https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67270
Bug ID: 67270
Summary: internal compiler error: in unify, at cp/pt.c:18178
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67270
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67257
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67247
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67259
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67100
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
Bug ID: 67271
Summary: ICE with -O1,2,3 on darwin14.5 x86_64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67050
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67050
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
(But it's a different ICE than the one in the Description.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67272
Bug ID: 67272
Summary: [HSA] register allocator expects that every register
must be assigned
Product: gcc
Version: hsa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
long int labs (long int j);
int
main ()
{
long *a = "empty";
int i = 1441516387;
a[i] = labs (a[i]);
return 0;
}
$ ./cc1 -quiet q.c -O
q.c: In function ‘main’:
q.c:5:13: warning: initialization from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Seems like native_encode_string should deal with nonsensical offset:
(gdb) p off
$4 = -1352770792
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67270
--- Comment #2 from radventure at yandex dot ru ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> This was fixed in r219557 and is fixed in 5/trunk.
I know about absence of problem in 5.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61578
--- Comment #19 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
I'm not sure why bug 59535 was closed, same problem might still exist, quote:
> Zhenqiang Chen 2014-09-03 06:17:44 UTC
>
> Here is a small case to show lra introduces one more register copy (tested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67270
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63602
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67250
--- Comment #14 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jeff Hammond from comment #13)
> This is all fair. I try very hard to fix my own bugs and submit patches,
> but in this case I am wholly unqualified. I don't know the first thing
> about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67273
Bug ID: 67273
Summary: Incorrect -Wshadow warning with generic lambdas
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67042
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Morin ---
Author: mikael
Date: Wed Aug 19 13:42:36 2015
New Revision: 227008
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227008&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Avoid signed left shift undefined behaviour in sext_hwi
gcc/
PR o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67042
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67274
--- Comment #1 from Vittorio Romeo ---
More test cases, using minor variations to the code posted above:
With bar() = call([this](auto x){ foo(x); });
clang++ 3.6+ compiles.
g++ 5.2+ does not compile.
With bar() = call([this](auto x){ this->foo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67274
Bug ID: 67274
Summary: Inconsistent `this->` required when calling member
function in a lambda capturing `this` through another
function
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #30 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Aug 19 14:22:26 2015
New Revision: 227009
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227009&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/67133
* gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67271
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67275
Bug ID: 67275
Summary: *** No rule to make target
'../build-x86_64-w64-mingw32/libiberty/pic/libiberty.a
', needed by 'build/genmddeps.exe'.
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67227
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6 regression] stage2 ada |[6 regression] comparison
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53184
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||blue.dragan+gcc at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51440
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66929
--- Comment #12 from Mikael Morin ---
Author: mikael
Date: Wed Aug 19 14:47:23 2015
New Revision: 227010
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227010&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Forward-port test generic_31.f90 from the 5 branch.
gcc/testsuite/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65491
Andrey Tarasevich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tarasevich at cs dot
uni-saarland.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67276
Bug ID: 67276
Summary: duplicated missing terminating character diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67276
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |preprocessor
--- Comment #1 from M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67277
Bug ID: 67277
Summary: segfault when passing a missing optional argument to
an elemental intrinsic
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67272
--- Comment #1 from Michael Matz ---
Which options and which svn revision are you using? I can't reproduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67272
--- Comment #2 from Michael Matz ---
Ah, with -O0, can reproduce now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67277
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Morin ---
Created attachment 36215
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36215&action=edit
Draft patch, untested, currently bootstrapping
This patch adds a gfc_abstract_symbol class to abstract away the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65491
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrey Tarasevich from comment #5)
> Test pr65491.c fails on on darwin14.5 x86_64
>
> GCC was compiled from SVN trunk revision 226781
Please file this as a separate bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67277
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #1)
> I hope it works that way.
Nope, it doesn't. :-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67272
--- Comment #3 from Michael Matz ---
Author: matz
Date: Wed Aug 19 15:55:19 2015
New Revision: 227014
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227014&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67272
* hsa-regalloc.c (naive_process_phi): Don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66929
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67272
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67278
Bug ID: 67278
Summary: ICE: verify_gimple failed on darwin 14.5 x86_64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67277
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #2)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #1)
> > I hope it works that way.
>
> Nope, it doesn't. :-(
The symbol is left uninitialized, it seems.
