https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71286
Bug ID: 71286
Summary: 6.1.0: compiling djgpp programs with LTO emits
"visibility attribute not supported in this
configuration" warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 6.
Hello,
I'm using the following version of GCC:
artpol@artpol-ThinkPad-T430 ~ $ gcc --version
gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.1) 4.8.4
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY
On 26/05/16 07:37 +, Artem Polyakov wrote:
Hello,
I'm using the following version of GCC:
artpol@artpol-ThinkPad-T430 ~ $ gcc --version
gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.1) 4.8.4
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. T
Thank you. Will move there.
Best regards, Artem Y. Polyakov
HPC Engineer, Mellanox Ltd.
От: Jonathan Wakely
Отправлено: 26 мая 2016 г. 14:39:01
Кому: Artem Polyakov
Копия: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Тема: Re: Broken connect syscall invocation ?
On 26/05
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
Bug ID: 71287
Summary: Possibly broken invocation of connect (and maybe
other) syscalls
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71052
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
See c++/68209
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71280
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 26 09:29:28 2016
New Revision: 236767
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236767&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71280
* gcc.dg/pr71280.c: New test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71280
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71239
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anton.mitrokhin at phystech
dot ed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71281
--- Comment #2 from Anton Mitrokhin ---
Created attachment 38571
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38571&action=edit
Small reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71270
--- Comment #2 from vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looked at x86_64 gimple code for intrinsic_pack_1.f90.
After the SLP split we now vectorize at the place where we pass constant
arguments via a parameterstructure to _gfortran_pack call.
Befor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50436
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59804
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71288
Bug ID: 71288
Summary: [7 Regression] Time and memory hog during
if-conversion at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-time-hog,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #1 from Artem Polyakov ---
On RHEL where this was also observed compiler version is the following:
gcc (GCC) 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-4)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71288
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71255
--- Comment #13 from Marek Polacek ---
I'd like to point out that the test case
struct sockaddr;
struct sockaddr *f();
struct __attribute__((may_alias)) sockaddr {};
struct sockaddr *f()
{
return nullptr;
}
(from https://sourceware.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71255
--- Comment #14 from Florian Weimer ---
I believe the equivalent C test case:
#include
struct sockaddr;
struct sockaddr *f();
struct __attribute__((may_alias)) sockaddr {};
struct sockaddr *f()
{
return NULL;
}
still does not work:
t.c:7:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71279
--- Comment #3 from Ilya Enkovich ---
This looks similar to PR70251 but this time transformation is performed in
folding. Here is a description of applied transformation:
/* Convert A ? 0 : 1 to !A. This prefers the use of NOT_EXPR
ove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #13 from Roger Orr ---
The patch sadly does not appear to fix the (very similar looking) valgrind
compilation failure I posted in pr71269.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269#c7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #8 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Roger Orr from comment #7)
> I've got a very similar problem, building valgrind with trunk revision
> 236644:
>
> m_mallocfree.c: In function 'sanity_check_malloc_arena':
> m_mallocfre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to kugan from comment #8)
> (In reply to Roger Orr from comment #7)
> > I've got a very similar problem, building valgrind with trunk revision
> > 236644:
> >
> > m_mallocfree.c: In function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #14 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Roger Orr from comment #13)
> The patch sadly does not appear to fix the (very similar looking) valgrind
> compilation failure I posted in pr71269.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #10 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #9)
> (In reply to kugan from comment #8)
> > (In reply to Roger Orr from comment #7)
> > > I've got a very similar problem, building valgrind with tru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
> Sorry, I missed that.
>
> on x86-64-linux-gnu, with the current trunk:
> ./build/gcc/cc1 -O2 m_mallocfree.i
> ./build/gcc/cc1 -O3 m_mallocfree.i
> are working. What command line did you use to ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #12 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #11)
> > Sorry, I missed that.
