https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66339
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66340
Bug ID: 66340
Summary: [6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failure on x86-64
with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
BTW, the hotpatch-19.c, hotpatch-20.c and hotpatch-compile-15.c testcases look
wrong, always_inline attribute shouldn't be used on functions not declared
inline.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66339
Bug ID: 66339
Summary: g++ 5.1.0 Generates memory leak
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
On 05/28/2015 12:41 PM, 田部 wrote:
> gcc is, in this code, or put out a warning?
> -O4 only???
-O3 and higher enables more aggressive loop unrolling. This happens in
the pass_complete_unrolli function. With -O3 or higher, the inner loop
is unrolled 12 times because the array size is 12. The arra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66334
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
This seems to work:
diff --git a/gcc/lra-lives.c b/gcc/lra-lives.c
index 085411e..a0c6171 100644
--- a/gcc/lra-lives.c
+++ b/gcc/lra-lives.c
@@ -979,8 +979,7 @@ process_bb_lives (basic_block bb, int &curr_point, b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66334
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: src/configure --prefix=install --with-cloog=infra
--with-ppl=infra --with-gmp=infra --with-mpfr=infra --with-mpc=infra
--with-isl=infra --disable-bootstrap --enable-checking=yes,rtl
--enable-languages=c
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20150529
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66334
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
The block has a EDGE_ABNORMAL_CALL predecessor.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66338
--- Comment #2 from Pawel Tomulik ---
I found this to be related to std::tuple constructors, especially this one:
template...>::value>::type>
explicit
constexpr tuple(_UElements&&... __elements)
: _Inherited(std::fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66334
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66338
--- Comment #1 from Pawel Tomulik ---
As a side note, the following variant also does not compile:
int main()
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66338
Bug ID: 66338
Summary: std::forward_as_tuple() issue with single argument
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66318
--- Comment #5 from Keith Thompson ---
Mikhail: Newlines in file names (either the actual file name or via a
#line directive) cause problems with __FILE__, though that particular
problem occurs only if there's an explicit reference to __FILE__.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66257
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66257
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin ---
Author: mikael
Date: Fri May 29 19:04:30 2015
New Revision: 223875
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223875&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/66257
gcc/fortran/
* resolve.c (resolve_actual_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63509
Paul Greenberg changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul at greenberg dot pro
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66282
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63175
--- Comment #39 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri May 29 16:48:37 2015
New Revision: 223872
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223872&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-29 Bill Schmidt
Backported from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66337
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Or rather it is a bit weird as it is dependent on the first element. X86 is
even worse as they are not equal either but the alignment requirement is only
dependent on if it is in a structure or not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66337
Bug ID: 66337
Summary: __alignof__(s.d) incorrect for a double member with
-malign-power
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #11 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #10)
> Hello Vladimir,
> Have you been able to make progress on this bug?
Thanks for the remainder, Cristophe. Sometimes I am loosing track of bugs I
should wor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66329
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Mikhail Maltsev from comment #4)
> Clang is more verbose:
>
> ./test.c:4:11: warning: & has lower precedence than ==; == will be evaluated
> first [-Wparentheses]
> x = y & 1 == 1;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #27 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri May 29 14:26:56 2015
New Revision: 223867
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223867&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 66215: S390: Fix placement of post-label NOPs with -mhotpatch
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66327
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri May 29 13:28:54 2015
New Revision: 223865
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223865&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/66327
* include/bits/stl_algobase.h (__equal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66142
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 29 13:06:23 2015
New Revision: 223863
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223863&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/66142
* tree-if-conv.c (if_convertib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Which also fixes the original testcase on trunk!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Which shows a bug in hybrid SLP detection.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66335
--- Comment #3 from vfdff ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> No, it's working as intended - we just print where we _could_ hoist it to
> (together with the cost).
you mean function `determine_max_movement` will check the cost, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Related to PR66251 (partial backport fixes the gcc 5 branch).
On trunk the issue is that we have a SLP node
node
stmt 0 _9->re = _17;
stmt 1 _9->im = _23;
node
stmt 0 patt_56 = _1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66330
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
It works for me, so - which target, which linker?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66335
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66314
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #26 from Dominik Vogt ---
The patch for upstream gcc is available here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg02739.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #25 from Andreas Krebbel ---
The patch looks good to me. Please post it on the mailing list and I'll commit
it.
Jakub, thanks for your valuable comments! Does Dominik's last patch address
your concerns?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66314
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 29 10:50:58 2015
New Revision: 223861
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223861&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-29 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/66314
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66184
--- Comment #2 from Casey Carter ---
Correction: r223462 was a fix on the c++-concepts branch, the trunk fix was
r223461.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66184
Casey Carter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66336
Bug ID: 66336
Summary: [C++14][Variable templates] Spurious "error: expansion
pattern contains no argument packs"
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #24 from Dominik Vogt ---
Okay, I've made a new patch that fixes the problem with only the hotpatch tests
running in the s390 test suite. This change passes all tests on 64 and 31 bit.
After this change we have done some cleanup wor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66335
--- Comment #1 from vfdff ---
I suggest using the code following code similar to fix the issue.
for (bsi = gsi_start_phis (bb); !gsi_end_p (bsi); gsi_next (&bsi))
{
stmt = gsi_stmt (bsi);
... ...
... ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66335
Bug ID: 66335
Summary: a dump bug related to loop invariant in
before_dom_children
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
46 matches
Mail list logo
