https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85416
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
And please output of adding --verbose option.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85416
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85426
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|85099 |
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Up
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85415
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85426
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
Martin, is this PR actually related to selective scheduling?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85417
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #2)
> I am working to enable CET on Linux with a single binary. -fcf-protection
> should provide CET protection on x86 by default. We can add a command-line
> option if we wan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85427
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85405
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0.1
Known to fail|8.0.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85405
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Apr 17 05:41:40 2018
New Revision: 259429
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259429&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Support bitfields in Wodr machinery (PR lto/85405).
2018-04-17 Jan Hubic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Apr 17 05:40:39 2018
New Revision: 259428
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259428&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Make redirection only for target_clones: V3 (PR ipa/85329).
2018-04-17 M
/suhua/compilers/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180416 (experimental) [trunk revision 259396] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk abc.c
during RTL pass: expand
abc.c: In function ‘fn1’:
abc.c:3:13: internal compiler error: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85413
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The difference between -flto and -flto=jobserver is minor (just speed of
linking). I don't think this minor difference would cause the need to update
the documentation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84856
--- Comment #9 from Kito Cheng ---
Hi Jim:
Yeah, you are right, so I guess just some missing in back-end now, thanks your
quick response :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
--- Comment #10 from Arseny Solokha ---
Created attachment 43955
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43955&action=edit
gcc/auto-host.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85426
Bug ID: 85426
Summary: ICE in patch_jump_insn, at cfgrtl.c:1271
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80290
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85039
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|aoliva at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85400
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85400
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85421
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85039
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Mon Apr 16 21:35:34 2018
New Revision: 259423
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259423&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/85039] no type definitions in builtin offsetof
Types defined w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85417
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 43954
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43954&action=edit
A patch
I am testing this patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84856
--- Comment #8 from Jim Wilson ---
I copied the design of the patch from the i386 backend, so in theory it should
work. The layout of the stack is completely at the control of the target
backend, so uses of STACK_BOUNDARY outside the backend sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85400
--- Comment #2 from Brian Vandenberg ---
Sorry, I was hand-typing from an air-gapped network. I left the type name
out; line 5 should read:
> thread_local int mything = 3;
-brian
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 2:52 AM, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85425
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85425
--- Comment #2 from Gerhard Heinzel ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
Many thanks for your quick response.
I normally don't use -Wconversion because it floods me with
uninteresting errors about size_t, floor(), and code from bis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59960
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79009
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at abeckmann dot de
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79009
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85418
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85425
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The example can be reduced to:
void ghhrobust_search (double ay, int type) { }
void f(int i, double d) { ghhrobust_search(i, d); }
This must not produce an error, because it is 100% valid according to th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79009
Sasha Unknown changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sasha2048 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85419
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84574
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Apr 16 19:11:13 2018
New Revision: 259422
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259422&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk
Function retu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84039
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Apr 16 19:08:14 2018
New Revision: 259421
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259421&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Add TARGET_INDIRECT_BRANCH_REGISTER
For
---
struct C {
vi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84530
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Apr 16 19:06:32 2018
New Revision: 259420
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259420&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Update -mfunction-return= for return with pop
When -mfunctio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85425
Bug ID: 85425
Summary: gcc 6.2.1 fails to catch error in function calling
arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85424
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85424
Bug ID: 85424
Summary: The __builtin_packlongdouble function might have
issues with the output overlapping the inputs
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83839
--- Comment #10 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Apr 16 18:55:04 2018
New Revision: 259414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
x86: Add -mfunction-return=
Add -mfunction-return= option to conv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686
--- Comment #14 from Dennis Clarke ---
Since this bug was a "bootstrap" issue I think I should close it
as simply an issue related to the garbage collector libs needed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83905
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Apr 16 18:44:43 2018
New Revision: 259411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259411&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Use const reference of struct ix86_frame to avoid copy
We ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82499
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Apr 16 18:42:57 2018
New Revision: 259408
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259408&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Move struct ix86_frame to machine_function
Make ix86_frame a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85391
--- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou ---
> We looked into this with Martin todday. There are two bugs: one is the fact
> that lto.c forgets to register the type in case it was within strongly
> connected component after its outer type. The order de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85080
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85080
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Apr 16 18:18:42 2018
New Revision: 259407
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259407&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc/testsuite]
2018-04-16 Bill Schmidt
PR target/85080
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84955
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Apr 16 18:01:09 2018
New Revision: 259406
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259406&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[openacc] Fix ICE when compiling tile loop containing infinite loop
2018-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Whether that's a good or bad decision is a matter of opinion. Most coding
guidelines advise against using strcpy even between distinct objects. I happen
to think that's unnecessarily restrictive when the siz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85423
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85421
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #5)
> The warning for attachment 43950 [details] is intended and the bug is
> actually in failing to issue it without -fsanitize=undefined. Unlike for
> raw memory func
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85423
Bug ID: 85423
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in code_motion_process_successors,
at sel-sched.c:6403
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85421
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686
--- Comment #13 from Dennis Clarke ---
Finally managed to get a decent looking three stage bootstrap to complete
without bizarre errors. Thanks to Matthias Klose for the suggestion to
get away from that gc issue entirely.
