https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80377
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80367
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80374
Sylvestre Ledru changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sylvestre at debian dot org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80375
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Dup of PR79788 ? I'll have a look in any case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80354
--- Comment #2 from Stephan Bergmann ---
But that makes this warning extremely hard to use. Is it really useful for
-Wall in that case?
I came across this with a real-world use-case in the LibreOffice code base,
where some code deliberately use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80365
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Apr 10 07:29:29 2017
New Revision: 246799
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246799&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Evaluate a SAVE_EXPR before an UBSAN check (PR sanitizer/80350).
2017-04-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0.1
Known to fail|7.0.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80380
Bug ID: 80380
Summary: misleading behavior with designated initializers for
std::vector
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80324
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80323
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80322
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80327
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80304
--- Comment #22 from Chinoune ---
Created attachment 41163
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41163&action=edit
the test program in c
This is an equivalent program written in c.
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
The iss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80362
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
10205 /* Convert -A / -B to A / B when the type is signed and overflow
is
10206undefined. */
10207 if ((!INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type) || TYPE_OVERFLOW_UNDEFINED (type))
10208
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80344
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Apr 10 08:58:02 2017
New Revision: 246800
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246800&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-10 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/80344
* gim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80344
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
Bug ID: 80381
Summary: AVX512: -O3, _mm512_srai_epi32, the last argument must
be an 8-bit immediate
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Guess at least get should return int or int & rather than void:
template struct tuple_size;
template struct tuple_element;
template struct tuple {};
template struct tuple_size> { static constexpr int
val
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Did someone check the places pointed by -Wconversion -Wsystem-headers? Some are
clearly false positive, but some seem suspicious (at least with an older
snapshot, maybe they have been fixed already).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Romeo ---
Even shorter:
template struct tuple_size { static constexpr int value = 1; };
template struct tuple_element { typedef int type; };
template struct tuple {};
template int get(T);
int
main ()
{
[](aut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48361
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80370
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41165
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41165&action=edit
gcc7-pr80370.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79905
--- Comment #12 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon Apr 10 11:25:44 2017
New Revision: 246802
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246802&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/79905
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_vector
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80304
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80304
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Apr 10 11:27:05 2017
New Revision: 246803
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246803&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-10 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/80304
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79905
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80224
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Apr 10 11:37:14 2017
New Revision: 246804
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246804&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Support multiple files w/ -i option in gcov (PR gcov-profile/80224).
2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80277
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80224
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Known to fail|7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
--- Comment #25 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle ---
[...]
> Can you try this patch. From what I read there can be issues with char pointer
> sizes between these architectures.
>
> diff --git a/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80375
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79788
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41166
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41166&action=edit
gcc7-pr79788.patch
Untested patch that caps the widest literal type at long long on ILP32 targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80375
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Patch attached to the other PR. Note this is an ABI change, basically undoing
the ABI change for 32-bit targets made by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/1999-07/msg00031.html
(at that point the ABI was depe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
Bug ID: 80382
Summary: ICE with error: unrecognizable insn
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80291
--- Comment #7 from snowfed ---
In the slightly reduced version of the test case cell is not allocated when
reaching associate structure. Maybe, allocate(cell) is worth being added. For
example, when I compile the example with ifort and run it I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80362
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0.1
Summary|[5/6/7 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80362
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Apr 10 13:02:12 2017
New Revision: 246805
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246805&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-10 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/80362
* fol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80293
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> We have another bugreport that complains about SRA and Martin said he had
> patches but intended to wait for GCC 8.
My patch for PR 78687 unfortunately won't he
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #21)
> On April 7, 2017 6:57:13 PM GMT+02:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
> wrote:
> >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
> >
> >--- Comment #20 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80057
--- Comment #4 from mpf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpf
Date: Mon Apr 10 13:44:39 2017
New Revision: 246807
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246807&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Update MIPS -mvirt option description
gcc/
PR target/80057
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80057
mpf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80374
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80376
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #2 from B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80294
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80374
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Testing a fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
--- Comment #3 from Sven Woop ---
Right, this could be considered a user bug. However, we ran into this as we are
successfully using this code sequence in our code:
#include
#define __forceinline inline __attribute__((always_inline))
struct v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
--- Comment #4 from Sven Woop ---
BTW, the AVX-512 version of this "bug" also compiles with ICC and Clang 4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80367
--- Comment #6 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com ---
So "esp" is not a valid register to clobber? I thought it would only make the
compiler use ebp instead to reference stack memory operands. After all
esp-relative operands wouldn't be valid after
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80376
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
It's difficult to completely avoid an ICE, as once we have a nested call with
an invalid value it is not simple to recover with our current design. However,
I will put together a patch that provides better er
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80376
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
Patch under test would produce the follow errors instead:
wschmidt@pike:~/src$ $GCC_INSTALL/bin/gcc pr80376.c
pr80376.c: In function 'main':
pr80376.c:12:5: error: argument 3 must be a 2-bit unsigned literal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478
--- Comment #10 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Apr 10 14:58:33 2017
New Revision: 246808
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246808&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-10 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/70478
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80367
--- Comment #7 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 41167
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41167&action=edit
test case
Here is a reduced test case that causes a similar (likely the same?) ICE on
i686-w64-min
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80293
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #3)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > We have another bugreport that complains about SRA and Martin said he had
> > patches but intended to wait for G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79522
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
--- Comment #26 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #25)
--- snip ---
>
> Btw., I happened to notice that this "int * length" (and many more
> instances throughout the file and probably all of libgfortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80381
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r243866.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80265
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think there was a bug report in the last month or so asking for some builtin
to detect when we're in a constexpr context.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80293
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> That said, the array cases we've seen are somewhat disturbing...
