https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989
Chengnian Sun changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chengniansun at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69998
Bug ID: 69998
Summary: GCC5.3.0 _Unwind_ForcedUnwind Always Abort While
pthread_exit
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69997
Bug ID: 69997
Summary: GCC5.3.0 _Unwind_ForcedUnwind Always Abort While
pthread_exit
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61156
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Feb 28 06:50:27 2016
New Revision: 233789
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233789&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-27 Jerry DeLisle
Backported from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740
--- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Sun Feb 28 06:43:07 2016
New Revision: 233788
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233788&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert
2016-02-26 Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Sun Feb 28 06:34:20 2016
New Revision: 233787
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233787&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert
2016-02-26 Richard Biener
Jef
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56744
Bug 56744 depends on bug 69456, which changed state.
Bug 69456 Summary: Namelist value with trailing sign is ignored without error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69910
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
WRT fallout and reverting on the gcc-5 branch. Based on what I'm seeing, that
may make sense.
The problem in this particular case is we've marked loops for fixup, then loop
distribution is explicitly calli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69996
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69996
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69996
Bug ID: 69996
Summary: [6 Regression] 186.crafty in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to
build
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69081
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69995
Bug ID: 69995
Summary: [C++14] Invalid result when evaluating constexpr
function
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69910
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Feb 27 19:07:13 2016
New Revision: 233782
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233782&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-27 Jerry DeLisle
Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988
--- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Hmm, the symbol is present in the glibc I used:
root@atlantis:/srv/sid-powerpcspe-sbuild/lib/powerpc-linux-gnuspe# objdump -T
libgcc_s.so.1 |grep unorddf2
00010a78 gDF .text 0088 GCC_3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988
--- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Looking at the source code, I found this:
ppc_fp_compat=
case ${ppc_fp_type} in
soft|e500v1|e500v2)
if test $glibc_version_major -gt 2 \
|| ( test $glibc_version_major -eq 2 \
&& te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|5.2.1 |5.3.1
--- Comment #2 from Jo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69994
Bug ID: 69994
Summary: [6 regression] test case gfortran.dg/reassoc_6.f fails
starting with r233669
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67164
--- Comment #6 from Louis Dionne ---
The code I posted above does not seem to trigger the bug anymore on GCC trunk.
However, the following code still produces an ICE on trunk:
> ~/code/gcc/prefix/bin/g++ --version
> g++ (GCC) 6.0.0 20160226 (ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69993
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Feb 27 19:07:13 2016
New Revision: 233782
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233782&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-27 Jerry DeLisle
Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #6)
> Bingo! With both files present I can even reproduce it on my x86_64 machine.
Unfortunately, I cannot reproduce it with r230753, so it seems quite a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> Note that this first started to ICE with r223470, which is also the first
> revision where it starts opening cmds-check.c (which also premature to me,
> be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> Note that this first started to ICE with r223470, which is also the first
> revision where it starts opening cmds-check.c (which also premature to me,
> bec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69993
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
There's an alternate suggestion here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/47pejg/gcc_6_wmisleadingindentation_vs_goto_fail/d0eqyih
> This is just passive voice, there is nothing tricky about it.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note that this first started to ICE with r223470, which is also the first
revision where it starts opening cmds-check.c (which also premature to me,
because no warning is actually emitted; I'd think that it s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69993
Bug ID: 69993
Summary: Misleading wording for -Wmisleading-indentation
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 37813
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37813&action=edit
c file
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69992
Bug ID: 69992
Summary: test case gcc.dg/sms-4.c fails
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(gdb) bt
#0 0x110c60d8 in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset
(set=0x3fffb7f7, loc=, offset=) at
../../gcc/libcpp/line-map.c:925
#1 0x101051b4 in location_from_offset (loc=,
off
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69991
Bug ID: 69991
Summary: missed tail merge optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #0)
> If I move the cmds-check.i file to a different directory gcc no longer ICEs,
> so reducing is impossible.
One idea. Do you still have cmds-check.c in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #0)
> If I move the cmds-check.i file to a different directory gcc no longer ICEs,
> so reducing is impossible.
What is the complete path to cmds-check.i ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69886
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Feb 27 13:31:39 2016
New Revision: 233781
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233781&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69613
PR rtl-optimization/69886
* gcc.dg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Feb 27 13:31:39 2016
New Revision: 233781
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233781&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69613
PR rtl-optimization/69886
* gcc.d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69889
--- Comment #7 from Benjamin Bannier ---
Thanks for taking care of this so quickly. I currently do not observe any more
ICEs from that codebase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69990
Bug ID: 69990
Summary: decl alignment not respected
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Artem S. Tashkinov from comment #15)
> Is this the same bug?
>
> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu-1604-
> compilers&num=2
>
> In Dense LU Matrix Factorization GCC 5.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564
--- Comment #15 from Artem S. Tashkinov ---
Is this the same bug?
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu-1604-compilers&num=2
In Dense LU Matrix Factorization GCC 5.3.1/6.0 is more than 2 times slower than
Clang.
G++ option
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160227 (experimental) [trunk revision 233778] (GCC)
$:
$: gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
small.c: In function ‘fn1’:
small.c:3:6: error: loop verification on loop tree that needs fixup
void fn1() {
^~~
small.c:3:6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988
--- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Full build log here:
> https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/gcc-5_5.2.1-14_powerpcspe-20160226-2238.build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988
Bug ID: 69988
Summary: libgo.so: undefined reference to `__unorddf2'
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
URL: https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/gcc-5_5.2.1-14_pow
erpcspe-20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987
Bug ID: 69987
Summary: [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in
verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69986
Bug ID: 69986
Summary: smaller code possible with -Os by using push/pop to
spill/reload
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimiz
57 matches
Mail list logo
