https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89784
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
and
VFMADDxxxSS __m128 _mm_mask_fmadd_ss(__m128 a, __mmask8 k, __m128 b, __m128 c);
VFMADDxxxSS __m128 _mm_maskz_fmadd_ss(__mmask8 k, __m128 a, __m128 b, __m128
c);
VFMADDxxxSS __m128 _mm_mask3_fmadd_ss(__m12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89785
Bug ID: 89785
Summary: Incorrect "not a constant expression" error with
switch statement that returns
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89783
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89782
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
*** Bug 89783 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89782
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Sigh. We set reset_sched_cycles_p to pipelining_p after the conditional, but
we have missed that in sel_sched_region_1 pipelining_p will be set to false.
So that initial patch should have the following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85876
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85876
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
This is caused by the overeager fix of PR 48235. We're unwinding the
first_insn variable (the border to which we step backwards in code motion) too
far so it gets beyond the original fence, which happen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89785
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
So you say that Addrlen(0) and Addrlen(2) are proper constexprs? Of course
Addrlen(1) is not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89785
--- Comment #2 from Antony Polukhin ---
> So you say that Addrlen(0) and Addrlen(2) are proper constexprs? Of course
Addrlen(1) is not.
Yes. But GCC does not even allow to define the Addrlen function:
https://godbolt.org/z/xqR2Lr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89785
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||88945
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54262
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The code in comment 0 compiles with 4.8.5, but gives an error
>
>p = transfer (loc(x), p)
> 1
> Error: Assumed-type argument at (1) is not permitted as actual argument
> to th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48419
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89766
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Rimvydas (RJ) from comment #10)
> Using 9.0.1 20190319 as reference several ICE cases reduce down to the same
> snippet (regression on trunk)?
None of these ICE on the trunk, there is a warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89784
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86549
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||meta-bug
Priority|P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78645
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
This is fixed in trunk. I'm adding a testcase and removing the regression
marker.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78645
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Mar 21 12:05:32 2019
New Revision: 269834
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269834&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/78645
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88066
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Mar 21 12:07:10 2019
New Revision: 269835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269835&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/88066 Use <> for includes not ""
These headers were missed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89394
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89505
--- Comment #8 from Matthias Klose ---
Author: doko
Date: Thu Mar 21 12:28:26 2019
New Revision: 269836
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269836&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-21 Matthias Klose
Backport from mainline
2019-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89509
Bug 89509 depends on bug 89505, which changed state.
Bug 89505 Summary: [7 Regression] LibreOffice miscompilation starting with
r260383
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89505
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #9 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #8)
> trunk doesn't
> ICE for me.
I don't have a good testcase at hand (it's just a matter of time, though), but
at least the following snippet makes the current
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #9)
> (In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #8)
> > trunk doesn't
> > ICE for me.
>
> I don't have a good testcase at hand (it's just a matter of time, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #11 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #10)
> Is it easy for you to check that the above patch fixes also your testcase?
Sure, I'll do it tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82501
Andrey Drobyshev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45751|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89785
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Also consider the equivalent(?)
constexpr foo() { throw 42; } // with or without constexpr
constexpr int Addrlen(int domain) {
switch (domain) {
case 0:
return 0;
case 2:
re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89785
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Also consider the equivalent(?)
>
> constexpr foo() { throw 42; } // with or without constexpr
>
> constexpr int Addrlen(int domain) {
> switch (domain)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54262
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> So far I did not find what to change to make specific->inquiry true for LOC.
Fixed by the following patch
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c 2019-03-12 16:12:35.0 +0100
+++ gcc/fortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85528
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89512
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88945
Bug 88945 depends on bug 89779, which changed state.
Bug 89779 Summary: [9 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check:
expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (error_mark) in
tree_nop_conversion_p, at tree.c:12798
https://gcc.gnu.org/bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 21 14:27:32 2019
New Revision: 269838
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269838&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-21 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/89779
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81866
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88652
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85528
--- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #1)
> Doesn't ICE for me at r259563 checkout -- anything else needed?
