https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79168
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79206
Bug ID: 79206
Summary: string_view operator== could do an early exit if sizes
differ
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79205
Bug ID: 79205
Summary: ICE in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:473
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78763
--- Comment #12 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue Jan 24 03:34:14 2017
New Revision: 244852
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244852&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/78763
Backported from mainline:
compiler:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79204
Bug ID: 79204
Summary: improve -Woverflow by mentioning types and values
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #4 from kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kelvin
Date: Tue Jan 24 01:26:13 2017
New Revision: 244850
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244850&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2017-01-23 Kelvin Nilsen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78703
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jan 24 01:10:10 2017
New Revision: 244847
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244847&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78703 - -fprintf-return-value floating point handling incorr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78703
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jan 24 01:06:34 2017
New Revision: 244846
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244846&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78703 - -fprintf-return-value floating point handling incorr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78703
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jan 24 00:55:19 2017
New Revision: 244845
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244845&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78703 - -fprintf-return-value floating point handling incorr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79168
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 24 00:18:36 2017
New Revision: 244844
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244844&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/79168
* merge.sh (change_comment_headers): Do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79203
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79203
Bug ID: 79203
Summary: Update PowerPC double->int conversions to know about
-mvsx-small-integer
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77445
--- Comment #22 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
In response to c#19. Yes, a thread path which is cold except for a hot block
in the middle might be profitable to thread as it will sometimes expose path
specific redundancies/simplifications in the hot bl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79202
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79202
Bug ID: 79202
Summary: On Power8, consider using vupkhsw/xxpermdi to sign
extend an int in a vector register instead of
mfvsrwz/mtvsrwa
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jens Maurer from comment #16)
> That means the standard library needs to do its homework to clearly specify
> under which circumstances (which argument types) it expects a constexpr
> function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77445
--- Comment #21 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
In response to c#20. We have to be careful about fixing up the loop after
rotation and avoid repeatedly peeling. The old threader dealt with those by
being fairly conservative in passes before the loop op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #18 from Jens Maurer ---
Then you should cheat on [dcl.constexpr] p5 by carving out the nullptr case:
constexpr void less_than(int *p1, int *p2)
{
if (p1 == nullptr && p2 == nullptr)
return false;
return (size_t)p1 < (size_t)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #17 from Ville Voutilainen ---
(In reply to Jens Maurer from comment #16)
> I'd like to point out that there is no prohibition against writing
> reinterpret_cast inside a constexpr function. It's just if you call that
> function and a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79193
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from sandr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
Jens Maurer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jens.maurer at gmx dot net
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79088
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79188
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79188
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Jan 23 22:29:17 2017
New Revision: 244837
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244837&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/79088
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79088
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Jan 23 22:29:17 2017
New Revision: 244837
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244837&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/79088
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79071
Maciej W. Rozycki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma...@linux-mips.org
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Ville Voutilainen from comment #14)
> Not in general, no, it doesn't have to always give a compile-time answer.
> But I believe the library intent is that when it compares compile-time
> constan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77300
--- Comment #6 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
Fixed in binutils now:
commit 65060a78866f374e25f4668d12efc783235d19d1
Author: Maciej W. Rozycki
Date: Wed Jan 18 18:18:21 2017 +
PR gas/20649: MIPS: Fix GOT16/LO16 reloc pairing with comdat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #14 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Not in general, no, it doesn't have to always give a compile-time answer. But I
believe the library intent is that when it compares compile-time constant
pointers, it should give that answer at compile-t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Ville Voutilainen from comment #11)
> Ah, the plot thickens. Jens Maurer wrote:
>
> "Regarding the std::less issue, it seems a bug in the standard
> to require that it be constexpr and deliver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
And based on the IRC discussion I had earlier today with Markus, I
have also added the following to the patch I'm bootstrapping, even
though it is not strictly necessary to prevent OOM in the testcase
from co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56727
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
Well, if my argument is correct, then GCC generates wrong code for the very
first example in comment #0. If that is deliberate as a compromise even though
otherwise GCC suppresses optimizations to honor p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78936
--- Comment #3 from Reid Kleckner ---
The compiled code still fails at runtime during an LLVM build in the same way.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79200
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79192
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I am about to test the following, which fixes the test from comment
#1. It does fix a clear bug in the patch I committed today, without
it there we multitudes of identical cgraph duplication hooks active at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79165
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|dmalcolm at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79165
--- Comment #12 from David Malcolm ---
Looking at the line maps, we have a sane list of ordinary linemaps, but then
the linemap_add call at line 4761 here:
4758tree
4759build_translation_unit_decl (tree name)
4760{
4761 linemap_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79192
--- Comment #1 from ricilake at gmail dot com ---
Thanks to Johannes Schaub-litb (via SO), the problem appears to be at around
line 16781 of cp/parser.c:
/* There is no valid C++ program where a non-template type is
followed by a "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71710
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon Jan 23 20:24:32 2017
New Revision: 244833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244833&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71710 - template using directive of field
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71710
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79165
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71406
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77508
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77508
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon Jan 23 20:19:07 2017
New Revision: 244832
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244832&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71406 - ICE with scope-ref'd template id exprs
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71406
--- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon Jan 23 20:19:07 2017
New Revision: 244832
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244832&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71406 - ICE with scope-ref'd template id exprs
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79082
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
> case 3. You can see that in the dump created by the -ftree-dump-vrp option
> where the argument is assumed to include the negative subrange:
>
> Value ranges after VRP:
> ...
