https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81595
Bug ID: 81595
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error:
multiple hot/cold transitions found)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81587
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79252
--- Comment #2 from Zoltan Hidvegi ---
Created attachment 41855
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41855&action=edit
Possible vec_insert implementation
The attached code shows two implementation for inserting a byte to a variab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81586
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81594
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81594
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 41854
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41854&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81594
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81593
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81594
Bug ID: 81594
Summary: Optimize PowerPC vector set and store
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81593
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 41852
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41852&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
Checked on power7 big endian and power8 little endian.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80925
--- Comment #18 from Steve Ellcey ---
See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01862.html for a proposed
patch to update the tests.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81593
Bug ID: 81593
Summary: Optimize PowerPC vector set from vector extract
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81587
--- Comment #3 from Jonny Grant ---
Ok. Had expected unused declarations to be a warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #12 from Icenowy Zheng ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #11)
> (In reply to Icenowy Zheng from comment #10)
> > In my environment (glibc 2.25, and both the building scripts of glibc and
> > gcc have -fomit-frame-pointer automatical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #11 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Icenowy Zheng from comment #10)
> In my environment (glibc 2.25, and both the building scripts of glibc and
> gcc have -fomit-frame-pointer automatically enabled), this bug is not fully
> resolved yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81588
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81586
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81586
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
I don't see a problem with the code in maybe_warn. It does this:
/* Buffer for the directive in the host character set (used when
the source character set is different). */
char hostdir[32];
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81592
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
Icenowy Zheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||icenowy at aosc dot io
--- Comment #10 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81514
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01858.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81586
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81587
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> These are declarations of nested functions, you're not using them.
Actually they are not nested functions but rather considered part of the
namespace that the fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81592
Bug ID: 81592
Summary: spurious -Wformat-overflow warning with
-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81591
Bug ID: 81591
Summary: segmentation fault when using priorities of nested
tasks
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81590
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81587
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81590
Bug ID: 81590
Summary: AVX512 run-time test failures
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53971
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49053
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81570
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01851.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39284
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81588
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50645
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45784
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jul 27 19:13:42 2017
New Revision: 250635
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250635&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/45784
* c-omp.c (c_finish_omp_for): If the condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25221
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50432
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79162
--- Comment #16 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> Thanks, Daniel. Let's reopen this to make the T -> const T& changes.
I'm now working at that problem, thereby also attempting to implement the full
P/R of L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81577
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52900
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81589
--- Comment #1 from Hunter L. Allen ---
Created attachment 41850
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41850&action=edit
preprocesed file (compressed)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81589
Bug ID: 81589
Summary: Possible False-Positive with decltype
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24546
Bug 24546 depends on bug 40040, which changed state.
Bug 40040 Summary: gfortran invalid DW_AT_location for overridable variables
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40040
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40040
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81582
--- Comment #9 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
With -fdirectives-only locations go bananas:
#include
int f1 (int x)
{
switch (x)
{
case 1: x++; // FALLTHRU
case 2: x--; /* FALLTHRU */
case 3: x++; // line #9
case 4: return x;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41827
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81588
Bug ID: 81588
Summary: Wrong code at -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81514
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
I'm able to reproduce this on Linux by replacing:
#include
with:
namespace std
{
extern int sprintf (char *dst, const char *format, ...);
};
On Linux, the include of stdio.h seems to have bee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81587
Bug ID: 81587
Summary: GCC doesn't warn about calling functions that don't
exist
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81586
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
The following much reduced C++ code seems to demonstrate the bug:
extern "C" int snprintf(char *, unsigned long, const char *...) ;
struct S {
char * a;
};
void f( S * af)
{
snprintf(af->a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81514
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45784
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64762
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81586
Bug ID: 81586
Summary: valgrind error in output_buffer_append_r with -Wall
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53075
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68034
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40864
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77481
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77428
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53716
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53943
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Konstantin Osipov from comment #2)
> kostja@atlas ~ % gcc -fobjc-direct-dispatch foo.m -lobjc
You still left off the -fobjc-exceptions flag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67455
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53943
--- Comment #2 from Konstantin Osipov ---
kostja@atlas ~ % gcc -fobjc-direct-dispatch foo.m -lobjc
foo.m: In function ‘main’:
foo.m:14:9: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
@throw [Interface new];
^
Please submit a full
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81585
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81585
Bug ID: 81585
Summary: fastcall/stdcall attribute conflict not detected on
distinct declarations of the same function
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57428
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53943
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On July 27, 2017 4:39:45 PM GMT+02:00, "seurer at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573
>
>--- Comment #7 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
>The problem in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53345
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25361
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24867
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60100
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57201
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lavr at ncbi dot nlm.nih.gov
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57821
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81477
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|marxin at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47901
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81417
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
There is more to fix, e.g. diagnostic with ?:, so not marking as resolved just
yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81417
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Jul 27 15:02:17 2017
New Revision: 250630
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250630&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/81417
* c-warn.c (warn_for_sign_compare): Tweak th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81021
--- Comment #32 from Matt Godbolt ---
Thanks! One thing, I probably misunderstand this, but you've put 7.1 in "known
to work" above: is this on purpose? 7.1 is the version the issue comes up in, I
assume it'll be fixed in an upcoming 7.2 release?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573
--- Comment #7 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The problem in the test case is that the code assumes "char" is signed. On
power it is not. So "b" starts at 0, is decremented to 255, and ...etc...
The for loop will run forever.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81306
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81574
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573
--- Comment #6 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
And it is run multiple times which means make check takes forever.
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr81573.c -O0 execution test
. . .
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.dg/t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81582
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The reason it is shown in the diagnostics is that the diagnostic code opens the
original, non-preprocessed source (if available) and prints the line from
there.
If you don't have the source around, say compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81575
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81582
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> If you are preprocessing without -C and without -fdirectives-only, then
> comments are gone, so you really can't use them to inhibit the warning.
Yes, so -Wim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81564
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81564
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81564
--- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Thu Jul 27 14:05:14 2017
New Revision: 250628
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250628&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/81564
* tree-cfg.c (group_case_labels
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81584
Bug ID: 81584
Summary: Pretty Printer for string* doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61727
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81582
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If you are preprocessing without -C and without -fdirectives-only, then
comments are gone, so you really can't use them to inhibit the warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81574
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Bet the initializer isn't through function-to-pointer conversion
(decay_conversion or whatever else invokes it), but no idea where that should
be done etc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81574
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81494
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 27 13:46:07 2017
New Revision: 250627
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250627&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-07-27 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/81573
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81494
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 27 13:46:07 2017
New Revision: 250627
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250627&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-07-27 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/81573
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81571
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