You may also want -m32, depending on your exact target[1]. I'll try to get
another testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88652
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Somewhat cleaned up test:
struct A
{
A (int);
};
struct BB
{
A v;
};
struct B : BB
{};
B
foo ()
{
return {{B {{42;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88652
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> > > Any progress on this please?
> >
> > Maybe a stupid q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
And an extended test:
// PR c++/89214
// { dg-do compile { target c++17 } }
struct A
{
A (int);
};
struct BB
{
A a;
};
struct B : BB
{
};
void
foo ()
{
B b1 = {42};
B b2 = {{42}};
B b3 = {{{42}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #12 from Arseny Solokha ---
Meanwhile, here's a C testcase that fails w/ the latest trunk snapshot on
x86_64:
__int128 jv;
void
zm (__int128 g9, unsigned short int sm, short int hk)
{
while (hk < 1)
{
if (jv == 0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87352
--- Comment #6 from Jeremy Sanders ---
I think I have worked out where the problem lies. The code contains fixed-sized
arrays of types containing allocatable arrays and other nested types with
allocatable arrays. If I switch the fixed-sized decla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87352
--- Comment #7 from Jeremy Sanders ---
Created attachment 46002
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46002&action=edit
Tiny patch to fix testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82501
--- Comment #28 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Patches should go to gcc-patches@. That is where reviews happen, too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87352
--- Comment #8 from Jeremy Sanders ---
Created attachment 46003
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46003&action=edit
Much smaller testcase. Switch 73/74 to see the difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80559
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89784
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46004
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46004&action=edit
gcc9-pr89784.patch
Untested patch, so far without testsuite coverage.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89786
Bug ID: 89786
Summary: ice in add_expr, at tree.c:7767
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89787
Bug ID: 89787
Summary: Fortran OpenACC 'routine' directive: parent
namespace(s)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82501
--- Comment #29 from Andrey Drobyshev ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #28)
> Patches should go to gcc-patches@. That is where reviews happen, too.
That's still a patch candidate. I want to hear other folks' opinion before it
go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89788
Bug ID: 89788
Summary: trunk/liboffloadmic/runtime/emulator/coi_host.cpp:175]
: (error) Null pointer dereference
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89789
Bug ID: 89789
Summary: [9 Regression] Compile time hog during RPO VN
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-time-hog
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89790
Bug ID: 89790
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE segfault in operand_equal_p() at
fold-const.c:3000 with -Wduplicated-cond since r269838
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #4 from Qirun Zhang ---
Bisect points to r151362.
commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
Author: aoliva
Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
* toplev.c (process_options): Enable var-tracking-assignments
by default
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
or_var_def): Handle degenerate PHI nodes.
(insert_debug_temps_for_defs): Handle PHI nodes.
* tree-ssa-dom.c (degenerate_phi_result): Don't crash on released
SSA names.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@154402
138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 9.0.1 2019032
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Another version, without a converting ctor:
struct B {
int c;
};
struct D : B { };
void
fn ()
{
D b{{D{42}}};
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29383
--- Comment #17 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 18:54:50 2019
New Revision: 269845
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269845&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite, Fortran] Consistently set 'DEFAULT_FFLAGS'
In the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29383
--- Comment #19 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 18:57:56 2019
New Revision: 269847
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269847&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite, Fortran] Consistently set 'DEFAULT_FFLAGS'
In the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29383
--- Comment #18 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 18:57:39 2019
New Revision: 269846
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269846&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite, Fortran] Consistently set 'DEFAULT_FFLAGS'
In the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56408
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:16:29 2019
New Revision: 269848
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269848&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite, Fortran] Apply DejaGnu 1.4.4 work-around also to
'gfort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56408
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:16:54 2019
New Revision: 269849
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269849&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite, Fortran] Apply DejaGnu 1.4.4 work-around also to
'gfort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56408
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:17:12 2019
New Revision: 269850
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269850&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite, Fortran] Apply DejaGnu 1.4.4 work-around also to
'gfort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56408
--- Comment #15 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:29:57 2019
New Revision: 269851
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269851&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite] Fix 'dg-compile-aux-modules' diagnostic
gcc/te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56408
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:31:09 2019
New Revision: 269852
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269852&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite] Fix 'dg-compile-aux-modules' diagnostic
gcc/te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56408
--- Comment #17 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:31:30 2019
New Revision: 269853
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269853&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite] Fix 'dg-compile-aux-modules' diagnostic
gcc/te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
And a fix:
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -5978,6 +5978,18 @@ reshape_init_class (tree type, reshape_iter *d, bool
first_initializer_p,
field = next_initializable_field (DECL_CHAIN (field)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72741
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:44:45 2019
New Revision: 269855
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269855&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR72741] Encode OpenACC 'routine' directive's level of parallelism
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72741
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 19:54:51 2019
New Revision: 269856
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269856&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR72741] The name in a Fortran OpenACC 'routine' directive refers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89773
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 20:02:42 2019
New Revision: 269857
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269857&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR89773] Fortran OpenACC 'routine' directive refuses procedures wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89787
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78377
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89790
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72741
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Mar 21 20:13:44 2019
New Revision: 269858
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269858&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR72741] Properly handle clauses specifying the level of paralleli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89454
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
Bisect points to r151362.
commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
Author: aoliva
Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
* toplev.c (process_options): Enable var-tracking-assignments
by default
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89454
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #1)
> Bisect points to r151362.
>
> commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
> Author: aoliva
> Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
>
> * toplev.c (process_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54262
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Regtested cleanly with the patch in comment 4.
If I remove the lines
se->expr = convert (pvoid_type_node, se->expr);
se->expr = gfc_evaluate_now (se->expr, &se->pre);
in conv_isocbinding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #5 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #4)
> Bisect points to r151362.
>
> commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
> Author: aoliva
> Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
>
> * toplev.c (process_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #6 from Qirun Zhang ---
As mentioned in my earlier comment, the revision should be between gcc-5 and
gcc-6.
Bisect points to r239357.
commit ec969ce4161538b561592a032eca6dcfaf513596
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Aug 11 09:02:04 2016
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89767
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 21 22:01:02 2019
New Revision: 269860
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269860&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89767
* parser.c (cp_parser_lambda_introducer): Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71446
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 21 22:03:07 2019
New Revision: 269861
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269861&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71446
* call.c (filed_in_pset): Change pset from h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 21 22:04:29 2019
New Revision: 269862
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269862&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/89692
* tree.c (fld_type_variant, fld_incomplete_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87769
--- Comment #9 from Mateusz Zych ---
Hi ;)
I've analysed this issue further and
tested all combinations of different vendors in host and target triplets.
Here are the results:
+---+
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87769
--- Comment #10 from Mateusz Zych ---
Created attachment 46005
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46005&action=edit
Build log of first GCC, ending on compilation failure of libstdc++-v3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87769
--- Comment #11 from Mateusz Zych ---
Oh, I forgot to mention that I've also tested this configuration:
HOST=x86_64-abc-linux-gnu
TARGET=x86_64-xyz-linux-gnu
and it worked without any issues.
I don't understand why would these configur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89784
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Created attachment 46004 [details]
> gcc9-pr89784.patch
>
> Untested patch, so far without testsuite coverage.
I'll do the test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #13 from Arseny Solokha ---
The patch in comment 8 fixes testcases from both comment 9 and comment 12 for
me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89792
Bug ID: 89792
Summary: gcc generates wrong debug information at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89792
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
This might be a latent issue.
Attaching my gcc version:
$ gcc-trunk -v
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.1 20190321 (experimental) [trunk revision 269832] (GCC)
$ gcc-7 -v
Thread model: posix
gcc version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 89350, which changed state.
Bug 89350 Summary: [9 Regression] Wrong -Wstringop-overflow= warning since
r261518
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89350
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89350
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89350
--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Mar 22 02:58:27 2019
New Revision: 269867
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269867&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89350 - Wrong -Wstringop-overflow= warning since r26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89793
Bug ID: 89793
Summary: Implicit conversion to std::string is ambiguous on GCC
8.2 but not GCC 7.3
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19852
yjf.victor at foxmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yjf.victor at foxmail dot
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
