https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
Andrew Miloradovsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Miloradovsky from comment #4)
> Hmm, man printf(3) doesn't tell anything about the formats, what are they
> for?
They are part of the gcc diagnostic format. Gcc does not use printf direct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Miloradovsky ---
After all I might simply insert that comment everywhere, to reduce confusion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Miloradovsky ---
Hmm, man printf(3) doesn't tell anything about the formats, what are they for?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Still broken:
else
-error (gmsgid);
+error ("%s", gmsgid);
And more where you have *msgid.
I bet invalid_func_diag has similar too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
Andrew Miloradovsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41428|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80894
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-linux-gnu,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80894
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This patch is incorrect:
/* The gmsgid may be a format string with %< and %>. */
- warned = pedwarn (exploc, opt, gmsgid);
+ warned = pedwarn (exploc, opt, "%s", gmsgid);
See that comment of why.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80895
Bug ID: 80895
Summary: format not a string literal and no format arguments;
in GCC itself
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80894
Bug ID: 80894
Summary: [8 Regression] 456.hmmer in SPEC CPU 2006 is
miscompiled
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759
--- Comment #17 from Daniel Santos ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #15)
> Created attachment 41404 [details]
> Switch ms-sysv to more regular dg functions
You may be surprised to learn how many faulty assumptions you may have about
how
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80850
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
(I am adding -gnatwA -gnatyN to the command line to let the reduced version
compile, and -m32 is fundamental)
Maybe simplifying (sizetype)_26 to _3 is fine, but it isn't fine to keep
valueizing _3 and redoing a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
Created attachment 41427
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41427&action=edit
Reduced version of s-regpat.ad[bs]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
Seems to me that it is FRE valueization doing something strange. We have (not
in a loop)
_26 = CHAIN.23_25(D)->parse_pos;
_28 = _26 + 1;
CHAIN.23_25(D)->parse_pos = _28;
_30 = CHAIN.23_25(D)->expressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80880
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80848
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80037
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mitalis at iiitd dot ac.in
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80037
--- Comment #7 from Alexey Neyman ---
Can you close 80848 as a duplicate of this one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80037
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80037
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri May 26 19:33:19 2017
New Revision: 248526
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248526&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgcc/80037
Backport from mainline
* config/alpha/t-alpha (CRTSTU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80037
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri May 26 19:29:46 2017
New Revision: 248525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgcc/80037
Backport from mainline
* config/alpha/t-alpha (CRTSTU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80892
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80850
--- Comment #2 from DIL ---
I have fixed all issues reported by VALGRIND so the code now is valgrind-clean.
However, the problem I reported still shows up from time to time (only when the
code is compiled with -g and no optimization: BUILD_TYPE =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to boger from comment #19)
> Is someone building and testing gccgo on x86_64 on a regular basis? If I
> look at the gcc-testresults output for x86_64 I don't see the go or libgo
> test results lik
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80878
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
Well, at least it's not too late to update the compiler manual, so I've
submitted a patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg02080.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #19 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Is someone building and testing gccgo on x86_64 on a regular basis? If I look
at the gcc-testresults output for x86_64 I don't see the go or libgo test
results like I do for ppc64le. Maybe it does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80037
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri May 26 18:45:59 2017
New Revision: 248522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgcc/80037
* config/alpha/t-alpha (CRTSTUFF_T_CFLAGS): New.
Modi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80893
Bug ID: 80893
Summary: std::vector creation dereferences null pointer
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #18 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Lynn, thanks for the detailed investigation.
Martin, Lynn is saying that these problems started with the SRA patch for PR
78687 committed on 2017-05-02.
It's odd that this problem only shows up on PPC64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #17 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Here's more info on the failures and how to reproduce them. Starting with
commit 247497 there are 7 new failures in the libgo testsuite.
There are 4 that fail with a SEGV at runtime: reflect, arch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80892
Bug ID: 80892
Summary: [8 regression] -Wfloat-conversion now warns about
non-floats
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80891
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80889
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80891
Bug ID: 80891
Summary: [8 Regression] Three new ICEs
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80889
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri May 26 17:16:35 2017
New Revision: 248519
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248519&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-26 Thomas Koenig
PR boostrap/80889
* acinclu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Trying to print captures in the frame that calls gimple_simplify_135 I see it
oscillating between:
parse_pos.474_23
4294967295
4294967295
and
_78
1
4294967294
(captures[0..2]).
_76 = CHAIN.552_67(D)->pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80890
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52595
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sergi.mateo at bsc dot es
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80822
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Should apply cleanly against 6.x, 7.x as well as current trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80822
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80859
--- Comment #26 from Thorsten Kurth ---
Hello Jakub,
thanks for the clarification. So a team maps to a CTA which is somewhat
equivalent to a block in CUDA language, correct? And it is good to have some
categorical equivalency between GPU and CPU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35339
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Nicolas Koenig from comment #7)
> Created attachment 41420 [details]
> Early patch for simplifying impl do loops - 2
>
> Sorry, wrong patch _and_ wrong testcase... Still fails for mysterious
> r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80889
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80859
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In the GCC implementation of offloading to PTX, all HW threads in a warp (i.e.