And reverting the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
--- Comment #52 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Aug 19 17:00:32 2015
New Revision: 227015
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227015&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR64164] fix regressions reported on m68k and armeb
Defer stack slot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55307
Jeffrey Walton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||noloader at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279
Bug ID: 67279
Summary: -fsanitize=undefined spurious error: initializer
element is not constant
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67280
Bug ID: 67280
Summary: [5 Regression] wrong C++11 code generated on
arm-linux-gnueabihf
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67281
Bug ID: 67281
Summary: HTM builtins aren't treated as compiler barriers on
powerpc
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67282
Bug ID: 67282
Summary: Wrong code with -floop-nest-optimize
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67281
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is no memory access in your testcase at all. Since the variables are all
local variables and nothing takes the address, it can be moved out of the loop
as no other thread can cause that to fail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
--- Comment #8 from Michael Meissner ---
A preliminary analysis is -mefficient-unaligned-vector is set in
rs6000_option_override_internal if -mtune=power8 is used. Note, this code uses
a variable 'rs6000_cpu' to indicate the tuning cpu, not the t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
--- Comment #9 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 36217
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36217&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
This patch makes -mefficient-unaligned-vsx set on -mcpu=power8 instead of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67268
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
This symbol shows a similar, though perhaps not identical, issue:
_ZNSt11_Tuple_implILm0EJN12stats_census7tracing2OpEEEC2IRS2_JEvEEOT_DpOT0_
The demangler turns this into
std::_Tuple_impl<0ul,
stats_cen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67281
--- Comment #2 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho ---
Oooops. My bad.
What about this one?
$ cat tbegin-barrier.c
long
foo (long dest, long *src0, long src1, long tries)
{
long i;
for (i = 0; i < tries; i++)
{
__builtin_tbegin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67281
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Since there are no stores, the load seems like it can be pulled out of the loop
too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36217|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67269
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Here is a similar, though different, case involving a constructor:
_ZZN1C1D1E1F1G1HEvENUlvE_C2EOS4_
The demangler currently turns this into:
C::D::E::F::G::H()::{lambda()#1}::H({lambda()#1}&&)
That is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279
--- Comment #2 from Vittorio Zecca ---
UB = undefined behaviour?
Why then it is only signaled if "static" attribute is requested?
This is accepted:"int dec_1 = 1 << 31;"
Isn't UB as well if it is not static?
I believe gcc should deliver a warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67281
--- Comment #4 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Since there are no stores, the load seems like it can be pulled out of the
> loop too.
I disagree with you.
If I use the value of dest to take
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279
--- Comment #3 from Vittorio Zecca ---
The following code has UB at lines 4 and 5 but compiles with
-fsanitize=undefined
int main()
{
int test[1],t;
t=test[1];
return test[1];
}
Its execution it delivers four runtime errors from the sanitizer an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67283
Bug ID: 67283
Summary: GCC regression over inlining of returned structures
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67283
--- Comment #1 from Xavier Roche ---
Created attachment 36220
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36220&action=edit
Produced assembly code with GCC 4.4.7 on x86_64
Produced assembly code with GCC 4.4.7 on x86_64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67283
--- Comment #2 from Xavier Roche ---
Created attachment 36221
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36221&action=edit
Produced assembly code with GCC 4.6.4 on x86_64
Produced assembly code with GCC 4.6.4 on x86_64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67283
--- Comment #3 from Xavier Roche ---
Created attachment 36222
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36222&action=edit
Produced assembly code with GCC 5.2.0 on x86_64
Produced assembly code with GCC 5.2.0 on x86_64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67281
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66606
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67284
Bug ID: 67284
Summary: libgo fails to build on trunk r227015 / *-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> A possible solution could be to give a warning enabled by default (about 1
> << 31 being undefined) and to NOT sanitize expressions that are required
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66957
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Aug 20 01:45:49 2015
New Revision: 227023
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227023&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66957
* search.c (protected_accessible_p): Remove r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67065
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66957
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38579
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67285
Bug ID: 67285
Summary: ICE with (rdiv (POW:s @0 REAL_CST@1) @0)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #21 from rusty at rustcorp dot com.au ---
jengelh at inai dot de writes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
>
> --- Comment #20 from Jan Engelhardt ---
> Seems like the short route is to add a new attribute
> ((warn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #22 from Filipe Brandenburger ---
(In reply to Jan Engelhardt from comment #20)
> Seems like the short route is to add a new attribute
> ((warn_unused_result_with_void_cancelling)) that exhibits the "desired"
> behavior of (void) canc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67286
Bug ID: 67286
Summary: asan doen't work on Android(32bit ARM)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: sanitize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67286
--- Comment #1 from zhouweiguo2008 at gmail dot com ---
this bug had been fixed and validated with gcc 4.9.2 and gcc 5.2.0.
and the testcases (from external/compiler-rt/test/asan/TestCases) could be
running
normally on the 32-bit Android 5.0 pho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67286
weiguo.zhou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
83 matches
Mail list logo
