From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 34638 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2015 00:29:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 34593 invoked by uid 48); 11 Sep 2015 00:29:52 -0000 From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/59124] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong warnings "array subscript is above array bounds" Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:29:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.3 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.4 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg00909.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D59124 Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #20 from Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez --- (In reply to baoshan from comment #19) > We can see the value of up_sub is represented as unsigned int value > 4294967291 which is really weird to me, it suppose to be a int value -5 h= ere. All counters are unsigned. You can see what code looks like to GCC at exact= ly that moment by using -fdump-tree-all-all-lineno and looking for that line in test.c.079t.vrp1.=20 ;; basic block 10, loop depth 1, count 0, freq 1430, maybe hot ;; Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 1226, should be 1430 ;; prev block 9, next block 11, flags: (NEW, REACHABLE) ;; pred: 9 [85.7%] (TRUE_VALUE,EXECUTABLE) ;; starting at line 9 [test.c:9:13] # RANGE [4294967291, 4294967295] _51 =3D i_2 + 4294967290; [test.c:9:10] # RANGE [4294967291, 4294967295] NONZERO 4294967295 _52 =3D (long unsigned intD.10) _51; [test.c:9:10] # RANGE [17179869164, 17179869180] NONZERO 17179869180 _53 =3D _52 * 4; [test.c:9:10] # PT =3D nonlocal _54 =3D bar_12(D) + _53; [test.c:9:23] # VUSE <.MEM_48> _55 =3D [test.c:9:23] bazD.1755[_51]; [test.c:9:18] # .MEM_56 =3D VDEF <.MEM_48> [test.c:9:10] *_54 =3D _55; [test.c:9:13] # RANGE [4294967290, 4294967294] _59 =3D i_2 + 4294967289; [test.c:9:10] # RANGE [4294967290, 4294967294] NONZERO 4294967295 _60 =3D (long unsigned intD.10) _59; [test.c:9:10] # RANGE [17179869160, 17179869176] NONZERO 17179869180 _61 =3D _60 * 4; [test.c:9:10] # PT =3D nonlocal _62 =3D bar_12(D) + _61; [test.c:9:23] # VUSE <.MEM_56> _63 =3D [test.c:9:23] bazD.1755[_59]; [test.c:9:18] # .MEM_64 =3D VDEF <.MEM_56> [test.c:9:10] *_62 =3D _63; ;; succ: 11 [100.0%] (FALLTHRU,EXECUTABLE) It seems GCC at some moment unrolls the loop and creates such block with th= ose ranges. Probably, the block is unreachable, but it would be better to not create it in the first place. Finding out where and why it is created would help to figure out a fix. >>From gcc-bugs-return-496932-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Sep 11 02:59:44 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 62818 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2015 02:59:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 62794 invoked by uid 48); 11 Sep 2015 02:59:39 -0000 From: "Casey at Carter dot net" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/67545] New: [concepts] Failure to properly substitute template parameters into requires-clause Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 02:59:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: Casey at Carter dot net X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone attachments.created Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg00910.txt.bz2 Content-length: 1813 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D67545 Bug ID: 67545 Summary: [concepts] Failure to properly substitute template parameters into requires-clause Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: Casey at Carter dot net Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 36323 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D36323&action=3Dedit Preprocessed test case r227603 fails to compile this correct TU: #include struct I { int operator*() const; }; template using Ref =3D decltype(*std::declval()); template requires !__stl2::Swappable, Ref>() static constexpr bool bar() { return true; } template requires !__stl2::Swappable, Ref>() static constexpr bool foo() { return true; } static_assert(bar()); // Fine static_assert(foo()); // Error with error: ~/gcc6/bin/g++ -std=3Dgnu++1z -I ~/cmcstl2/include -I ~/cmcstl2/meta/include foo.cpp -c foo.cpp:19:19: error: cannot call function =E2=80=98constexpr bool foo() [w= ith U =3D I]=E2=80=99 static_assert(foo()); // Error ^ foo.cpp:16:23: note: constraints not satisfied static constexpr bool foo() { return true; } ^ foo.cpp:16:23: note: =E2=80=98! Swappable, Ref >()=E2=80=99 eva= luated to false Despite the fact that the requirements on foo and bar are functionally equivalent, the call to bar succeeds whilst the call to `bar` fails to comp= ile. I conjecture that the substitution of template parameters into foo's requir= es clause is not working correctly. >>From gcc-bugs-return-496933-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Sep 11 04:50:47 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 49846 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2015 04:50:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 49778 invoked by uid 48); 11 Sep 2015 04:50:43 -0000 From: "ismail at i10z dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug bootstrap/67363] [6 Regression] r227188 breaks build for mingw-w64 Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 04:50:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ismail at i10z dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg00911.txt.bz2 Content-length: 542 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D67363 =C4=B0smail D=C3=B6nmez changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #18 from =C4=B0smail D=C3=B6nmez --- (In reply to John David Anglin from comment #17) > Fixed on hppa*-*-hpux*. Also fixes mingw-w64, thank you! >>From gcc-bugs-return-496934-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Sep 11 05:16:19 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 74199 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2015 05:16:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 74136 invoked by uid 48); 11 Sep 2015 05:16:09 -0000 From: "pault at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/66993] Spurious ambiguous symbol error with submodules Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:16:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pault at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pault at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg00912.txt.bz2 Content-length: 558 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66993 Paul Thomas changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas --- Closed on trunk. Thanks for the report, Mikael! I should have thought of this particular implication of host association myself.... Cheers Paul