GCC 14.2 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 14.3.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2030797
Title:
Parallel C++ algorithms run sequentially
To manage notifications about this bu
Fixed for 11.5 as well.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052929
Title:
failed autopkgtests for evolver vs glibc 2.39 on amd64
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bug
Should be fixed for 12.4+ too.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052929
Title:
failed autopkgtests for evolver vs glibc 2.39 on amd64
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
http
GCC 13.3 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.4.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2058742
Title:
libalog and dbusada ftbfs on s390x with gnat-13
To manage notifications about
Fixed for 13.3 too.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052929
Title:
failed autopkgtests for evolver vs glibc 2.39 on amd64
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.la
From what I can see, glibc uses there the same thing as libquadmath
does, so why is it ok on the glibc side and not on the libquadmath side?
I mean
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=stdio-common/printf_fp.c;h=e75706f089bba3baabbcfb6bcf41514bad0a9dcb;hb=HEAD#l222
and
https://sourcewa
I guess we should go with the above patch after fixing formatting, but it isn't
enough,
printf_fphex.c has similar code.
Even in glibc which doesn't support printing _Float128 nor any other type which
would require similar alignment, the hooks only register a function to fill in
some mem and all
Created attachment 57853
gcc14-pr114533.patch
Untested fix. Unfortunately, we don't have any testsuite for
libquadmath, hope it will be tested during libgfortran testing.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.l
GCC 12.1 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 12.2.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1831385
Title:
`std::cosf`, `std::sinf`, `std::sqrtf` are not declared in ``
To manage notifi
The GCC 8 branch is being closed, fixed in GCC 9.1.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1791425
Title:
Compiler error: constexpr with bitfields.
To manage notifications about this bug go
The GCC 8 branch is being closed, fixed in GCC 9.1.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1823296
Title:
g++ 7.3 and g++ 8.2 report segmentation fault
To manage notifications about this bug
Assuming fixed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1856682
Title:
[UBUNTU 20.04] GCC Miscompilation in vectorized code
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpa
GCC 8.4.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1823296
Title:
g++ 7.3 and g++ 8.2 report segmentation fault
To manage notifications about thi
The fixes have been reverted for 9.3/8.4.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053
Title:
Compiler gets stuck (or extremely slow) on ppc64el
To manage notifications about this bug go t
GCC 9.3.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053
Title:
Compiler gets stuck (or extremely slow) on ppc64el
To manage notifications abou
GCC 8.4.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1791425
Title:
Compiler error: constexpr with bitfields.
To manage notifications about this bu
Caused PR93974.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053
Title:
Compiler gets stuck (or extremely slow) on ppc64el
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.
On the #c7 testcase, this started with
r8-6072-ga3a821c903c9fa2288712d31da2038d0297babcb (so I wonder why this
isn't a 8/9/10 Regression).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053
Title:
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 16 19:06:41 2019
New Revision: 270396
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270396&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/86953
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-86953.C: New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-86953.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/tests
What we could do there is remove the first of those two splitters, remove the
&& !dead_or_set_p (insn, operands[1])
test from the second, and add peephole2 that would transform
(set (access part 1) (subreg:SI (match_dup 1) low))
(set (match_dup 1) (rotate:DI (match_dup 1) (const_int 32)))
That said, the regression is fixed now.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798
Title:
gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #16)
> I'll commit a patch which just removes the splitter for now. I'll try to
> come up with a nicer testcase.
All 3 s390 splitters that do this?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubun
I admit I have just a vague recollection of this, but I thought since df
has been added, usually if a pass wants REG_DEAD notes, it needs to
df_note_add_problem () and df_analyze should rebuild the
REG_DEAD/REG_UNUSED notes.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
So, to me this looks like a backend bug, using dead_or_set_p in a splitter when
the split passes don't really compute the note problem. Seems s390 is the only
backend that does this, other backends use dead_or_set_p either only in
peephole2s (which is fine, peephole2 pass starts with
df_set_f
Segher on IRC says that removing REG_DEAD notes that aren't valid is the
right thing, so paging others what they think.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798
Title:
gcc 8 miscompiles
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #14)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> > ... Can't what you are doing in the splitters be done in
> > define_peephole2 instead?
>
> Not that easy unfortunately. peephole2 will run after reload. So the FP
> constant ok 0.0 will already be re
Yeah, like that problematic source, all gfortran options used to compile that,
any needed modules too + stubbed whatever it calls and whatever is needed in
MAIN__ or main to reproduce, ideally with minimal dependencies.
