public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2019-11-25 16:11 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-21 15:56 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: iains at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2019-11-25 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 506489 bytes --]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #22 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #21)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #20)
> > As of XCode 11.3beta, the contained SDK works OK:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2019-11/msg01439.html
> >
> > We still have the underlying problems - which need to be addressed (so
> > please don't close this PR yet) - but for now using the latest SDK should
> > work.
>
> "should work" means with the gcc svn trunk or with the patch posted in this
> ticket applied? I would understand your remark that it should work without
> the applied patch, as it stands from the gcc trunk.
It works with unpatched trunk - as per the posted results.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661259-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 16:13:19 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661259-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 67523 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 16:13:19 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 67455 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 16:13:16 -0000
From: "dje at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/92661] [10 Regression] AIX bootstrap failure with builtin-types.def change
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:13:00 -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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: blocker
X-Bugzilla-Who: dje at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92661-4-Mlz10ORRpo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03053.txt.bz2
Content-length: 722
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
--- Comment #3 from David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
An alternate work-around is
Index: tree.c
===================================================================
--- tree.c (revision 278691)
+++ tree.c (working copy)
@@ -10334,7 +10334,7 @@
uint64_type_node = make_or_reuse_type (64, 1);
/* Decimal float types. */
- if (targetm.decimal_float_supported_p ())
+ if (1)
{
dfloat32_type_node = make_node (REAL_TYPE);
TYPE_PRECISION (dfloat32_type_node) = DECIMAL32_TYPE_SIZE;
>From gcc-bugs-return-661260-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 16:35:17 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661260-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 84725 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 16:35:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 84696 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 16:35:13 -0000
From: "robert.dumitru at cyberthorstudios dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/92664] New: Wrong .debug_line section information when compiling stdin input with -g3
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:35:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 7.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: robert.dumitru at cyberthorstudios dot com
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
Message-ID: <bug-92664-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03054.txt.bz2
Content-length: 4030
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92664
Bug ID: 92664
Summary: Wrong .debug_line section information when compiling
stdin input with -g3
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: robert.dumitru at cyberthorstudios dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Hello,
When compiling simple test programs with -g3 and input from the console (-
(stdin)), the .debug_line section is wrong.
Steps to reproduce this issue:
1. In your console type:
arm-none-eabi-gcc -mcpu=cortex-m4 -mthumb -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=fpv4-sp-d16
-O0 -g3 -c -o test.o -x c -
2. Copy and paste:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("Hello World\n");
return 0;
}
3. Ctrl+Z and Return
4. If you type: arm-none-eabi-readelf --debug-dump=decodedline test.o
You get the following:
Contents of the .debug_line section:
CU: ./<stdin>:
File name Line number Starting address View
readelf: Warning: Badly formed extended line op encountered!
readelf: Warning: Badly formed extended line op encountered!
UNKNOWN (116): length 115
<stdin> 0 0xc
<stdin> -1 0x1a
<stdin> -1 0x1e
<stdin> 1 0x2a
UNKNOWN (0): length 4
<stdin> -1 0x36
<stdin> -6 0x42
<stdin> -8 0x50
<stdin> -7 0x5c
<stdin> -7 0x60
<stdin> -5 0x6c
UNKNOWN (0): length 2
<stdin> 2 0x76
<stdin> 2 0x84
<stdin> 7 0x92
<stdin> 3 0xa0
<stdin> 2 0xac
<stdin> 1 0xba
<stdin> 1 0xbe
<stdin> 3 0xca
UNKNOWN (0): length 4
<stdin> -1 0xd8
<stdin> -2 0xe4
<stdin> -3 0xf2
<stdin> -3 0xf6
<stdin> -1 0x102
UNKNOWN (0): length 1
UNKNOWN (115): length 95
<stdin> -2 0x110
<stdin> -6 0x11e
<stdin> -7 0x12a
<stdin> -10 0x136
<stdin> -10 0x13a
<stdin> -8 0x146
UNKNOWN (0): length 1
UNKNOWN (112): length 95
5. Repeating the steps with -g instead of -g3 we get the right .debug_line
section:
Contents of the .debug_line section:
CU: ./<stdin>:
File name Line number Starting address View
<stdin> 3 0
<stdin> 4 0x4
<stdin> 5 0xa
<stdin> 6 0xc
<stdin> 6 0x14
>From gcc-bugs-return-661261-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 16:39:32 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661261-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 89707 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 16:39:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 89650 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 16:39:29 -0000
From: "dcb314 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:39:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-HmzFyLu3Jd@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03055.txt.bz2
Content-length: 899
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #0)
> Surely it is time to make "-fno-common" the default, at least when a modern
> C standard is specified indicating that the code is modern? People who need
> the old behaviour can always get it with "-fcommon".
