https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #53 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to Erik Schnetter from comment #46)
> The patch does not include the generated files. You need to run "genfixes"
> in the "fixincludes" directory after applying the patch.
This I don't understand:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
--- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
Theoretically similar to PR87214, but the patch was backported and this issues
is present in 8.3.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90027
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
> for deja testcase: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010518-2.c
> as the struct a_struct define with __attribute__ ((packed)), so the member
> variable b also not aligned with 4 bytes, is this case undefined behavio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška ---
Can be reproduced also on e.g. a Haswell machine:
-Ofast -march=haswell -g -funroll-loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90027
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> No, and AFAIK the testcase has always worked on strict-alignment platforms.
To be more explicit:
typedef struct
{
short a;
long b;
short c;
short d;
} __attribute__ ((packed)) S;
S s;
S *p = &s;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90010
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 10 07:27:20 2019
New Revision: 270246
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270246&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90010
* gimple-ssa-sprintf.c (target_to_host): Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90025
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 10 07:28:05 2019
New Revision: 270247
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270247&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/90025
* expr.c (store_expr): Set properly si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90026
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90006
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Summary|[7/8/9 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90025
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90010
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] valgrind |[8 Regression] valgrind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89794
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90026
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #54 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Ok, after running genfixes there are still only two modified files in the whole
tree of code, namely fixincludes/inclhack.def and fixincludes/fixincl.x.
Is that as intended?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90034
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #55 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #54)
> Ok, after running genfixes there are still only two modified files in the
> whole tree of code, namely fixincludes/inclhack.def and
> fixincludes/fixincl.x.
> Is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86504
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|rsa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90005
--- Comment #9 from Pawel ---
Hello Eric,
Thank You so much for this answer - in our case that turned out also to be
really useful.
We took the "-Werror=conditionally-supported" version - to trigger an error in
our custom variadic function - as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88259
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88259
>
> Tamar Christina changed:
>
>What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65930
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65930
>
> Tamar Christina changed:
>
>What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Ferruh YIGIT from comment #1)
> Created attachment 46115 [details]
> 19.05-rc1 -mno-avx512f gcc build on skylake
>
> The build is done with changing the lib/librte_kni/Makefile as following:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looks like gas bug to me:
vpgatherqq 8(,%ymm1,1), %ymm0{%k2}
vpgatherqq 8(%rcx,%ymm1,1), %ymm0{%k2}
vpgatherqq %ymm2, 8(,%ymm1,1), %ymm0
vpgatherqq %ymm2, 8(%rcx,%ymm1,1), %ymm0
when assem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fedora binutils-2.31.1-24.fc29.x86_64 has the bug, haven't checked upstream
2.31.1 nor which exact patch fixed it. But as I said, there is no testcase
coverage for this, so it might break any time again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #56 from Jürgen Reuter ---
I tried the fix, but now I get another error:
/libstdc++-v3/../libgcc
-I/usr/local/packages/gcc_9.0_fixincl/_build/x86_64-apple-darwin18.5.0/i386/libstdc++-v3/include/x86_64-apple-darwin18.5.0
-I/usr/local/p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #9 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
Created attachment 46125
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46125&action=edit
19.05-rc1 default gcc build (avx512 enabled) on skylake .o file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #10 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
Created attachment 46126
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46126&action=edit
19.05-rc1 default gcc build (avx512 enabled) on skylake .s file via
--save-temps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #11 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
Created attachment 46127
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46127&action=edit
19.05-rc1 -mno-avx512f gcc build on skylake .o file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #12 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
Created attachment 46128
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46128&action=edit
19.05-rc1 -mno-avx512f gcc build on skylake .s file via --save-temp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #13 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #6)
> (In reply to Ferruh YIGIT from comment #1)
> > Created attachment 46115 [details]
> > 19.05-rc1 -mno-avx512f gcc build on skylake
> >
> > The build is done with ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
$ as --version
GNU assembler (GNU Binutils; openSUSE Tumbleweed) 2.32
is fine:
$ as --64 avx512.s -o avx512.o && objdump -S avx512.o | grep gather
234b: 62 f2 fd 2a 91 04 0dvpgatherqq 0x8(,%ym
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89093
--- Comment #36 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #35)
> (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #33)
> > (In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #32)
> > >
> > > Either I drop the warning or I keep the hun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #15 from Martin Liška ---
Fixed in bintuils with:
commit 629cfaf1b0fbb32a985607c774bd8e7870b9fa94 (HEAD, refs/bisect/bad)
Author: Jan Beulich
Date: Mon Jul 30 17:25:05 2018 +0200
x86: don't mistakenly scale non-8-bit displace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86504
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86504
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88259
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
> Note that ripping out non-SLP support from the vectorizer will turn
> reduction support upside down ... which means the work will heavily
> conflict, either me or you needing to re-do stuff.