If you know the exact problematic routine, see in the debugger how many times
GCC 4.8.4 has been released.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295738
Title:
[4.8 Regression] unable to find a register to spill in class 'LO_REGS'
To manage notifications about this b
GCC 4.8.4 has been released.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1352417
Title:
[4.8/4.9 Regression] cc1plus doesn't terminate when called with -g on
arm-linux-gnueabihf
To manage notif
GCC 4.8.4 has been released.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1112499
Title:
WiFi.cpp doesn't compile with default flags
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.laun
Fixed on the trunk, but not on the 4.8 branch yet.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295653
Title:
[4.8/4.9 Regression] Error: value of 256 too large for field of 1
bytes at 68242
T
Fixed on the trunk so far.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343
Title:
mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el at -O2 or higher
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
ht
I have:
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-19 15:57:57.735114622 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-20 11:13:58.933256068 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+// PR middle-end/60419
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-O2" }
+
+struct C
+{
+};
+
+struct I : C
+{
+ I ();
+};
FYI, since r208573 the reduced ppc64 testcase no longer reproduces, but
the #c0 still does.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343
Title:
mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el a
Slightly more reduced testcase:
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-19 15:57:57.735114622 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-20 10:20:56.245365852 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+// PR middle-end/60419
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-O2" }
+
+struct J
+{
+ J ();
+
Honza or Martin, can you please have a look? The #c5 testcase should be
reproduceable with a cross to powerpc64-linux.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343
Title:
mrpt triggers ICE
Created attachment 32321
pr60419.C
This is quite impossible to reduce, at least after 4 days of attempting to
delta/creduce reduce this I got only to 132KB.
Compile with -m64 -O3 -std=c++11.
Anyway, it is reduced enough that it compiles (and ICEs in a different place)
with x86_64-linux cc1plus,
The slsr issue is just a pilot error, I've mistakenly used ~ r205NNN
compiler in that case, so it looks like an already fixed issue.
Anyway, the ICE on ppc64 with the reduced testcase started with r208184 (thus I
wonder about the 4.8 regression status), the problem is that
getMeanVal function (me
GCC 4.6.4 has been released and the branch has been closed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1112499
Title:
WiFi.cpp doesn't compile with default flags
To manage notifications about th
GCC 4.8.2 has been released.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1185028
Title:
drizzle FTBFS due to internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
whilst compiling drizzle on i386|armhf
T
Author: jakub
Date: Tue May 7 10:30:13 2013
New Revision: 198671
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198671&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/57149
* tree-ssa-uninit.c (uninit_undefined_value_p): New inline.
(can_skip_redundant_opnd, compute_uninit_opnds_pos,
The difference in *.uninit before/after that commit is small, just:
@@ -78,7 +79,7 @@ fn4 (struct F * x, unsigned int k)
goto ;
:
- # retval_25 = PHI <0(3), retval_26(6)>
+ # err_25 = PHI <0(3), retval_26(6)>
_12 = y_9->f;
if (_12 == 0)
goto ;
@@ -89,17 +90,17 @@ fn4 (struct
Started with http://gcc.gnu.org/r190339
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1175744
Title:
[4.8 Regression] wrong -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with -Os
To manage notifications about this
I'd say the problem comes from the
int retval = retval;
in isr_tr_complete_low, which is supposedly inlined into the function
containing err = istr_tr_complete_low (mEp);
At least replacing that with retval = 0; makes the warning go away.
Reduced testcase for -Os -Wall:
struct A { struct A *a, *b
Fixed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135633
Title:
[linaro regression] alsa-tools FTBFS with error "unable to find a
register to spill in class ‘AREG’"
To manage notifications ab
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 5 22:25:43 2013
New Revision: 196478
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196478
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/56484
* ifcvt.c (noce_process_if_block): If else_bb is NULL, avoid extending
lifetimes of hard registers on small register
Created attachment 29583
gcc48-pr56484.patch
Untested fix.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135633
Title:
[linaro regression] alsa-tools FTBFS with error "unable to find a
register
Actually, looking more at this, I'd say combiner is innocent here, the problem
is earlier , during ce1 pass, which transforms:
16: ax:SI=call [`output_play'] argc:0
REG_DEAD di:DI
REG_DEAD si:SI
17: r60:SI=ax:SI
REG_DEAD ax:SI
18: flags:CCGOC=cmp(r59:SI,0)
19: pc={(fl
Started with http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188526
but it was merely latent before that, so it isn't LRA bug, because it fails
with reload equally.
I think the problem is in combine, where we have:
ax = call ...
flags = r59 != 0
r60 = flags >= 0 ? ax : r59
r65 = buf
r68 = 768
rep
Yes, it does, just verified that.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 56405 ***
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1132012
Title:
[4.8 regression] ICE in expand_asm_operan
(In reply to comment #6)
> Do you think I should revert the patch on the branch nevertheless?
