https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71077
--- Comment #1 from Sergey ---
Upd: with the reduced testcase the problem hid out after May 3; here is a
bigger testcase which reveals it reliably :
output_inline_function() { rest_of_compilation(); }
*a;
b, c, d, e;
sched_analyze() {
for (;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71077
Bug ID: 71077
Summary: gcc -lto raises ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Assignee: unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
--- Comment #10 from John Ettedgui ---
I tried to rebuild my gcc with Kal's patch but it fails with this error:
"make[6]: *** No rule to make target '../src/c++11/libc++11convenience.la',
needed by 'libstdc++.la'. Stop."
I don't understand how
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71076
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71076
Bug ID: 71076
Summary: Internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71075
Bug ID: 71075
Summary: Broken diagnostic: 'integer_cst' not supported by
'dump_decl'
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71021
--- Comment #3 from Romain Geissler ---
Please note that this is the only target lib that fails for me. Others (like
libgomp) are fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71021
--- Comment #2 from Romain Geissler ---
The very same thing happens with gcc 6.1.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71074
Bug ID: 71074
Summary: combine.c in simplify_comparison sanitizer detects
left shift of negative value
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71074
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70825
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64, aarch64 |x86_64, aarch64, powerpc64*
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43651
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43651
--- Comment #8 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
Author: miyuki
Date: Wed May 11 20:23:37 2016
New Revision: 236142
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236142&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR43651: add warning for duplicate qualifier
gcc/c/
PR c/4365
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71072
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71073
Bug ID: 71073
Summary: debug-mode headers should include #pragma GCC
system_header directives
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71072
Bug ID: 71072
Summary: [6/7] gnat doesn't respect --enable-default-pie
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71049
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71049
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed May 11 19:06:45 2016
New Revision: 236137
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236137&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++/71049 fix --disable-libstdcxx-dual-abi bootstrap
PR li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70855
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071
Bug ID: 71071
Summary: [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold
check: original tree changed by fold
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71069
--- Comment #1 from Eugene Zelenko ---
Sorry for mistake in original report. -Waddress should report such problems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71070
Bug ID: 71070
Summary: MPX gives a false positive when allocating a string
longer than 16 bytes on the stack
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71069
Bug ID: 71069
Summary: Extend -Wnonnull-compare to address of reference
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71062
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I don't think it's valid to optimize for comparisons, where dereference
doesn't occur, based on restrict; restrict is only about how an object is
accessed (and as long as the object doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70876
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Will you please check gcc 6.1 with your fix against bug 70877?
I get an ICE, could it be a regression?
gcc -fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx gccerr36.c
gccerr36.c: In function ‘bar’:
gccerr36.c:12:8: warning:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71068
Bug ID: 71068
Summary: ICE in check_data_variable(): Bad expression
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71067
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
A) correct with parameter :
$ cat z3.f90
program p
integer, parameter :: i = 0
integer :: z(2)
data z /2*i/
print *, z
end
$ gfortran-6 z3.f90
$ a.out
0 0
B) wrong c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71067
Bug ID: 71067
Summary: ICE on data initialization with insufficient value or
wrong boz-constants
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71066
Bug ID: 71066
Summary: ICE in set_loop_bounds, at fortran/trans-array.c:4680
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57197
--- Comment #2 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
For me, test compiles now without ICE -- same with "use thing" added.
$ gfortran-6 --version
GNU Fortran (SUSE Linux) 6.1.1 20160502 [gcc-6-branch revision 235698]
Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20160511 (experimental) [trunk revision 236116] (GCC)
$:
$: gcc-trunk -O1 small.c
small.c: In function ‘fn1_BOUOUtg_1828_f2’:
small.c:2:6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56765
--- Comment #6 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
On my environment, all tests compile now without an ICE.
(also tested with several other compile options)
$ gfortran-6 --version
GNU Fortran (SUSE Linux) 6.1.1 20160502 [gcc-6-branch revision 235698]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71024
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71024
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed May 11 17:07:37 2016
New Revision: 236129
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236129&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71024
* c-common.c (diagnose_mismatched_attribut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71064
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Monakov ---
> (It's generally tuned for speed instead of precision, and does not strive for
> full IEEE-754 conformance.)
(PTX is an abstract ISA, if it's tuned for anything it's the simplicity of
abstraction and m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> Sure, and sorry for duplicated work. Now how to test this properly in
> gcc.misc-tests/help.exp...
Thanks.
