https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68307
Bug ID: 68307
Summary: [mingw32] Missing enum values in std::errc
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
ICE's in vectorizable_load, too:
markus@x4 linux % cat vsyscall_gtod.i
struct {
int tz_minuteswest;
int tz_dsttime;
} a, b;
void fn1() {
b.tz_minuteswest = a.tz_minuteswest;
b.tz_dsttime = a.tz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g |
|nu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
Bug ID: 68306
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: in vectorizable_store, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:5651
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68268
--- Comment #5 from isearcher at 126 dot com ---
Hello!
I create a build directory, cd to it, and execute "sources_dir/./configure ..."
like this :
/wk5/WJ/tmp/gcc-4.8.0/configure --prefix=/wk5/WJ/gcc -enable-threads=posix
-disable-checking -dis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68305
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53050
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68305
Bug ID: 68305
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: tree
check: expected class ‘expression’, have ‘exceptional’
(ssa_name) in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3436
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065
--- Comment #31 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Alexander Cherepanov from comment #23)
> 2. The practical problem is size calculation in general, it's not
> limited to sizeof operation. You don't need to use sizeof to create
> oversized aut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68304
Bug ID: 68304
Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/950612-1.c
-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops
-ftracer -finline-functions (internal compiler erro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Does this patch
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c
index 2ac3828..8b57875 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c
@@ -4372,17 +4372,16 @@ sccvn_dom_walker::before_dom_chi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
It came from
enum tree_code code = gimple_cond_code (stmt);
tree lhs = gimple_cond_lhs (stmt);
tree rhs = gimple_cond_rhs (stmt);
record_conds (bb, code, lhs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68263
--- Comment #10 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 36693
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36693&action=edit
Alternative patch
Alternative patch that does a couple of things:
- always defines BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT to 32 for T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
+ /* If that didn't simplify to a constant see if we have recorded
+ temporary expressions from taken edges. */
+ if (!val || TREE_CODE (val) != INTEGER_CST)
+ {
+ tree ops[2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #6 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #5)
> Could you please add it to your nightly test run and commit it if there no
> other new failures? I'll be away for a few days...
OK, will do.
> Hm ... so maybe fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67771
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ignore that last comment, I must not be awake :-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67771
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67201
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065
--- Comment #30 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, ch3root at openwall dot com wrote:
> 4. From the POV of the standard I don't see much difference between VLA
> and ordinary arrays in this question. AFAICT the standar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68303
Bug ID: 68303
Summary: performance: unordered_map&co. up to 7x speedup
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compone
||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
6.0.0 2015 doesn't issue any warnings on either the original translation
unit or the smaller test case in attachment 26877. Since comment #3 indicate
||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
6.0.0 2015 issues the following slightly different warnings which disappear
when the increment of r in the first loop is made undonditional. Since the
condition should always be true (r can never be zero), the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Still fails with r230191 at -O2:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0xf7571e97 in _Unwind_RaiseException (exc=)
at /export/gnu/import/git/sources/gcc/libgcc/unwind.inc:136
136 }
(gdb) bt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68301
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||24639
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68263
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36674|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68302
Bug ID: 68302
Summary: [5/6 Regression] ICE with debugging enabled on mips
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Even further reduced
MODULE neb_utils
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
TYPE neb_var_type
REAL(KIND=dp), DIMENSION(:, :), POINTER :: xyz, int, wrk
END TYPE neb_var_type
CONTAINS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68263
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
After PR 66250 is fixed, we need to adjust all alignments > 4 bytes
to 4 bytes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The reduced test with only one error
MODULE neb_utils
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
TYPE neb_var_type
REAL(KIND=dp), DIMENSION(:, :), POINTER :: xyz, int, wrk
END TYPE neb_v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68301
Bug ID: 68301
Summary: self-dependent reference member initialization not
diagnosed
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68208
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Patch posted for review here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg01420.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68263
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53050
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68072
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64667
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ooprala at redhat dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68208
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
|---
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
Seems to go wrong with gcc trunk dated 2015
/home/dcb/rpmbuild/BUILD/OpenCV-2.3.1/modules/imgproc/src/smooth.cpp:112:10:
int
ernal compiler error: tree check: expected class ‘expression’, have
‘exceptional
’ (ssa_name) in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> yes, I noticed this as well, I think this is one of the fortran frontend
> optimization passes.
Indeed, no ICE with '-O -fno-frontend-optimize'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68035
--- Comment #3 from ncahill_alt at yahoo dot com ---
Martin, your patch produces the identical object file in 10.3s versus 24.6s.
The profile is also very smooth with none of the functions listed above
appearing.
Thank you very much, this is now
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #8 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
> For some reason, the ICE requires to use at least -O.
yes, I noticed this as well, I think this is one of the fortran frontend
optimization passes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58926
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
Andreas Arnez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 06:01:19PM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
>
> --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> For some reason, the ICE requ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
For some reason, the ICE requires to use at least -O.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60158
--- Comment #5 from joakim.tjernlund at transmode dot se ---
I am sure I saw .data.rel.ro.local section with a .4byte statement in it
using -S
Now I cannot repeat it. The only thing that has changed that I know is
glibc 2.19 is no glibc 2.20 and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
If we should pay attention to the sign, then maybe
--- gcc/c-family/c-common.c
+++ gcc/c-family/c-common.c
@@ -11903,9 +11903,9 @@ vector_types_compatible_elements_p (tree t1, tree t2)
&& (c2 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66205
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35567|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68286
Renlin Li changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g |powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60421
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jaak Ristioja from comment #6)
> Additionally, the nanosleep code is also missing proper EINTR handling,
> which again could break the sleep.