Fair enough,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65930
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
> If you have some clever ideas make sure to outline a patch
> before finalizing it so you won't be disappointed by negative feedback ;)
I'll be sure to do that with this and the other changes I intend to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #14 from Richard B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90016
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Wed Apr 10 09:51:16 2019
New Revision: 270248
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270248&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[aarch64] PR90016 - aarch64: reference to undeclared N in help for c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90016
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89093
--- Comment #37 from Bernd Edlinger ---
If a non-general-regs-only function is called from here,
it will only preserve d8-d15, and the call-clobbered registers
d0-d7 would of course be modified.
But is that a problem at all, if the call-clobbered
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89851
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Apr 10 10:43:39 2019
New Revision: 270249
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270249&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89851 Add testcase for std::variant equality
Add a test for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90026
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #18 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #17)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> > Fedora binutils-2.31.1-24.fc29.x86_64 has the bug, haven't checked upstream
> > 2.31.1 nor which exact patch fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
So the issue is really that for
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
double tem1 = a4[i*4] + a4[i*4+n*4] (**);
double tem2 = a4[i*4+2*n*4+1];
a4[i*4+n*4+1] = tem1;
a4[i*4+1] = tem2;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Upstream 2.31 and 2.31.1 is affected too, but 2.31 branch starting with August
2018 is not affected. As the fix has been backported also to 2.30 branch, I
guess 2.30 is affected too, 2.32 is not affected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.4 |7.5
Summary|[8 Regression] r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89959
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Apr 10 11:44:08 2019
New Revision: 270251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Make gcov docs more precise (PR gcov-profile/89959).
2019-04-10 Martin L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89959
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #57 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #56)
> I tried the fix, but now I get another error:
> /libstdc++-v3/../libgcc
> -I/usr/local/packages/gcc_9.0_fixincl/_build/x86_64-apple-darwin18.5.0/i386/
> libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #58 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> No such file or directory
>31 | #include
> | ^~~~
> compilation terminated.
I think this is an older issue (on SSD?) for which there is already a filed PR.
When I hit t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #59 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Yes, to me this looks also like an independent problem, and it appears to me
like a sort of race condition. I also just restarted the bootstrap (without a
parallel make). Now I have to do some theoretical ph
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #20 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
Confirmed that issue is fixed with the latest assembler [1].
[1]
as --version
GNU assembler (GNU Binutils) 2.32.51.20190410?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90028
--- Comment #21 from Ferruh YIGIT ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> Upstream 2.31 and 2.31.1 is affected too, but 2.31 branch starting with
> August 2018 is not affected. As the fix has been backported also to 2.30
> branch, I g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #60 from Jonathan Wakely ---
PR 81797 was the relevant bug, which apparently is still present for darwin
when using the buggy new APFS filesystem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #61 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #60)
> PR 81797 was the relevant bug, which apparently is still present for darwin
> when using the buggy new APFS filesystem
so, from discussion on IRC, and notes ab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89965
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46129
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46129&action=edit
gcc9-pr89965.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90007
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Why does sel-sched try to propagate hard registers into insns before RA? The
whole point of the combiner changes was not to do that, so that the RA can do
better job.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864
--- Comment #62 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #61)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #60)
> > PR 81797 was the relevant bug, which apparently is still present for darwin
> > when using the buggy new APFS fil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 46130
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46130&action=edit
patch for GCC 8
I am testing the attached, now forward-porting to GCC 9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90030
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89875
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 46131
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46131&action=edit
patch for GCC 9
So trunk, instead of grouping (a) and (b) groups (d) and (b), leaving (a)
alone.