> (it was a fix for a missed-optimization regression only ...)
Yeah, missed-optimization regression can wait for 4.8, but just the
tree-ssa-dse.c part + related testcase, not all the other fixes.
--
You
Well, perhaps we need to improve documentation, because for calloc the
memory doesn't have undefined contents either, it is well defined to be
all zeros.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1
Assuming fixed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1065122
Title:
kumofs ftbfs on armhf (gcc ICE)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/106512
4.4 branch is being closed, moving to 4.5.4 target.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/89408
Title:
gcj-dbtool segfaults on hppa-linux
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https
4.4 branch is being closed, moving to 4.5.4 target.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/472056
Title:
[PR42536] crash trying to build portable .net
To manage notifications about this bug
Fixed in 4.5+, 4.4 is no longer supported.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/564492
Title:
[PR 44626, armel] ICE: output_operand: invalid expression as operand
To manage notifications a
4.4 branch is being closed, moving to 4.5.4 target.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/598462
Title:
[PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use
To manage notifications a
The testcase is invalid C, while x86_64/i?86 will do the expected thing of
doing unaligned loads/stores silently, it won't do that in vectorized code or
for atomic accesses. You need to tell the compiler that ia isn't aligned
through aligned attribute. E.g. typedef int T __attribute__((aligned
Please read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html, you should provide a self-
contained and if possible small testcase, it could very well be a bug in
the application you are using. If you suspect a gcc bug, you can use
use either a debugger or brute-force - e.g. binary search in between
objects compiled w
Dup of PR51915.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 51915 ***
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/910791
Title:
[armhf] trunk 20111223, ICE in output_move_double, at config
Ramana (or some other ARM maintainer), could you please try to implement
this? Thanks.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/836588
Title:
armel FTBFS with gcc 4.5 org 4.6 O2 and fPIC
To m
Note, can't be reproduced on the trunk, the strcmp isn't DCEd there, but
guess the problem is just latent there.
It looks like a target bug to me. Before RTL loop opts we have:
(insn 91 90 92 13 (set (reg:SI 167)
(unspec:SI [
(const:SI (unspec:SI [
Fixed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/897583
Title:
Code generation bug with -O2 (-foptimize-sibling-calls)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/g
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 8 13:36:40 2011
New Revision: 182112
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182112
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-12-05 Jakub Jelinek
Eric Botcazou
PR middle-end/51323
PR middle-end/50074
Fixed on the trunk so far.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/897583
Title:
Code generation bug with -O2 (-foptimize-sibling-calls)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Dec 5 08:15:23 2011
New Revision: 182000
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182000
Log:
PR middle-end/51323
PR middle-end/50074
* calls.c (internal_arg_pointer_exp_state): New variable.
(internal_arg_pointer_based_exp_1,
It is gimple_modified_p and gsi_insert_before does call
build_stmt_operands on it. Still debugging...
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/841825
Title:
gcc SIGSEGV when building Firefox a
We have:
:
# DEBUG this => this_2(D)
reason_15 = reason_10(D);
reason_17 = reason_15;
# DEBUG reason => reason_17
D.137092_16 = &this_2(D)->D.122214;
mozilla::net::PWyciwygChannelChild::Send__delete__ (D.137092_16);
D.132395_6 = 0;
and ccp (substitute_and_fold called from ccp_finalize) decides (be
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 22 09:21:49 2011
New Revision: 176622
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176622
Log:
PR c++/49756
* libiberty.h (stack_limit_increase): New prototype.
* stack-limit.c: New file.
* Makefile.in: Regenerate deps.
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 22 08:33:37 2011
New Revision: 176617
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176617
Log:
PR c++/49756
* libiberty.h (stack_limit_increase): New prototype.
* stack-limit.c: New file.
* Makefile.in: Regenerate deps.
More probably the gcc/g++ driver already, because inside of tbe main of a
program it might be too late to increase the stack limits - if something is
already mmapped right below the old smaller stack the increase won't be
effective.
I guess increasing the RLIMIT_STACK in the driver to MIN (hard_
Created attachment 24788
gcc47-pr49756.patch
Untested patch. Clueless people will be still able to construct twice or 4
times as large testcases of similar quality when they really should be using an
array, but I guess this can help even with reasonable testcases.
The drawback is I think that e
GCC 4.6.1 is being released.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/791327
Title:
codeblocks version 10.05-2 failed to build on armel
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bu
73 matches
Mail list logo