https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78898
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78898
Bug ID: 78898
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE: in get_template_base, at
cp/pt.c:19665
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78894
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
--- Comment #8 from Yuan Pengfei ---
I have sent a patch that fixes this bug. Please review it. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg01824.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
Yuan Pengfei changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78897
Bug ID: 78897
Summary: ICE: in output_constructor_regular_field, at
varasm.c:5019
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78896
Bug ID: 78896
Summary: Segmentation fault occurs when use variable
initialized using structured binding with
capture-by-ref lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78893
--- Comment #2 from William Bader ---
Thanks for the quick reply. The system is a VM. I have the results of 'free'
below. The VMs where the build worked all have slightly more memory and swap.
What is the recommended minimum to build gcc-6?
$ fre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78893
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>make[3]: *** [s-attrtab] Killed
How much memory do you have on your system? Do you have a swap space?
Provide the output of the command "free".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78895
Bug ID: 78895
Summary: [6 regression] wrong code with -O1 when setting union
twice since 6.3
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78894
Bug ID: 78894
Summary: [c++17] ICE for std::list template deduction from
std:: initializer_list
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78893
Bug ID: 78893
Summary: gcc-6.3.0 build fails on genattrtab on CentOS 7
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72707
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 21 22:49:59 2016
New Revision: 243877
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243877&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/72707
* name-lookup.c (pushdecl_maybe_friend_1): Do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78892
Bug ID: 78892
Summary: [7.0 Regression] no type conversion before coarray put
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> Jason, do you see any advantage to making this a pedwarn for -std=c++98
That seems to make sense, given that other compilers diagnose it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78749
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78767
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42329
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71724
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I am using the following, which also fixes the infinite loop, and seems to
not regress code quality much at all (I found *one* pattern where it made
things one machine insn worse, involving a define_insn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78812
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So it's been a long time... And IIRC, rth was the one that fixed this wart in
gcse.
A BB that ends with a call that can throw or any other abnormal edge is
supposed to suppress hoisting for precisely the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78580
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Dec 21 22:20:11 2016
New Revision: 243875
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243875&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-21 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/78580
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 21 22:15:59 2016
New Revision: 243874
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243874&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/78817
* tree-pass.h (make_pass_post_ipa_warn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77829
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78656
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78891
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77830
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 21 21:58:23 2016
New Revision: 243873
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243873&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77830
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_array_reference): Per
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78891
Christian Paulsen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVAL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71724
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Maybe we just need to test for that condition, even though it's ugly. However,
I think there are some other improvements we could make here.
Part of the problem seems to be what if_then_else_cond does on thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11488
--- Comment #13 from Pat Haugen ---
Fixed on powerpc. Testcase times (at 8X original loop count to get measurable
times).
base: 4.436 sec
base + -fno-schedule-insns: 2.052 sec
base + patch: 1.815 sec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42329
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Dec 21 19:38:50 2016
New Revision: 243870
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243870&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/42329 - deducing base template for template template arg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11488
--- Comment #12 from Pat Haugen ---
Author: pthaugen
Date: Wed Dec 21 19:15:32 2016
New Revision: 243866
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243866&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/11488
* common/config/rs6000/rs6000-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78767
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Dec 21 19:10:23 2016
New Revision: 243864
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243864&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/78767 - ICE with inherited constructor default argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65479
--- Comment #19 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: seurer
Date: Wed Dec 21 19:09:10 2016
New Revision: 243863
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243863&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PATCH, v2, rs6000] pr65479 Add -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78891
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78891
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77345
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It looks very much like PR71724 indeed, but I cannot get this one to fail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78891
Bug ID: 78891
Summary: Array out of bound access generates wrong code in O2
or higher optimizations
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78890
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78749
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Dec 21 18:28:54 2016
New Revision: 243862
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243862&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/78749 - friend in anonymous namespace
* decl.c (wr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78890
Bug ID: 78890
Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on invalid reference type in
union
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685
--- Comment #5 from Paul Eggert ---
Just to clarify: 'main' (in the sample program) is just an example. The
problems developers are seeing when debugging Emacs almost all involve
functions other than 'main'.
It should be OK for -Og to optimize s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77345
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78887
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you attach the preprocessed sources associated with sha1-ce.o ? It should
be only one or two files.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71518
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
Bug ID: 7
Summary: toupper(x) can be assumed not to be in the range 'a' -
'z'
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78866
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78886
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78870
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jan Niklas Hasse from comment #6)
> According to https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html the Boost
> License is GPL compatible. So when I mark the code I copied with the source,
> it sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71321
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Dec 21 16:45:33 2016
New Revision: 243861
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243861&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/71321
* config/i386/i386.md (lea_general_2b, l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78870
--- Comment #6 from Jan Niklas Hasse ---
> Yes.
Okay thanks, I'll look into it.
> You can't copy any code, that would be a copyright violation. It's OK to see
> which Windows API functions Boost uses for a particular filesystem
> operation, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78866
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 21 16:16:20 2016
New Revision: 243860
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243860&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/78866
* openmp.c (resolve_omp_clauses): Diagnos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76731
Andrew Senkevich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.senkevich at gmail
dot co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78870
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jan Niklas Hasse from comment #4)
> Do you mean the part about legal paperwork in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html ?
Yes.
> And can I look at how boost::filesystem does this?