for (int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90035
Bug ID: 90035
Summary: Non-translatable C++ parser diagnostics
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: translation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90024
--- Comment #3 from Matthew Malcomson ---
Author: matmal01
Date: Wed Apr 10 13:34:54 2019
New Revision: 270253
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270253&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport of r270226 from mainline to gcc-7-branch
The "*neon_mov"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90024
--- Comment #4 from Matthew Malcomson ---
Author: matmal01
Date: Wed Apr 10 13:41:21 2019
New Revision: 270254
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270254&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport of r270226 from mainline to gcc-8-branch
The "*neon_mov"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90007
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
Well, often sel-sched just does not discriminate hardregs and pseudos when
checking if renaming/substitution may be applied. Sure, as a matter of
efficiency we should probably disallow substitution throug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90007
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It is not a matter of efficiency, but primarily that RA can't do anything in
many cases after propagating hard registers into instructions. This PR is just
one of the many cases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90035
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90007
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90034
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
[...]
>
> Smaller testcase that will hang:
>
> #line 1 "/dev/stdout"
> #def xy
Presumably we're blocked, waiting on ourselves to write something to our
stdout s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90034
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab ---
You get the resolve part for free by opening it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89394
--- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton ---
Author: nickc
Date: Wed Apr 10 14:44:47 2019
New Revision: 270258
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270258&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix a stack exhaustion bug in libiberty's demangler when decoding a
pathalo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
Dmitry Kazakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dimula73 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #26 from Dmitry Kazakov ---
Created attachment 46133
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46133&action=edit
Test source for unaligned pass-by-value crash
Test file for the comment above
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #27 from Dmitry Kazakov ---
As a workaround, one can either use __attribute__((always_inline)) for *all*
the functions accepting __m256 or pass *all* arguments by const-ref. Const-ref
arguments are passed correctly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89394
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90024
Matthew Malcomson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90036
Bug ID: 90036
Summary: False positive: directive argument is null
[-Werror=format-overflow=]
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90024
Matthew Malcomson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.5 |7.6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89395
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89832
--- Comment #6 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
one question to Martin:
has the proposed patch been committed in gcc9 upstream?
my understanding is the proposed patch is for LLVM source base, not for GCC.
are you planning to port the patch to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51277
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Feature request: C++|Feature request: improve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90034
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
(gdb) call fileno(c->fp)
$3 = 4
(gdb) info inferior
Num Description Executable
* 1process 35251 /home/david/coding-3/gcc-git-bugfixing/build/gcc/cc1
(gdb) shell ls -al /proc/35251/fd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89971
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90037
Bug ID: 90037
Summary: [9 Regression] -Wnull-dereference false positive after
r269302
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90037
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90034
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #4)
> You get the resolve part for free by opening it.
Thanks.
I'm wondering what the best cross-platform test ought to be.
Maybe something like this to input.c's a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69549
Julian Stecklina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||js at alien8 dot de
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90037
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89900
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90038
Bug ID: 90038
Summary: execute_command_line should not use fork()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90039
Bug ID: 90039
Summary: libiberty demangling _GLOBAL__sub_I__Z11print_tracev
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84032
Roman Zhuykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhroma at ispras dot ru
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84032
--- Comment #4 from Roman Zhuykov ---
There is the following mistake in logic behind the code.
We want to schedule the branch instructions only as a last instruction in a
row. But when branch was scheduled and we add other instructions into part
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87979
Roman Zhuykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhroma at ispras dot ru
--- Comment #1 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87979
--- Comment #2 from Roman Zhuykov ---
Situation is same in the following tests on ia64 platform with -fmodulo-sched
enabled (with any of O1, O2, Os):
gcc.dg/torture/pr82762.c
gcc.c-torture/execute/20170419-1.c
We divide by zero when we try to sc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84369
Roman Zhuykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhroma at ispras dot ru
--- Comment #3 f
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