Interestingly, use of -std=c89 or -std=gnu89 doesn't also switch on -fcommon
to get old behaviour.
So use of compiler flag indicating to compile code to old standards
means implicit use of *new* standard for common.
Looks odd to me. Possible bug ?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661262-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 16:55:36 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661262-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 114547 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 16:55:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 114498 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 16:55:32 -0000
From: "wilco at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:55:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-eV4mnBb8Qa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03056.txt.bz2
Content-length: 884
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #8 from Wilco <wilco at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #7)
> (In reply to David Brown from comment #0)
> > Surely it is time to make "-fno-common" the default, at least when a modern
> > C standard is specified indicating that the code is modern? People who need
> > the old behaviour can always get it with "-fcommon".
>
> Interestingly, use of -std=c89 or -std=gnu89 doesn't also switch on -fcommon
> to get old behaviour.
>
> So use of compiler flag indicating to compile code to old standards
> means implicit use of *new* standard for common.
>
> Looks odd to me. Possible bug ?
If required, it would be feasible to keep the old behaviour for C89 indeed,
however -fno-common is not incompatible with C89 (embedded C compilers may not
even support -fcommon).
>From gcc-bugs-return-661263-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:00:53 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661263-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 120888 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:00:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 120782 invoked by uid 55); 25 Nov 2019 17:00:39 -0000
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92641] VLA type finalized at the beginging of the statement rather at the point of use
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:00:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92641-4-ZgXfmRfWVh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92641-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92641-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03057.txt.bz2
Content-length: 539
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92641
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
The C front end explicitly tracks VLA size expressions in type names in
casts and ensures they are evaluated at an appropriate point using a
C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR (which later turns into a COMPOUND_EXPR); see
c_cast_expr. Presumably C++ needs to do something similar to ensure size
expressions in type names are evaluated at an appropriate point within the
containing expression.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661264-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:09:23 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661264-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 127471 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:09:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 127417 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 17:09:18 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:09:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-f6fVnWXMvC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03058.txt.bz2
Content-length: 263
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
C89 6.7p4 looks equivalent to C99 6.9p5, so I don't see why -std=c89 should
imply -fcommon. It's just as bad in C89 as in later standards.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661265-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:17:18 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661265-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 3146 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:17:18 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 3068 invoked by uid 55); 25 Nov 2019 17:17:14 -0000
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/92661] [10 Regression] AIX bootstrap failure with builtin-types.def change
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:17:00 -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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: blocker
X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92661-4-LYdRtpv5my@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03059.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1032
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
The design in the target-independent compiler is that the functions that
get called when processing builtins.def notice that the type involved is
error_mark_node (which in turn gets set when processing builtin-types.def)
and refrain from defining the built-in function. The goal is that the DFP
types are never created in the compiler when DFP is unsupported, which
means that no built-in functions using those types can be declared.
My suggestion for the target-specific built-in functions would be:
* builtin_function_type in rs6000-call.c should detect the case of a
DECIMAL_FLOAT_MODE_P mode and NULL_TREE ret_type and return NULL_TREE in
place of the existing error in that case.
* rs6000_common_init_builtins should then accept a NULL_TREE type as
indicating not to call def_builtin (or def_builtin could accept it as
indicating to return early).
>From gcc-bugs-return-661266-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:28:27 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661266-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13203 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:28:26 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13138 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 17:28:22 -0000
From: "dcb314 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:28:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-FmNaQ0VvXb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03060.txt.bz2
Content-length: 678
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> C89 6.7p4 looks equivalent to C99 6.9p5, so I don't see why -std=c89 should
> imply -fcommon.
To reduce costs in upgrading to post-revision 278509 compilers.
-std=c89 implies old code. Old code relies on old behaviour. Providing
old behaviour by default means that compiler users don't have to
suddenly put "-fcommon" in all their old code Makefiles to get compilation.