Testsuite is running h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85417
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Summary|Extra test failures wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #3)
> Hmm, this maybe creduce'd too much, the original source reads more like
>
>strcpy(b, b + a + 10);
>
> which would be only UB for sure if strlen(b + a + 10) >=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
--- Comment #3 from Franz Sirl ---
Hmm, this maybe creduce'd too much, the original source reads more like
strcpy(b, b + a + 10);
which would be only UB for sure if strlen(b + a + 10) >= 9, or?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83660
acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84955
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to cesar from comment #6)
> It should be noted that GCC also chokes with any empty OpenACC loop in
> general.
Filed as PR85422 - [openacc] ICE at cfgloop.c:468: segfault in flow_loops_find
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85422
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openacc
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85422
Bug ID: 85422
Summary: [openacc] ICE at cfgloop.c:468: segfault in
flow_loops_find
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85421
Bug ID: 85421
Summary: [8 regression] internal compiler error: in
ipa_propagate_frequency, at ipa-profile.c:405
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84463
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
--- Comment #1 from Franz Sirl ---
Created attachment 43951
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43951&action=edit
C++ testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85420
Bug ID: 85420
Summary: More -Wrestrict false positives with
-fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85419
Bug ID: 85419
Summary: Incorrect determination of null pointer constant
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84463
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85418
Bug ID: 85418
Summary: -Wformat-truncation on inlinned function
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83660
acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83660
--- Comment #14 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: acsawdey
Date: Mon Apr 16 14:50:06 2018
New Revision: 259403
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259403&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-04-16 Aaron Sawdey
PR target/83660
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85417
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85391
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 43947
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43947&action=edit
Proposed fix
We looked into this with Maritn todday. There are two bugs: one is the fact
that lto.c forgets to r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
Or as Jakub (thanks!) noted on IRC, gcc/auto-host.h from the build tree may be
also helpful and simpler for us to work with.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
--- Comment #7 from Alexander Monakov ---
The testcase is not easily reproducible because the rs6000 backend has some
implicit dependencies on capabilities of configure-time binutils, and they are
not visible as 'gcc -v' flags.
So, to reproduce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85414
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84463
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85416
--- Comment #1 from Martin Reinecke ---
Just re-tested on an Intel Core i5-4570; on this CPU, there is no performance
degradation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85304
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85417
Bug ID: 85417
Summary: Extra test failures with -fcf-protection -mcet
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85414
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The problem is likely with the caching of ix86_compute_frame_layout results, at
least if I call this function at the beginning of ix86_expand_prologue, it
doesn't ICE anymore.
What changes in particular is i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85403
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85405
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2018-04-15 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85416
Bug ID: 85416
Summary: Massive performance regression when switching on
"-march=native"
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85391
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85403
--- Comment #1 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Apr 16 11:31:22 2018
New Revision: 259400
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259400&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Check error_mark_node in multiversioning
Since CET is applie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85415
Bug ID: 85415
Summary: internal compiler error: in finish_member_declaration,
at cp/semantics.c:2984
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83983
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84331
--- Comment #1 from Julia Koval ---
Author: jkoval
Date: Mon Apr 16 11:23:55 2018
New Revision: 259399
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259399&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fixed g++.dg/ext/mv16.C with -march=native.
gcc/
PR target/84331
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84945
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Apr 16 11:22:40 2018
New Revision: 259398
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259398&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84945
* config/i386/cpuinfo.c (set_feature): Wr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85414
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-259397-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180416 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85129
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0)
> I. trunk
>
> The GOMP_OPENACC_DIM environment variable is not documented (it should have
> an entry in libgomp.texi at 'OpenACC Environment Variables').
Atm, in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84733
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini ---
Nope. Something deeper. The new testcase would be accepted but the declaration
of the int variable 'e' would not be usable, would be ignored.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84733
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini ---
In fact, if I slightly tweak the testcase to avoid the error by defining 'e' we
would ICE again, because binding->type is found null without a preceding
diagnostic. Thus I wonder if my patchlet in Comment 7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85411
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries -
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
