https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95152
--- Comment #4 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Stripped down example:
File :
typedef struct {
int var;
} info_t;
extern void *_data_offs;
void test()
{
info_t *info = ((void *)((void *)1) + ((unsigned int)&_data_offs));
my_func(info->var
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95183
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.2
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95176
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95172
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95171
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
OK, so this is always_inline crossing a IL semantic boundary
(-fnon-call-exceptions + -ffinite-math-only). In w9 NaN > 0.0 does not trap
but when
inlined into o7 it suddenly does and thus is invalid GIMPLE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94577
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Thank you, can you please attach a pre-processed file (-E) so that one doesn't
need to clone seastar repository?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95183
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95171
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95163
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95164
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.3.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-18
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95158
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.3.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95154
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95171
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94969
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 18 May 2020, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94969
>
> --- Comment #10 from bin cheng ---
> Hi，should I backport this and PR95110 to branc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95163
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.0, 7.5.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95159
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95152
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Keywords|needs-bisecti
nterminated" "unterminated macro" } */
| ^
0xd9b92f crash_signal
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20200517/work/gcc-11-20200517/gcc/toplev.c:328
0x18578d3 _cpp_lex_direct
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20200517/work/gcc-11-20200517/libc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95182
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Also explictly this part of the documentation makes it clear that Pmode should
be DImode for AARCH64 ILP32:
define this to be the integer mode corresponding to the width of a hardware
pointer
The hardware po
Hello, this is the mail server on mailmarketingworldbee.live.
I am sending you this message to inform you on the delivery status of a
message you previously sent. Immediately below you will find a list of
the affected recipients; also attached is a Delivery Status Notification
(DSN) report in st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95182
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95182
Bug ID: 95182
Summary: Change the definition of Pmode
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94969
--- Comment #10 from bin cheng ---
Hi，should I backport this and PR95110 to branches? Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95164
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
struct H {
int a;
};
struct I {
int c;
H b;
};
struct E { I d; };
void foo(E);
template
void fn ()
{
int a = 42;
int &k = a;
foo({1, {H{k}}});
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95179
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181
--- Comment #3 from ahmet özhan ---
Comment on attachment 48554
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48554
gcc 10 don't compile but clang compile
>#include
>
>namespace math {
>
> template
> requires std::is_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181
--- Comment #2 from ahmet özhan ---
Comment on attachment 48554
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48554
gcc 10 don't compile but clang compile
>#include
>
>namespace math {
>
> template
> requires std::is_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181
--- Comment #1 from ahmet özhan ---
gcc 9.3 compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181
Bug ID: 95181
Summary: internal compiler error: in push_access_scope, at
cp/pt.c:241
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95180
Bug ID: 95180
Summary: Failure to reject invalid code with attempted
redefinition of symbol with different linkage
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95179
Bug ID: 95179
Summary: explicit constructor not used for static inline member
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95164
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
It actually started with r5-7-g1c982d13138ee4518db10b6fbe02fa32d09ab51e -- it
was latent for a while.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95178
Bug ID: 95178
Summary: error: array subscript has type char
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libquadmath
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177
Bug ID: 95177
Summary: error: array subscript has type char
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95169
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94690
--- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #12)
> This breaks gfortran.dg/gomp/target1.f90 on riscv.
See comment 10 – or PR95109, which points to comment 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94690
--- Comment #12 from Andreas Schwab ---
This breaks gfortran.dg/gomp/target1.f90 on riscv.
/daten/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/target1.f90:318:0: internal
compiler error: in lookup_decl_in_outer_ctx, at omp-low.c:3967
0xbb9b5a look
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95169
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95176
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95168
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95166
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95167
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95168
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:999c80acfdd890b789678c989c3d740969c14d20
commit r10-8150-g999c80acfdd890b789678c989c3d740969c14d20
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95167
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:999c80acfdd890b789678c989c3d740969c14d20
commit r10-8150-g999c80acfdd890b789678c989c3d740969c14d20
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95166
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:999c80acfdd890b789678c989c3d740969c14d20
commit r10-8150-g999c80acfdd890b789678c989c3d740969c14d20
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
Fixed for GCC 11.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95176
Bug ID: 95176
Summary: Failure to optimize division followed by
multiplication to modulo followed by subtraction
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:266f44a91c0c9705d3d18e82d7c5bab32927a18f
commit r11-446-g266f44a91c0c9705d3d18e82d7c5bab32927a18f
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Sun May 17 10:1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95166
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e977a5df5bae2bce6e3e95456f5da0dbfdd02934
commit r11-445-ge977a5df5bae2bce6e3e95456f5da0dbfdd02934
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Sun May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95168
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e977a5df5bae2bce6e3e95456f5da0dbfdd02934
commit r11-445-ge977a5df5bae2bce6e3e95456f5da0dbfdd02934
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Sun May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95167
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e977a5df5bae2bce6e3e95456f5da0dbfdd02934
commit r11-445-ge977a5df5bae2bce6e3e95456f5da0dbfdd02934
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Sun May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95175
Bug ID: 95175
Summary: constexpr and alias template
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95075
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
Also present in upstream implementation, I'll ask the author of the change
about it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94970
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94970
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:80cefde6212c3de603dda46d05123a750b378ff2
commit r9-8601-g80cefde6212c3de603dda46d05123a750b378ff2
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94970
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79f2ae6ecffbef5c1f78459f6980e0f91121022d
commit r10-8149-g79f2ae6ecffbef5c1f78459f6980e0f91121022d
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95174
Bug ID: 95174
Summary: [D] Incorrect compiled functions involving const fixed
size arrays
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95173
Bug ID: 95173
Summary: [D] ICE on some architecture targets when trying to
use unknown attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94474
--- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Hi Andrew,
You are right about the instruction re-ordering, that is done in
a compiler pass, which simply re-orders RTL instruction lists.
But I think when the code motion happens, we just
have no easy acc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94474
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Burgess ---
> But what I learned from writing the patch is that gcc cannot
> easily tell if a range will be empty or not. That is because
> the assembler does emit the line info and the views,
> and the assembler deci
64 matches
Mail list logo