You can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78880
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78875
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70936
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-w64-mingw32|
Last reconfirmed|2016-05-27 00:00:00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78886
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
The return value of malloc is ignored? Your patch looks ok to me, thanks. If it
is convenient, you might want to remove the statement, otherwise I expect
another pass will handle it later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78887
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64-linux-gnu
Know
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78887
Bug ID: 78887
Summary: [7 Regression] Failure to build aarch64 allmodconfig
Linux kernel 4.9
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] ICE when |ICE when gimplifying VLA in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78886
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov ---
Not sure how well this qualifies as a regression: prior to 4.9, there was no
OpenMP SIMD support, so 4.8 just diagnoses a warning for an unrecognized
omp-simd pragma.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78886
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78877
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
There's very similar one seen by Jakub in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg01765.html
$ ./xgcc -B. -fsanitize=nul /tmp/a.c
xgcc: error: unrecognized argument to -fsanitize= option: ‘nul’
$ ./xgc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78863
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 Regression] error on |[6 Regression] error on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78863
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Dec 21 15:05:10 2016
New Revision: 243857
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243857&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not suggest -fsanitize=all (PR driver/78863).
PR driver/78863
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78886
--- Comment #1 from George Prekas ---
Created attachment 40390
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40390&action=edit
the preprocessed file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78883
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 40389
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40389&action=edit
.combine dump as requested.
Genrated with
$ avr-gcc pr26833.c -S -O1 -mmcu=avr4 -S -fdump-rtl-combine-detai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78886
Bug ID: 78886
Summary: gcc Segmentation fault malloc and volatile
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78870
--- Comment #4 from Jan Niklas Hasse ---
> Great! Please read
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/appendix_contributing.html
> especially the part about legal paperwork.
Do you mean the part about legal paperwork in
https://gcc.g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78885
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Gcac is always collect when ggc_collect is called so yes it will be slow as gc
collecting is slow due to having to mark and sweep over huge amounts of memory
and there are many calls to ggc_collect now. Each
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78885
Bug ID: 78885
Summary: gcac checking too slow to be useful ?
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78807
--- Comment #3 from Mauritz Sundell ---
I did not have access to a Solaris/sparc machine with GCC 6.
But on Linux/sparc test program do not crash compiled with GCC 6.2.0.
$ uname -a
Linux xxx 4.1.12-80.el6uek.sparc64 #1 SMP Wed Nov 30 03:09:10 P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64194
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It is confirmed, and has been since 2014-12-08. If you look at the dropdown
you'll see there is no CONFIRMED status in GCC's bugzilla.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78831
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78831
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Wed Dec 21 14:20:09 2016
New Revision: 243855
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243855&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
nvptx: do not assume that crtl->is_leaf is unset
PR target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78883
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt ---
Can you please attach a combine dump?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64194
--- Comment #2 from lcid-fire at gmx dot net ---
Shouldn't the status be confirmed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78843
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78882
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64194
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lcid-fire at gmx dot net
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52641
--- Comment #12 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Dec 21 13:50:11 2016
New Revision: 243854
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243854&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/
PR testsuite/52641
* gcc.dg/builtin-objec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69681
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There's no need to determine the addresses, only the truth of the inequality.
The standard says distinct functions have distinct addresses. Yes, linker
trickery can break that, but it's reasonable to rely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78762
--- Comment #15 from Venkataramanan ---
Considering this PR, removing the tuning (splitting of unaligned avx256 loads)
for generic is suggested.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78762
--- Comment #14 from Venkataramanan ---
(In reply to Allan Jensen from comment #13)
> The question is if the unaligned store is still slow on Excavator and Ryzen
> which support AVX2. As far as I understand the bulldozer architectures just
> pref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77963
--- Comment #2 from Pawel Sikora ---
(In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #1)
> lsan does not work with ptrace.
> There is https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/728 for it.
> We don't have plans to fix it, but the change I sent for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71444
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed on gcc trunk. Assuming no problems show up this is suitable for
backporting to the branches, so I'll leave the bug open for now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
Bug ID: 78884
Summary: ICE when gimplifying VLA in OpenMP SIMD region
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, openmp
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78883
Bug ID: 78883
Summary: [avr] ICE triggered by change to combine.c (r243578)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71444
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Dec 21 13:09:13 2016
New Revision: 243853
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243853&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 71444 define more error constants for mingw-w64
PR libstdc++/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Yuan Pengfei from comment #5)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Yuan Pengfei from comment #2)
> > > (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
--- Comment #5 from Yuan Pengfei ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #3)
> (In reply to Yuan Pengfei from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> > > See discussion in PR72785.
> >
> > I am using GCC 6.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77767
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 21 12:52:06 2016
New Revision: 243851
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243851&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/77767
* c-decl.c (grokdeclarator): If *expr is non-NU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77905
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 21 12:49:44 2016
New Revision: 243850
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243850&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-12-13 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78866
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78762
--- Comment #13 from Allan Jensen ---
The question is if the unaligned store is still slow on Excavator and Ryzen
which support AVX2. As far as I understand the bulldozer architectures just
prefer split AVX because it was basically emulating them
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It seems that this problem not only appears when reading from internal units,
but also from std input:
module t_m
implicit none
type, public :: t
character(len=:), allocatable :: m_s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
--- Comment #22 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #21)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #20)
> > *** Bug 78879 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>
> Kernel bug or not, it shou
1 - 100 of 274 matches
Mail list logo