32 of them) are a single OpenMP thread, and one needs to use a simd region
(effectively SIMT) to get useful work done by all all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80859
--- Comment #24 from Thorsten Kurth ---
Hello Jakub,
I know that the section you mean is racey and gets the wrong number of threads
is not right but I put this in in order to see if I get the correct numbers on
a CPU (I am not working on a GPU y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #16 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
After further investigation I found the original testcase failures started
happening with an earlier commit, which I have verified as 247497. That commit
caused 7 new libgo testcase failures, but a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri May 26 14:18:26 2017
New Revision: 248512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248512&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80815
* tree-data-ref.c (pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80878
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Since this makes libatomic required for DCAS on x86_64 it should probably have
been documented at https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80890
Bug ID: 80890
Summary: Qualified class member access in a member
initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80889
Bug ID: 80889
Summary: [8 Regression] Bootstrap broken on all targets due to
rev 248472
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80888
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 41424
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41424&action=edit
Demonstrator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80888
Bug ID: 80888
Summary: Wide_Text_IO defaults to bracket encoding even if
-gnatW8 specified
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80878
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80822
--- Comment #9 from Nathan Weeks ---
Created attachment 41423
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41423&action=edit
Code from 80822 comment #4 run as per comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80867
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu, |powerpc64le-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80887
Bug ID: 80887
Summary: gnat bootstrap fails at s-regpat.o: raised
STORAGE_ERROR : stack overflow or erroneous memory
access
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.3.1
Known to fail|6.3.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79931
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:32:26 2017
New Revision: 248504
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248504&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r247097
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50345
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:31:33 2017
New Revision: 248502
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248502&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246995
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65972
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:31:52 2017
New Revision: 248503
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248503&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246996
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78783
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:31:15 2017
New Revision: 248501
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248501&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246961
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80413
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:30:54 2017
New Revision: 248500
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248500&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246903
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80212
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:29:35 2017
New Revision: 248499
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248499&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246848
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80212
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:28:44 2017
New Revision: 248498
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248498&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246847
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70878
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:28:07 2017
New Revision: 248497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246837
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80224
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:27:25 2017
New Revision: 248496
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248496&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246804
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:26:45 2017
New Revision: 248495
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248495&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246799
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80166
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:26:04 2017
New Revision: 248494
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248494&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246730
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80205
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:25:34 2017
New Revision: 248493
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248493&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246530
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80104
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:24:49 2017
New Revision: 248492
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248492&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r246525
2017-05-26 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80659
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80875
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
There is always an emulated TLS support, but that is not what you ask for if
you --enable-tls. As for mingw TLS support, you need to ask the mingw
maintainers, I don't have access to that target, nor suffici
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80659
--- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri May 26 11:17:34 2017
New Revision: 248491
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248491&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80659
* c-decl.c (build_compound_literal)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80875
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri May 26 11:15:37 2017
New Revision: 248490
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248490&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80875
* fold-const.c (fold_binary_loc) : C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80663
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80663
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri May 26 11:05:52 2017
New Revision: 248489
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248489&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Bound partial-inlining-entry-probability param (PR ipa/80663).
2017-05-26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Starke ---
True, I have rebuild GCC without --enable-tls enabled and the null pointer
access is gone. So I guess there is still no TLS support for mingw-w64 (even
though Windows supports it as far as I know).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71605
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80884
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80862
--- Comment #2 from Yulia Koval ---
Patch posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg02013.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80886
Bug ID: 80886
Summary: __builtin_constant_p magic has broken at some point
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80809
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 26 10:14:37 2017
New Revision: 248488
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248488&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-05-22 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80809
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 26 10:13:34 2017
New Revision: 248487
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248487&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-05-22 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80853
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 26 10:05:39 2017
New Revision: 248486
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248486&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-05-22 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80846
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 41422
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41422&action=edit
adjusted tree-vect-loop.c hunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80846
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Note that similar to the vec_init optab not allowing constructing larger
vectors from smaller ones vec_extract doesn't allow extracting smaller vectors
from larger ones. So I might be forced to go V8SI -> V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80632
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80875
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 Regression] UBSAN: |[7 Regression] UBSAN:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80875
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri May 26 09:31:36 2017
New Revision: 248485
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248485&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80875
* fold-const.c (fold_binary_loc) : C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557
--- Comment #13 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Fri May 26 09:25:00 2017
New Revision: 248484
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248484&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Replace absolute line numbers in gcc.dg
2017-05-26 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80885
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80867
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu, |powerpc64le-linux-gnu,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80846
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Similar with AVX512F I get
.L2:
vmovdqa64 -112(%rbp), %zmm3
addq$64, %rdi
vpaddd -64(%rdi), %zmm3, %zmm2
cmpq%rdi, %rax
vmovdqa64 %zmm2, -112(%rb
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
