https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70708
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Looks complicated. _mm_set_sd(x) returns {x,0}, and I don't think the calling
convention guarantees anything about the unused part of SSE registers.
_mm_min_sd uses the high part of its first argument. So we ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70684
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
The following patch fixes the issue.
diff --git a/libgfortran/io/list_read.c b/libgfortran/io/list_read.c
index e24b3922..b8e174c5 100644
--- a/libgfortran/io/list_read.c
+++ b/libgfortran/io/list_read.c
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70710
Bug ID: 70710
Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] Compile time hog w/ -O -g
-fpeel-loops
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-time-hog
model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20160417 (experimental) [trunk revision 235070] (GCC)
$
$ g++-4.7 -c small.cpp
$ clang++-3.8 -c small.cpp
$
$ g++-trunk -c small.cpp^C
$ timeout -s 9 10 g++-trunk -c small.cpp
Killed
$
-
struct A
{
A (int);
};
struct B
{
B () {}
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70708
Bug ID: 70708
Summary: Suboptimal code generated when using _mm_set_sd (X64)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70150
--- Comment #19 from psturm at computervoice dot com ---
H.J,
Done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70230
On a separate topic, do you know an Intel colleague named Kirill Shutemov? I am
having a problem with a kernel warning about a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70230
--- Comment #2 from psturm at computervoice dot com ---
2 new failures appeared when testing with only --enable-default-ssp using the
hjl/pr70150 branch:
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-1.c execution test
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-2.c execu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70150
--- Comment #18 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to psturm from comment #17)
> Yes, they do appear when only using --enable-default-ssp, so I don't think
> they are relevant.
I suggest you open a new bug report if you haven't done so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70150
--- Comment #17 from psturm at computervoice dot com ---
Yes, they do appear when only using --enable-default-ssp, so I don't think they
are relevant.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70683
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.0 |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70683
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 Regression]|[7 Regression]
|-fcomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70684
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
The regression occurred at r200238, which was a fix for PR57633.
I am working on a fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70707
Bug ID: 70707
Summary: INT_MAX used before it is defined
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704
--- Comment #4 from David Edelsohn ---
sbitmap.s was one of the smaller files. All of the debugging information seems
to be present, but emitted in a different order in the stage2 versus stage3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704
--- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn ---
Created attachment 38299
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38299&action=edit
Stage2 sbitmap.s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704
--- Comment #3 from David Edelsohn ---
Created attachment 38300
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38300&action=edit
Stage3 sbitmap.s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70702
--- Comment #2 from Olivier Gautherot ---
Last correction: the build under FreeBSD uses GCC 5.3 and requires the same fix
to build.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70701
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Er, sorry, a "const" disappeared when I posted.
const int a[]={1,2,3};
int f(){
int*b=__builtin_malloc(12);
__builtin_memcpy(b,a,12);
return b[0];
}
this fails to optimize (without forwprop).
int a[]=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68467
--- Comment #2 from angelo ---
Well the final error is :
/home/angelo/archivio/aziende/sysam/buildall/gcc-5.2.0/libgcc/config/m68k/linux-atomic.c:198:13:
internal compiler error: in emit_library_call_value_1, at calls.c:4401
return (__sync_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68082
--- Comment #5 from angelo ---
Any news ?
Trying also --with-arch=cf breaks the compilation.
So i can't have in any way valid libgcc code i.e. for m5307.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27557
Sameer Sheorey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssameer at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70706
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Apr 17 18:30:21 2016
New Revision: 235086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/70706
* predict.h (tree_estimate_probability)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70706
--- Comment #3 from graham.stott at btinternet dot com ---
still fails predict.h needs updating prototype also
Original message
From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org"
Date: 17/04/2016 19:05 (GMT+00:00)
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70706
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
> libbackend.a(graphite.o): In function `graphite_finalize(bool)':
> /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-profiled/bld/gcc/../../src-trunk/gcc/graphite.c:259:
> undefined reference to `tree_estimate_probability()'
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70706
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Apr 17 18:04:51 2016
New Revision: 235085
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235085&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/70706
* graphite.c (graphite_finalize): Upda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70150
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to psturm from comment #15)
> Tested with hjl/pr70150 branch and no unexpected errors using
> --enable-default-pie.
>
> However, when testing the same branch with both --enable-default-pie and
> --enabl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70706
Bug ID: 70706
Summary: [7 Regression] r235082 caused bootstrap failure
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: boo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49636
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||townsend at astro dot wisc.edu
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70705
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70705
Bug ID: 70705
Summary: Associate construct with array section causes ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704
Bug ID: 70704
Summary: [6 Regressions] AIX bootstrap comparison failure
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70018
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Apr 17 16:04:05 2016
New Revision: 235081
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235081&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/70018
* cgraph.h (cgraph_node::set_const_flag,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30354
--- Comment #18 from Denis Vlasenko ---
Created attachment 38297
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38297&action=edit
Comparison of generated code with 7.0.0.svn on i86
With div cost of 3:
:
- 0: 8b 44 24 04
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30354
--- Comment #17 from Denis Vlasenko ---
Any chance of this being finally done?
I proposed a simple, working patch in 2007, it's 2016 now and all these years
users of -Os suffer from slow divisions in important cases usch as "signed_int
/ 16" and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70703
Bug ID: 70703
Summary: Regression in register usage on x86
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70702
--- Comment #1 from Olivier Gautherot ---
Additional note: by adding the static keyword, I got the following error:
In file included from ../../gcc/cp/except.c:1023:0:
cfns.gperf: In function 'const char* libc_name_p(const char*, unsigned int)':
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70702
Bug ID: 70702
Summary: Build failure of ARM cross compiler under Cygwin -
libc_name_p
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67538
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66911
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65795
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70624
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70701
Bug ID: 70701
Summary: incomplete value numbering when memcpy-ing from array
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64883
--- Comment #40 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 38295
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38295&action=edit
Further tweak for Darwin10
Sorry, this one slipped thorough the cracks, and I guess we're no longer in the
"appl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70699
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
pinged: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00783.html
46 matches
Mail list logo