> iftmp.0_11: [-99, 99]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79082
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Except for #8, none of the sprintf calls in the extended testcase in attachment
40566 can be handled as accurately at -O0 as with optimization because the
arguments to the format directives are treated as if t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56727
--- Comment #7 from Yuri Gribov ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #6)
> Note that even without symbol aliases, such calls are not necessarily
> self-recursive when 'f' is first called via dlsym with RTLD_NEXT or a
> specific module
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78936
--- Comment #2 from Reid Kleckner ---
That option does not appear to affect the linked portions of the assembly. The
" [clone .constprop.544]" transform still appears to fire.
I will run the complete build and get back soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79176
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
It looks to me like vect_alignment_reachable is the wrong test to be using
here. This is equivalent to vect_aligned_arrays || natural_alignment_32.
vect_aligned_array is always 0 for powerpc*-*-*. natural_a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, or -mcpu=power8 -mno-popcntd -mvsx -mvsx-scalar-double even if gas has
power7/power8 support.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ah I can reproduce it now... -mcpu=power7 -mno-popcntd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78936
Alexandre Pereira Nunes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexandre.nunes at gmail dot
c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79037
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
--- Comment #27 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to James Greenhalgh from comment #26)
> (In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #21)
> > (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #20)
> > > *** Bug 78879 has been marked as a dupl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually, it ICEs for me only if auto-host.h doesn't have HAVE_POPCNTD defined.
And the problem is in mismatch of the conditions:
(define_expand "fixuns_truncdi2"
[(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79037
--- Comment #12 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Mon Jan 23 18:15:22 2017
New Revision: 244824
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244824&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/79037
compiler, runtime: align gc data for m68k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
--- Comment #26 from James Greenhalgh ---
(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 should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77508
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
I also saw this on Linux/i686.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79168
--- Comment #2 from Brian Rzycki ---
Hello Jakub. Thank you for the fast response. We have verified that gcc with
your patch successfully compiles. We haven't done any real testing on the
compiler itself though.
I think it'd be good to push that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71406
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79201
Bug ID: 79201
Summary: issed optimization: gcc fails to cut out unnecessary
loop.
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79159
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #5)
> (In reply to amker from comment #4)
> > Discussed with richi, and conclusion is that vrp issue is hard to fix at the
> > moment. Easy way out is to investigate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71724
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Summar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56049
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #19 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56069
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.0 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78516
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79190
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The C++17 draft requires aligned-delete to be used for memory obtained from
aligned-new (and not otherwise):
"Requires: If the alignment parameter is not present, ptr shall have been
returned by an allocat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79165
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Block
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Summar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48091
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
OK, but as the reporter of 64526 said, we should warn at least. We know the
number of parameters (even if there isn't a prototype) and we know the number
of arguments doesn't match it. That warrants a warni
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79165
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754
--- Comment #11 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to amker from comment #10)
> Author: amker
> Date: Mon Jan 23 15:59:19 2017
> New Revision: 244815
This fixes the problem on powerpc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79108
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71724
--- Comment #7 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Author: bernds
Date: Mon Jan 23 16:30:55 2017
New Revision: 244817
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244817&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/71724
* combine.c (if_then_else_cond)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78634
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48091
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|accepts-invalid |
--- Comment #7 from Joseph S. Myers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78634
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Author: bernds
Date: Mon Jan 23 16:17:33 2017
New Revision: 244816
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244816&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/78634
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_max_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79195
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed on trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Jan 23 15:59:19 2017
New Revision: 244815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70754
* tree-predcom.c (st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79194
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78945
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79195
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Jan 23 15:56:05 2017
New Revision: 244813
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244813&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79195 fix make_array type deduction
PR libstdc++/79
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79200
Bug ID: 79200
Summary: Race-Condition in Address Santitizer
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56069
--- Comment #16 from Bernd Schmidt ---
I retested again with a few different combinations of things. With an older
gdb, I can still reproduce the issue that sra-1 becomes UNSUPPORTED (presumably
through a gdb crash). With gdb-7.12 installed the p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79165
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
https://gcc.opensuse.org/c++bench-czerny/pb11/ has this link:
http://www.polyhedron.com/fortran-compiler-comparisons/polyhedron-benchmark-suite
which is a 404.
An updated link seems to be:
http://www.f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79196
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79196
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Jan 23 14:57:43 2017
New Revision: 244812
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244812&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix strstr folding (PR tree-optimization/79196).
2017-01-23 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69188
--- Comment #26 from anthonyfk at gmail dot com ---
Thank you very much for the fix! I've tried the patch as applied to
gcc-6-branch with an otherwise fresh tarball of gcc 6.3.0. When compiling
lapack-3.6.1 I no longer get the original bug, but I
1 - 100 of 168 matches
Mail list logo