> >
> > on x86-64-linux-gnu, with the current trunk:
> > ./build/gcc/cc1 -O2 m_mallocfree.i
> > ./build/gcc/cc1 -O3 m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71288
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71289
Bug ID: 71289
Summary: Fails to optimize unsigned mul overflow check 'A > -1
/ B'
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61408
Georg Koppen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61475
Georg Koppen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71283
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #13 from Roger Orr ---
Ok, I'll try with trunk (I'd not noticed a relevant change had already been
submitted)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71290
Bug ID: 71290
Summary: [6/7 Regression] Flexible array member is not
diagnosed with -pedantic
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71291
Bug ID: 71291
Summary: Firefox with GCC reports stack-buffer-overflow but
clang does not
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71291
--- Comment #1 from Georg Koppen ---
I wonder if there are any good things I could do to debug this problem before
looking at the stack trace itself. Any ideas?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71255
--- Comment #15 from Marek Polacek ---
Yeah, only the C++ side was changed. I think it's wrong that we reject the
testcase in Comment 14 in C (I have a fix for that).
But even with that fixed we still need the new #pragma because of the second
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71291
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
You haven't mentioned any details, like in which function it is, the exact
diagnostic you get, reference to the upstream bugreport, preprocessed source +
g++ command line for the problematic source file, ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #15 from Roger Orr ---
Sorry for the noise; I'd not noticed there had been a relevant commit.
I'll re-check against trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71289
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #0)
> I've tried to add the corresponding transform to match.pd, but it seems
> something else needs to be wired up as well, because it doesn't trigger.
> What am I m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71291
--- Comment #3 from Georg Koppen ---
Created attachment 38573
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38573&action=edit
ASan stack trace
This is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1268854 and attached is
the ASan stack tra
-reassoc.c:5631
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
The reduced testcase for that reproducible with trunk at:
gcc version 7.0.0 20160526
is:
unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71292
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #14 from Roger Orr ---
Confirmed: valgrind now builds successfully with revision 236769.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71288
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #2)
> Actually it started with r235808.
Thanks for doing triage, I will look into this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71291
--- Comment #4 from Georg Koppen ---
Created attachment 38574
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38574&action=edit
.ii file
Here comes the .ii file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71282
--- Comment #2 from Raymond Connell ---
Thanks for responding so quickly. Sorry for the false alarm. I have no excuse.
I should have looked at the C++ versions more closely.
RSC
-- Original Message --
Received: 11:16 PM EDT, 05/25/2016
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71270
--- Comment #3 from vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Built armeb-none-linux-gnueabihf -with-cpu=cortex-a9 --with-fpu=neon-fp16
--with-float=hard
And compared gimple output from intrinsic_pack_1.f90.151t.slp1 before and after
my patch.
The differen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52551
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2013-02-25 00:00:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71291
--- Comment #5 from Georg Koppen ---
And that's the g++ command line:
/usr/bin/g++ -std=gnu++11 -o Unified_cpp_gfx_layers2.o -c
-I/home/thomas/Arbeit/Tor/mozilla-central/obj-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/dist/stl_wrappers
-I/home/thomas/Arbeit/Tor/mozilla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71290
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71289
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov ---
> What do the dumps look like? Gcc is likely to change things to -1 / B < A,
> which you don't handle...
The dumps didn't help much, but you're right that normally the order is
opposite, thanks (I didn'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71261
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71293
Bug ID: 71293
Summary: [7 regression] test case
gcc.dg/plugin/must-tail-call-2.c fails starting with
r236514
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71151
--- Comment #5 from Anatol ---
This bug has been reported by Arch Linux users.
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/49284
It is a severe compiler issue that stop avr-gcc 6 from using. Consider changing
"Importance" status to blocker.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
Bug ID: 71294
Summary: [6/7 Regression] ICE in gen_add2_insn, at
optabs.c:4442 on powerpc64le-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71219
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71295
Bug ID: 71295
Summary: [7 Regression] internal compiler error: in
subreg_get_info, at rtlanal.c:3673 on arm
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71295
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.1.0
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71295
--- Comment #1 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The function is trying to handle a V2DImode subreg of an EImode reg when it
ICEs.