Ah, I was not aware of gcc.misc-tests/he
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|ktka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71065
Bug ID: 71065
Summary: Missing diagnostic for statements between OpenMP
'target' and 'teams'
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: accepts-inv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
FWIW, my fix was
--- a/gcc/opts.c
+++ b/gcc/opts.c
@@ -1641,6 +1641,11 @@ common_handle_option (struct gcc_options *opts,
{
++ a;
pflags = & exclude_flags;
+ if (*a == '\0')
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70830
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch posted at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-05/msg00395.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71064
Bug ID: 71064
Summary: nvptx offloading: "long double" data type
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
Bug ID: 71063
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault with --help="^"
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On May 11, 2016 3:52:43 PM GMT+02:00, "wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050
>
>--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
>Sorry, accidentally saved b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71062
Andre Vieira changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Summary|[bugzilla] r235622
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71062
Bug ID: 71062
Summary: [bugzilla] r235622 and restrict pointers
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69979
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70809
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
--- Comment #9 from Kai Tietz ---
Created attachment 38470
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38470&action=edit
updated patch
Well, DECL_P check is indeed superfluous, but I added to point out we are
checking here for declarati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||john.ettedgui at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Comment on attachment 38469
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38469
suggested patch
DECL_P check doesn't make sense, of course all VAR_Ps are also DECL_Ps, but no
need to verify that. Why
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70904
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68463
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71054
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71055
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71055
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed May 11 14:04:32 2016
New Revision: 236122
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236122&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-11 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/71055
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71057
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Summary|[6/7 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71057
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed May 11 13:59:34 2016
New Revision: 236121
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236121&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-11 Richard Biener
PR debug/71057
* dwarf2ou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Sorry, accidentally saved before finishing my thoughts.
How do we "inform" the middle-end that a DI subreg of a DF is very expensive?
This differs wildly by processor for us. We "can" always do the subreg,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70855
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed May 11 13:18:05 2016
New Revision: 236120
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236120&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/70855
* frontend-passes.c (inline_matmul_assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70855
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed May 11 13:16:48 2016
New Revision: 236119
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236119&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/70855
* frontend-passes.c (inline_matmul_assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70255
--- Comment #19 from Marek Polacek ---
Markus recently committed a patch (r235580) that points out that this attribute
should only be used for debugging.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71024
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71049
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed May 11 12:39:28 2016
New Revision: 236118
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236118&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++/71049 fix --disable-libstdcxx-dual-abi bootstrap
PR li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70986
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Other loop opts don't necessarily like this (I get regressions).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70255
--- Comment #18 from shatz at dsit dot co.il ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #15)
> (In reply to shatz from comment #14)
> > It is not documented that __attribute__((optimize(""))) works reliably when
>
> Unfortunately, you shou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71006
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71061
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71061
Bug ID: 71061
Summary: [ARM] is not setting instruction length for pop*
patterns
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71053
--- Comment #2 from Michael Weiser ---
Also happens with trunk r236113:
# ~/bin/gcc-trunk-20160511-avr/bin/avr-g++ -Wall -Wextra -fno-strict-aliasing
-fwrapv -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations -Os t.c -o t.S -S -v
Using built-in specs.
Reading
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
--- Comment #36 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I've just been notified that the bug is fixed in Xcode 7.3.1.
> Will try that as soon as it hits the Appstore.
I have Xcode 7.3.1 since May 4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70845
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
6.1.1 is not a release, it's the current development snapshot from the gcc-6
branch. It will be fixed in a later version.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71060
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71002
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Summary|[6/7 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71002
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Summary|[6/7 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70855
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70845
--- Comment #8 from Wei-Wei Tu ---
Would this bug be fixed in gcc 6.1.1 or in later version?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70876
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70877
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70877
--- Comment #3 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Wed May 11 09:55:55 2016
New Revision: 236116
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236116&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline r236088.
2016-05-10 Ilya
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70876
--- Comment #2 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Wed May 11 09:51:49 2016
New Revision: 236115
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236115&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline r236086.
2016-05-10 Ilya
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70807
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70855
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71060
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70807
--- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Wed May 11 09:33:13 2016
New Revision: 236114
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236114&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/70807
* cfgrtl.h (delete_insn_and_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70876
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Fixed in trunk by r236086
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70916
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The ICE is fixed, the second patch has been just an optimization, so shouldn't
be backported, but for the last patch dunno, I believe it already had some
follow up.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71049
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71049
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71060
Bug ID: 71060
Summary: Compiler reports "loop vectorized" but actually it
was not
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71054
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The problem is that with the PTRMEM_CST handling moved from the gimplification
hook to genericization (the right thing), as apparently we don't genericize
DECL_INITIAL of VAR_DECLs, nothing handles the PTRMEM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71053
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71054
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