I am not sure about intermediate cases like c99, but certainly
newer language standards (c11, ...) can adopt the new behaviour.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661267-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:37:37 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661267-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20606 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:37:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20548 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 17:37:31 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92648] Handling of unknown attributes
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:37:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on assigned_to everconfirmed attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92648-4-7qmCccnBb7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92648-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92648-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03061.txt.bz2
Content-length: 690
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92648
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-25
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47353
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47353&action=edit
gcc10-pr92648.patch
Untested fix.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661268-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:49:47 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661268-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 29433 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:49:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 29374 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 17:49:43 -0000
From: "epagone at email dot it" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92586] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:13479 with nested allocatable derived types
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:49:00 -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: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: epagone at email dot it
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: blocked
Message-ID: <bug-92586-4-1aFOrqziv9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92586-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92586-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03062.txt.bz2
Content-length: 593
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586
epagone <epagone at email dot it> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |19276
--- Comment #3 from epagone <epagone at email dot it> ---
Converting "data_get_foo_s" to a subroutine makes the ICE go away but, upon
execution, there is a segmentation fault.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19276
[Bug 19276] [meta-bug] CHARACTER related bugs in gfortran
>From gcc-bugs-return-661269-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:49:58 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661269-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30114 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:49:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30058 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 17:49:54 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:49:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92651-4-rVIS4QWvZG@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03063.txt.bz2
Content-length: 425
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Do you mean r274481 rather than r277481, right?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661270-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 17:54:15 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661270-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 34243 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 17:54:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 33425 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 17:54:08 -0000
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92533] [F2018] Permit module names in access-stmt (public::/private::)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:54:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
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: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92533-4-Oz5lLLkTxC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92533-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92533-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03064.txt.bz2
Content-length: 465
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47354
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47354&action=edit
Parsing-only patch – TODO: resolve PUBLIC/PRIVATE + handle example of comment 1
First patch. Need to resolve use-associated symbols such that the example of
comment 1 passes. – Probably somewhere in module.c's gfc_use_module.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661271-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 18:12:58 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661271-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 58070 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 18:12:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 57927 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 18:12:53 -0000
From: "david at westcontrol dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:12:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: david at westcontrol dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-9ii39oYHkt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03065.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1677
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #11 from David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com> ---
Reliance on -fcommon has not been correct or compatible with any C standard (I
don't think it was even right for K&R C). If the code is written correctly
(with at most one definition of all externally linked symbols) then -fcommon
does not make it incorrect or conflict with the standards. But if your code
requires -fcommon to compile correctly, it does not conform to C89 or anything
newer.
Personally, I'd like to see many old and dangerous C practices give errors by
default. Along with common symbols, I'd include non-prototype function
declarations and definitions, and calling functions without declaring them.
These are the kind of thing you'd expect to see in pre-ANSI C - other than
that, they are probably errors in the code. It is good that gcc still
supports such code, but I think making them errors by default will reduce bugs
in current code. And surely that is worth the cost of adding a "-fold-code"
flag to ancient build recipes? (The "-fold-code" flag could probably also
imply "-fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv" to deal with other assumptions sometimes
made in older code.)
There is precedence for this. The default standard for gcc changed from
"gnu89" to "gnu11". While most "gnu89" code will compile with the same
semantics in "gnu11" mode, there are a fair number of incompatibilities.
Changing the default to "-fno-common" (and ideally "-Werror=strict-prototypes
-Werror=old-style-declaration -Werror=missing-parameter-type") would have a lot
smaller impact than changing the default standard.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661272-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 18:15:39 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661272-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60806 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 18:15:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60608 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 18:15:27 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/86172] [meta-bug] issues with -Wnull-dereference
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:15:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: dep_changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 8.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, meta-bug
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-86172-4-xG4dHIe469@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-86172-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-86172-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03066.txt.bz2
Content-length: 474
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86172
Bug 86172 depends on bug 90264, which changed state.
Bug 90264 Summary: [9/10 Regression] -Wnull-dereference QoI issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90264
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
>From gcc-bugs-return-661273-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 18:15:39 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661273-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60813 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 18:15:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60529 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 18:15:25 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/90264] [9/10 Regression] -Wnull-dereference QoI issue
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:15:00 -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: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-90264-4-YlSpMNQaFR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-90264-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-90264-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03067.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1252
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90264
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The warning started with r270574.
That said, I don't see why it wouldn't be fine to warn with line A and not warn
with line B, there is a significant difference between the two, in particular
that with line A, len is known to be in range [1, INT_MAX] in the
if ((out - *seq) > len) return -2;
statement, and as there is out && in the condition, showing that *seq in theory
could be NULL, the compiler considers that path, and that path is broken with
line A, because the for loop will not do anything, out == *seq == NULL,
out - *seq is 0 and that is never > 1 or larger and thus *out will be
dereferenced.
