https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81361
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62236
Victor Porton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81114
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2)
When I said in comment 1
>I have to say that, great as it would be to have this fixed, the changes
>required would be extensive, and I can’t see that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033
--- Comment #19 from d25fe0be@ ---
Bootstrap seems to work for me now.
Not sure which revision brings it back to normal though.
On 08/07/17 20:01 +, George R Goffe via gcc-bugs wrote:
Hį
I have experienced this bug for the past 2-3 days. I'm not sure if it's a bug
or I have missed something important.
I have a complete build log available if needed. Here's the tail of the log.
Thanks ahead of time for your help.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033
--- Comment #20 from simon at pushface dot org ---
r249926
See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00121.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033
--- Comment #21 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Actually, r249930 was the last related revision (cleans up spaces).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80365
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80365
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> How do I actually obtain this error?
I see it with a build configured with
Configured with: ../work/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc8g
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --with-gmp=/opt/mp-new --with-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80365
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Or you may add
assert(buf);
just before the memcpy library call.
If nbyte==0 then it should be harmless, but undefined.
assert(buf || !nbyte) should catch an error situation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81365
Bug ID: 81365
Summary: GCC miscompiles swap
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81066
--- Comment #8 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Khem Raj from comment #7)
> (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Khem Raj from comment #5)
> > > +#ifndef __stack_t_defined
> > > +struct stack_t;
> > > +#endif
> >
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81366
Bug ID: 81366
Summary: pragma omp simd reduce(max:m) not vectorizing
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81341
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Sun Jul 9 17:41:45 2017
New Revision: 250083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250083&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-07-09 Dominique d'Humieres
PR fortran/81341
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81341
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81313
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Sun Jul 9 18:25:49 2017
New Revision: 250084
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250084&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
x86: Use DRAP only if there are outgoing arguments on stack
Since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81021
--- Comment #7 from Avi Kivity ---
Hitting something similar-looking on Fedora 26's gcc 7.1.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69908
--- Comment #3 from Yuri Gribov ---
As noted in comments, this is more about adding new API to Glibc than GCC (they
have corresponding https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19920 about
this). So can this be closed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69908
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Yuri Gribov from comment #3)
> As noted in comments, this is more about adding new API to Glibc than GCC
> (they have corresponding
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19920 about thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81367
Bug ID: 81367
Summary: internal compiler error: in gfc_typenode_for_spec, at
fortran/trans-types.c:1086
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81365
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69908
--- Comment #5 from Yuri Gribov ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> (In reply to Yuri Gribov from comment #3)
> > As noted in comments, this is more about adding new API to Glibc than GCC
> > (they have corresponding
> > https://sourc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81313
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Sun Jul 9 21:01:42 2017
New Revision: 250086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/81313
* gcc.dg/stack-layout-dynamic-1.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81313
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81365
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.2
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81336
--- Comment #3 from bburgerm at googlemail dot com ---
Yes, I'm using this option because the gfortran code should be included in a
larger project with a mixture of C, C++, gfortran and partially intel fortran
code with several libraries only avai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81368
Bug ID: 81368
Summary: GCC reports bad option if
-fdata-sections/-ffunction-sections is specified
through #pragma or function attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81368
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81368
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
What I meant is once -fdata-sections/-ffunction-section is set, it cannot be
unset. That meant in GCC 5.4, the option was not working correctly; just
working accidentally the way you wanted it to work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81368
--- Comment #3 from sebastian.schrader at ossmail dot de ---
I see. Is it just a limitation of the current implementation of
-fdata-sections/-ffunction-sections in GCC that it can't be unset or is it
generally impossible?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69908
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Yuri Gribov from comment #5)
> Well, as we all know there are a lot of missing optimizations in GCC :) I
> think the real question is whether it's ever going to be fixed if there's no
> standard AP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38797
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Volker R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65775
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79145
Petr Cvek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81369
Bug ID: 81369
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in generate_code_for_partition
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81371
Bug ID: 81371
Summary: Too much C++ templates output in output
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81371
--- Comment #1 from Jon Grant ---
Created attachment 41701
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41701&action=edit
Example
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81371
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The problem is std::string could be std::__cxx11::basic_string or just
std::basic_string depending on the ABI chosen at compile time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81371
--- Comment #3 from Jonny Grant ---
Hello
Perhaps just std::__cxx11::basic_string or std::basic_string in the message?
But the char_traits and allocator aren't really needed are they? (I didn't
write them in the function declaration). I apprec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81371
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
basic_string in C++ is always defined as a template class with three template
arguments. Yes most folks don't know the C++ standard but it is what it is.
42 matches
Mail list logo