From the dumps I think it's due to the instruction:
(insn 6 15 16 2 (set (subreg:V2DI (reg/v:EI 111 [ b ]) 0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70668
Chung-Ju Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Started with r230091 which enabled a vectorization, thus the bug looks latent:
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Nov 10 09:43:54 2015 +
2015-11-10 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/56118
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71219
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71296
Bug ID: 71296
Summary: missing warning on strcat appending to a non-string
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
tree-dump of the problematic function:
;; Function void fn1() (_Z3fn1v, funcdef_no=6, decl_uid=2937, cgraph_uid=4,
symbol_order=4)
void fn1() ()
{
struct A a;
struct C D.3115;
struct C D.3114;
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
The issues can be debugged with a cross-compiler:
../configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-bootstrap
--target=ppc64le-suse-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71297
Bug ID: 71297
Summary: ICE on invalid code in
altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin (rs6000-c.c:5106)
on powerpc64le-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71298
Bug ID: 71298
Summary: changes to libstdc++ breaks windows builds
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71295
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Setting info->representable_p to false and returning on the condition that
GET_MODE_SIZE (ymode) + offset > GET_MODE_SIZE (xmode)
in that function fixes the ICE for me (though I haven't tested fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71299
Bug ID: 71299
Summary: [7 regression] test case gcc.dg/torture/pr69909.c
fails with ICE starting with r236634
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70762
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 26 17:18:13 2016
New Revision: 236786
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236786&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++/70762 fix fallback implementation of nonexistent_path
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71283
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
Status|RESOLV
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71300
Bug ID: 71300
Summary: Vector ABI bug for some AVX vectorized variants
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70762
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 26 17:33:17 2016
New Revision: 236788
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236788&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++/70762 fix fallback implementation of nonexistent_path
Backpor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71275
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu May 26 17:38:36 2016
New Revision: 236789
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236789&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
ira.c bb_loop_depth
PR rtl-optimization/71275
* ira.c (ira)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71237
--- Comment #1 from Andre Vieira ---
So yes disabling LIM will make the tests "PASS". Though I couldnt find an
option to do this, I disabled the pass by changing passes.def, so that doesnt
sound like a good idea to test SCCP.
However, it might
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71275
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71237
--- Comment #2 from Andre Vieira ---
Created attachment 38575
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38575&action=edit
Assembly with the changed passes.def removing one pass of lim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71237
--- Comment #3 from Andre Vieira ---
Created attachment 38576
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38576&action=edit
Regular generation at -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71219
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That example is just taken straight from the WG14 document I linked to. Maybe
the compiler should also be able to presume that the allocation is intended for
struct S1 if you do:
struct S1 *p = mal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52393
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 38577
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38577&action=edit
Final patch, regression tested
I will submit this patch to list for approval.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71301
Bug ID: 71301
Summary: std::tuple move constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70106
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu May 26 18:17:43 2016
New Revision: 236792
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236792&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/70822 (bogus error with parenthesized SCOPE_REF)
gcc/cp/Chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71123
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70822
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu May 26 18:17:43 2016
New Revision: 236792
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236792&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/70822 (bogus error with parenthesized SCOPE_REF)
gcc/cp/Chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70668
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On May 26, 2016 6:01:39 PM GMT+02:00, "jasonwucj at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70668
>
>Chung-Ju Wu changed:
>
> What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71300
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70896
--- Comment #9 from PeteVine ---
I've rerun the same `configure` command against gcc-7-20160522 source, only
with `---disable-bootstrap`, and all went fine. The latter issue is definitely
gone, not sure about the original one. If disabling bootst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71268
Ismael Luceno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #38558|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71166
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Adding an at_eof check into try_const fixes the testcase. (also) Adding an
at_eof <= 1 assert into cxx_eval_outermost_constant_expr causes 261 new fails.
Although many are obviously init & ctor related, th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71289
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
I think genmatch can handle calls to internal functions, the issue is with
guessing the return type. Maybe we could have a specific heuristic for these
functions in the case where the type is not explicitly spe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71296
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Another problem is with strcat appending to a buffer initialized using the
array notation like below where it also assumes it's starting at the beginning
of the buffer (and so only diagnoses writes in excess o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71302
Bug ID: 71302
Summary: -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant: misleading caret
location for pointer in function call
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71303
Bug ID: 71303
Summary: missing strlen optimization for strings initialized
via a braced-init-list
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
> $SRC/gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c:5631
> Please submit a full bug report,
> with preprocessed source if appropriate.
> Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
> See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
>
> The reduced testcase for that reprodu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71296
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||71303
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It also fails on BE. It needs -O3 -fstack-protector -mcpu=power8 to fail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71156
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71302
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57342
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2013-05-21 00:00:00 |2016-5-26
Version|4.9.0
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
