https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88870
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 17 08:04:28 2019
New Revision: 268008
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268008&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/88870
* dce.c (deletable_insn_p): Neve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88870
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] ICE: |[7/8 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86214
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 17 08:05:12 2019
New Revision: 268009
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268009&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/86214
* cfgexpand.c (add_stack_var_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88877
--- Comment #11 from Umesh Kalappa ---
>>To make slightly better code we could make the soft float routines be
prototyped?
having the prototype also no luck here like
$cat test.c
#include
double __floatunsidf(unsigned int );
int main () {
un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86214
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Short testcase that shows what's going on on the #c7 testcase:
typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t;
struct A { A (); ~A (); int a; void qux (const char *); };
int bar (char *);
static inline __attribute__((always_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019, ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760
>
> --- Comment #11 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Thank you all for the inpu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86736
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 17 08:45:00 2019
New Revision: 268010
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268010&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-01-17 Richard Biener
PR lto/86736
* dwarf2out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86549
Bug 86549 depends on bug 86736, which changed state.
Bug 86736 Summary: [9 regression] g++.dg/asan/pr81021.C -O2 -flto
-flto-partition=none ICE at dwarf2out.c:3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86736
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88794
--- Comment #2 from xuepeng guo ---
Author: xguo
Date: Thu Jan 17 08:51:01 2019
New Revision: 268011
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268011&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2019-01-17 Wei Xiao
PR target/88794
Revert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88489
--- Comment #7 from xuepeng guo ---
Author: xguo
Date: Thu Jan 17 08:51:01 2019
New Revision: 268011
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268011&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2019-01-17 Wei Xiao
PR target/88794
Revert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86214
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> The workaround for MySQL, at least for -O2, would be to move logger:msg
> definition out from the class, so it is not inline, then at least gcc trunk
> doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86214
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, the #c13 testcase shows the issue, but in the early inliner, not in IPA
inliner like is triggered on the #c7 testcase.
This modified testcase triggers it in the IPA inliner:
typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87187
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24073
Matthias Kretz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kretz at kde dot org
--- Comment #8 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88794
--- Comment #3 from xuepeng guo ---
Author: xguo
Date: Thu Jan 17 09:34:00 2019
New Revision: 268012
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268012&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-01-17 Wei Xiao
PR target/88794
Revert:
2018-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88794
--- Comment #4 from xuepeng guo ---
Author: xguo
Date: Thu Jan 17 09:54:56 2019
New Revision: 268013
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268013&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
2019-01-17 Wei Xiao
PR target/88794
Revert:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88856
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel ---
I've tried building scipy 1.1.0 from github on a Fedora installation. The build
already uses -funroll-loops. But I couldn't reproduce the problem with the
resulting binary.
gcc version 8.0.1 20180324
Aure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Bug ID: 9
Summary: [9 Regression] New valgrind warning since r261039
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2019-1-17
CC|
tions/Xcode-6.2.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.9.sdk
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20190117 (experimental) [trunk revision 268011p8] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88871
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The patch in comment 10 fixes the ICEs for me. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86214
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45449
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45449&action=edit
gcc9-pr86214.patch
Untested patch. Not 100% sure if there must be just one landing pad, will see
during boots
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88788
--- Comment #17 from Arseny Solokha ---
Is it fixed now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> The "nonexistent-path/.." part is reported as
> https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/bugs/782/
And is apparently a feature not a bug. That's just how paths wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Fixed with:
$ gcc lib1560.c -O2 && valgrind --expensive-definedness-checks=yes ./a.out
==15329== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==15329== Copyright (C) 2002-2017, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
On the other side, I wonder how many real-world bugs can it find if valgrind
has this strict behavior, isn't the most common case of bugs where all of the
bytes are uninitialized, or none of them are?
Do we w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
jseward at acm dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jseward at acm dot org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
>
> That should make it run clean even without using
> --expensive-definedness-checks=yes. Does it?
Yes, as mentioned in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9#c2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86610
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86610
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Thu Jan 17 11:56:58 2019
New Revision: 268016
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268016&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86610] lambda captures in templates
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #6 from jseward at acm dot org ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #5)
> >
> > That should make it run clean even without using
> > --expensive-definedness-checks=yes. Does it?
>
> Yes, as mentioned in https://gcc.gnu.org/bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #7 from jseward at acm dot org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Because, say in the memcmp case, if the first 4 bytes are defined and are
> not equal to the first bytes of the other value, then it will be non-equal
> r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to jseward from comment #6)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #5)
> > >
> > > That should make it run clean even without using
> > > --expensive-definedness-checks=yes. Does it?
> >
> > Yes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88851
--- Comment #1 from Tamar Christina ---
Author: tnfchris
Date: Thu Jan 17 12:06:04 2019
New Revision: 268017
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268017&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Rename stack-clash protection CFA register to avoid clash
gcc/Change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88851
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Testcase that shows this isn't just about cmpq, but also cmpl and cmpw on
x86_64:
extern int strcmp (const char *, const char *);
extern void abort (void);
__attribute__((noipa, noinline, noclone)) void
foo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49330
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #25)
> When considering the patch from comment#18 additional data is that only
> 95802 out of 636160 disambiguations that ultimately require base_alias_check
> invol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87824
--- Comment #19 from Iain Buclaw ---
On another look, (In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #15)
> Still to do are:
>
> - runnable/cppa.d: (Remove struct __c_{u}long detection and tests)
> - runnable/eh.d: (Have -fno-reorder-blocks-and-partition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88788
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88890
Bug ID: 88890
Summary: libbacktrace on 32-bit system with _FILE_OFFSET_BITS
== 64
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86610
--- Comment #8 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Fixed gcc-8 r268029
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86610
--- Comment #9 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Thu Jan 17 12:58:50 2019
New Revision: 268029
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268029&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86610] lambda captures in templates
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88475
Allan Jensen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linux at carewolf dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88734
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
+FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sha2_1.c (test for excess errors)
+UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/aarch64/sha2_1.c scan-assembler-times
sha512htq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+, v[0-9]+.2d 1
+UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/aarch64/sha2_1.c sc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33430
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> It would also make a lot of sense to do this for allocated
> arrays, as well.