This part is done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60421
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Nov 11 17:08:51 2015
New Revision: 230183
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230183&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Loop in std::this_thread sleep functions
PR libstdc++/60421
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68299
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68300
Bug ID: 68300
Summary: Bogus -Wnon-virtual-dtor warning with protected base
class constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67941
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68299
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68299
Bug ID: 68299
Summary: [5/6 Regression] runtime error: member call on null
pointer of type 'const struct __lambda0'
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68298
Bug ID: 68298
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu (in 64-bit mode)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68297
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68282
--- Comment #3 from Stan Shebs ---
Sorry, left out a detail - the cltq output is compilation as C++. Compiled as
a C file, the code does have the andl as noted. (I'm sure there are good
reasons why the *exact* *same* source text ends up with tw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67265
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67265
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68297
Bug ID: 68297
Summary: Faster std::make_exception
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67265
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 11 16:04:34 2015
New Revision: 230179
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230179&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67265
* ira.c (ira_setup_eliminable_regset)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68272
--- Comment #5 from Sergey Organov ---
Thanks, but my particular problem is that I do want nice GCC builtin when it is
available, and I want generic inline implementation, rather than function call,
when GCC builtin is not available.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68294
--- Comment #3 from Robert Clausecker ---
Sorry, I forgot to attach the test case. Here it is.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68294
--- Comment #2 from Robert Clausecker ---
Created attachment 36689
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36689&action=edit
Testcase for bug #68294
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68039
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Since op1 and op2 in that COND_EXPR are the same, we fold the conditional
expression to a COMPOUND_EXPR:
return x ();, 0;
so the result of x () looks unused.
Same for C++.
: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr53410-2.c -O0 (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr53410-2.c -O0 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/opt/gcc/gcc-2015/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr53410-2.c:27:18:
internal compiler error: in prepare_cmp_insn, at optabs.c:3813
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68272
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67265
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 11 14:56:17 2015
New Revision: 230176
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230176&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67265
* ira.c (ira_setup_eliminable_regset):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68293
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to James Greenhalgh from comment #1)
> Looks related to pr68134 ?
Maybe; the compiler crashes at roughly the same place.
PR68134 is "r230014 or older", so either the buggy path is now triggered much
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68266
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68107
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68107
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Nov 11 14:47:03 2015
New Revision: 230174
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230174&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/68107
PR c++/68266
* c-common.c (valid_arr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68266
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Nov 11 14:47:03 2015
New Revision: 230174
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230174&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/68107
PR c++/68266
* c-common.c (valid_arr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68293
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68271
--- Comment #16 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Wed Nov 11 14:30:16 2015
New Revision: 230172
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230172&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/cp/ChangeLog
2015-11-11 Dominique d'Humieres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67265
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 11 14:24:39 2015
New Revision: 230170
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230170&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67265
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_finalize_st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67612
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66719
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67265
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 11 14:22:43 2015
New Revision: 230168
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230168&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67265
* ira.c (ira_setup_eliminable_regset):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #4)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #3)
> > I haven't read reload.*, but my speculation is that if something in reload
> > instantiates that rtx with an imm8 consta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68287
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68287
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Nov 11 14:04:47 2015
New Revision: 230163
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230163&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR rtl-optimization/68287
PR rtl-optimization/68287
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56592
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #0)
>
> Function argument/return value aggregates are decomposed so that the
> individual members can be passed in different register classes, based on the
> data type. E.g.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #4 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #3)
> I haven't read reload.*, but my speculation is that if something in reload
> instantiates that rtx with an imm8 constant to calculate addresses, it might
> also try
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68138
--- Comment #1 from Ville Voutilainen ---
The test works if operator== is not a member. There's something fairly fishy
going on here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68138
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68295
Bug ID: 68295
Summary: internal compiler error / segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58497
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Index: gcc/tree-vect-generic.c
===
--- gcc/tree-vect-generic.c (revision 230146)
+++ gcc/tree-vect-generic.c (working copy)
@@ -105,6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68294
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Please always include a compilable testcase so everyone doesn't have to
reinvent one from your explanations.
Gcc knows that u|v is not 0 (from VRP), but does not take advantage of that
information in this case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68271
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #14)
> > Quick temporary fix is easy, just make pragma_kind in cp/parser.h 8 bit,
> > and change id < 64 to id < 256 in c-family and update the comment.
> > Thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68271
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Quick temporary fix is easy, just make pragma_kind in cp/parser.h 8 bit,
> and change id < 64 to id < 256 in c-family and update the comment.
> This I believe shouldn't make the C++ token any larger
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58497
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, ro at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58497
>
> --- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth ---
> Created attachment 36687
> --> https://gcc.gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065
--- Comment #29 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
On 2015-11-11 14:57, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>> Are you saying that -fstack-check is ready for use? Why it's not
>> documented (except for Ada and in gccint)?
>
> !??? See 3.18 Options fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58497
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 36687
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36687&action=edit
-fdump-tree-dom2-details dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58497
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #6)
> The new gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-5.c testcase FAILs on 64-bit Solaris/SPARC:
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-5.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized " * 3;" 1
>
> Ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67305
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