Cases? Can you point me to the other ones, please? What type do they
have?
> maybe we can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
That revision enabled -fsched-pressure by default, so it may have been latent
with -fsched-pressure before then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60685
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Dave McMordie from comment #6)
> Any sense of a minimal patch to fix this issue?
At a wild guess, I'd say it might be one of r209907 or r216750, which both look
quite involved and probably not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
--- Comment #7 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #6)
> That revision enabled -fsched-pressure by default, so it may have been
> latent with -fsched-pressure before then.
Yes, this is a latent bug in the "model" sched-pre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #6)
> That revision enabled -fsched-pressure by default, so it may have been
> latent with -fsched-pressure before then.
No, r243865 does not ICE with -O3 -fsched-press
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80265
--- Comment #9 from Pedro Alves ---
FWIW, I've tried to poke a bit more at this, to try to make it _not_ work, but
couldn't. It seems to always do what we need. These all work/compile too:
constexpr int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80357
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #6)
> > That revision enabled -fsched-pressure by default, so it may have been
> > latent with -fsched-pressure before then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Apr 10 16:51:44 2017
New Revision: 246810
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246810&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80153
* tree-affine.c (aff_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Apr 10 16:54:14 2017
New Revision: 246811
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246811&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80153
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80265
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I don't think it works that well.
Consider:
int
str6 (int a)
{
char s[] = "strabcdefgh";
s[2] = a;
return ce_char_traits::length(s);
}
int
str7 (int a)
{
char s[] = "strabcdefgh";
s[2] = a;
retu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt ---
You didn't fill in the target. 32/64-bit, little-/big-endian?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80348
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Mon Apr 10 17:18:15 2017
New Revision: 246812
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246812&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80348
* typeck.c (cp_build_binary_op): Use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80348
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 Regression] UBSAN: |[6 Regression] UBSAN:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #1)
> You didn't fill in the target. 32/64-bit, little-/big-endian?
64-bit, and I think it ICEs on both BE and LE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
I'll have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80354
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
The warning does just what it's designed to do: point out the potential
unhandled truncation. If the argument values are such that the truncation
cannot occur then using snprintf is unnecessary and sprintf ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #0)
> This testcase (which took ~5 days of reducing) ICEs with -O3 -std=c++11
> -mtune=power8 -mcpu=power8 -mno-lra:
Did you use creduce or delta or ??? to reduce the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #4)
> (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #0)
> > This testcase (which took ~5 days of reducing) ICEs with -O3 -std=c++11
> > -mtune=power8 -mcpu=power8 -mno-lra:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> Just creduce. I think it'd be possible to reduce it a bit more, first
> manually and then run creduce again, but it needs a bit of knowledge of C++.
Ok, in that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79867
--- Comment #2 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mrs
Date: Mon Apr 10 17:45:35 2017
New Revision: 246813
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246813&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-10 Daniel Santos
PR testsuite/79867
* li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79867
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80283
wilco at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80210
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80210
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Confirmed. The define_expand condition is *not* checked?! Possibly by
the pow->sqrt code (yeah I'm guessing here).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79712
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80099
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80265
--- Comment #11 from Pedro Alves ---
Ok, so s[2] is not constant, while s[0] is, in that case.
AFAICS, changing constexpr_strlen to this:
constexpr size_t constexpr_strlen(const char* s)
{
const char *p = s;
while (__builtin_constant_p (*p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80367
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uros at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79356
--- Comment #15 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Apr 10 18:51:42 2017
New Revision: 246816
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246816&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/79356
* gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-11.c:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80367
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
In PR 79804, I have a patch that makes ICE more informative, but the frame reg
problem elimination remains to be solved in LRA.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80349
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Babokin ---
PR80348 is fixed, but this still fails.
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