Tracked by pr51310.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760
--- Comment #14 from Wilco ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
> Usually the peeling is done to improve branch prediction on the
> prologue/epilogue.
Modern branch predictors do much better on a loop than with this kind of code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51310
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Yes, leave it for the time being - I will see if I can do something
> about it (or unassign, if not).
OK.
See also pr33430.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Bug ID: 88892
Summary: Double-to-float conversion uses wrong rounding mode
when followed by memcpy
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88734
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
Yes, I noticed them as well as was taking a look.
I don't quite understand what was going on before and why they passed but the
option is wrong. Those intrinsics and are all sha3 extensions.
diff --git a/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019, wilco at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760
>
> --- Comment #14 from Wilco ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82857
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Jan 17 13:42:20 2019
New Revision: 268031
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268031&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[libbacktrace] Handle DW_FORM_GNU_ref_alt
Handle DW_FORM_GNU_ref_alt which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82857
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Jan 17 13:42:30 2019
New Revision: 268032
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268032&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[libbacktrace] Add btest_dwz test-case
Add test-case to verify that libbac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82857
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760
--- Comment #16 from Wilco ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #15)
> which is what I refered to for branch prediction. Your & prompts me
> to a way to do sth similar as duffs device, turning the loop into a nest.
>
> head:
>i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88850
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83531
--- Comment #6 from MCCCS ---
After reading your comment, I noticed that
there were two things I forgot to mention:
1 - availability.h is the file where
"API_AVAILABLE" is defined for Clang.
2 - the part of the file the patch
changes is 1:1 cop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|Double-to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71659
Daniel Fruzynski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugzilla@poradnik-webmaster
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71659
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
I meant pr85684
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88893
Bug ID: 88893
Summary: Forward declaring of enum class with visibility
results in -Wattributes false positive.
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88894
Bug ID: 88894
Summary: [libbacktrace] share abbrevs between units
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libbackt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88894
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88845
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #2)
> Thinking about this, insn 14 doesn't look legal to me for ppc, since FP
> values in our FP regs are actually stored as 64-bit quantities, even for
> SFmode,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88850
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
Author: tnfchris
Date: Thu Jan 17 15:17:57 2019
New Revision: 268033
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268033&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix Arm testcase by using NEON.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Jan 17 15:31:59 2019
New Revision: 268034
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268034&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/1 adjust filesystem::status and tests for mingw semantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Jan 17 15:32:05 2019
New Revision: 268035
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268035&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/4 fix filesystem::absolute("//") for mingw
PR l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer ---
Started with r253210. I don't think the new pattern is used in this case, so
maybe this is a pre-existing latent bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #4 from Florian Weimer ---
Eh, forget what I wrote. The pattern *is* used. r253210 looks definitely to
blame.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88895
Bug ID: 88895
Summary: unnecessary warnings in unreachable code (shift)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #5)
> This is one of the reasons -Wfloat-conversion exists:
>
> $ gcc -c -Wall -Wextra -Wfloat-conversion -Wdouble-promotion
> -Wunsuffixed-float-constants -pedantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88893
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88800
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Jan 17 16:33:55 2019
New Revision: 268037
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268037&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/88800 - Spurious -Werror=array-bounds for non-taken b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88800
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] Spurious |[8 Regression] Spurious
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80537
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 80537, which changed state.
Bug 80537 Summary: missing -Wformat-overflow on POSIX %C conversion
specification
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80537
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-redhat-linux-gn |powerpc64*-*-*
|u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88815
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88699
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Jan 17 17:07:20 2019
New Revision: 268041
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268041&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++: Fix ICE when adding overloaded operator via using_decl (PR c++/886
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88699
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77293
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88895
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88895
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So we should use the current rounding mode for any float_trunc? So we can use
float store instructions for it only with some fast-math option?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88895
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #8)
> So we should use the current rounding mode for any float_trunc? So we can
> use
> float store instructions for it only with some fast-math option?
No, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Use of stfs on a double-precision value without frsp first is worse than
simply using the wrong rounding mode; in the case of overflow it does a
bitwise defined operation which is pretty u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88895
--- Comment #4 from Scott ---
Um... yes, that would kill the warning; but then I'd be writing
/* The modulo operation is meaningless and will be optimized out, I
promise. It's here
because there's a specific compiler, g++ 7.3.0, that can't fig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65873
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Priority|P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88273
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88896
Bug ID: 88896
Summary: [8/9 Regression] integer overflow check optimized away
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Good point. So we cannot use stfs (etc.) as float_truncate+store ever, not
even with full fast math options.
1 - 100 of 150 matches
Mail list logo