Compare that to line B, where nothing is known about len value, it could be 0,
or could be negative, so it is possible that return -2; will happen in that
case and the invalid dereference will not happen.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661274-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 18:44:01 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661274-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 90983 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 18:44:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 90905 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 18:43:56 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92646] Compilation fails on armv7l with sys/cdefs.h: No such file or directory
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:44:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92646-4-jrp3Fn7Y9i@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92646-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92646-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03068.txt.bz2
Content-length: 214
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92646
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Looks like multi-arch is not being auto-detected correctly.
Try adding --enable-multiarch .
>From gcc-bugs-return-661275-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 18:49:43 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661275-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 96381 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 18:49:43 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 96343 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 18:49:39 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:49:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
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_severity
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-EtbgUgRutK@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03069.txt.bz2
Content-length: 591
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Sometimes bug reports don't get a bugzilla #.
Also would you consider code generation (not wrong code but unoptimial code
generation) get an entry?
Could you provide a full example of where you think this would be useful?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661276-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 18:56:51 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661276-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 103741 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 18:56:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 103636 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 18:56:46 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:56:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub 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: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-89549-4-qw2o1hymfl@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03070.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1439
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I don't see a bug here, it behaves as expected, once you have too long line
somewhere or too many lines, column tracking is disabled and column tracking is
essential for this warning:
/* PR c++/68819: if the column number is zero, we presumably
had a location_t > LINE_MAP_MAX_LOCATION_WITH_COLS, and so
we have no column information.
Act as if no conversion was possible, triggering the
error-handling path in the caller. */
if (!exploc.column)
{
static bool issued_note = false;
if (!issued_note)
{
/* Notify the user the first time this happens. */
issued_note = true;
inform (loc,
"%<-Wmisleading-indentation%> is disabled from this point"
" onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to"
" the size of the code/headers");
}
return false;
}
This isn't a note that is related to some particular warning, just a message
telling that there won't be any further warnings emitted due to this later.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661277-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 18:59:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661277-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 105732 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 18:59:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 105683 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 18:59:10 -0000
From: "spop at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/92665] New: [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:59:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: spop at gcc dot gnu.org
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
Message-ID: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03071.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1020
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665
Bug ID: 92665
Summary: [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal
intrinsics
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: spop at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
With gcc as of today I see dup instructions that could be optimized out:
$ cat red.c
#include "arm_neon.h"
int32x4_t fun(int32x4_t a, int16x8_t b, int16x8_t c) {
a = vmlal_s16(a, vget_low_s16(b), vget_low_s16(c));
a = vmlal_high_s16(a, b, c);
return a;
}
$ gcc -O3 -S -o- red.c
fun:
dup d3, v1.d[0]
dup d4, v2.d[0]
smlal v0.4s,v3.4h,v4.4h
smlal2 v0.4s,v1.8h,v2.8h
ret
$ clang -O3 -S -o- red.c
fun:
smlal v0.4s, v1.4h, v2.4h
smlal2 v0.4s, v1.8h, v2.8h
ret
>From gcc-bugs-return-661278-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:02:41 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661278-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 114465 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:02:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 114168 invoked by uid 55); 25 Nov 2019 19:02:36 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/91786] Clang 8.0.1 can't compile the <filesystem> header on Windows
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:02:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-91786-4-iP9MUxyIr7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-91786-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-91786-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03072.txt.bz2
Content-length: 532
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91786
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Nov 25 19:01:58 2019
New Revision: 278697
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278697&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/91786 fix compilation error with Clang
PR libstdc++/91786
* include/bits/fs_path.h (filesystem_error): Move definition before
the use in u8path.
Modified:
trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog
trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/fs_path.h
>From gcc-bugs-return-661279-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:07:20 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661279-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 120155 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:07:19 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 120078 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:07:15 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:07:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cf_gcctarget bug_status version keywords cf_reconfirmed_on component assigned_to everconfirmed bug_severity
Message-ID: <bug-92665-4-GjYYF85AYh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03073.txt.bz2
Content-length: 979
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target| |aarch64-linux-gnu
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Version|unknown |10.0
Keywords| |missed-optimization
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-25
Component|rtl-optimization |target
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.
I have a patch (or two) that will optimize this.
I was going to be submitting them in the next few days.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661280-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:14:28 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661280-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 824 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:14:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 747 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:14:23 -0000
From: "david.bolvansky at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: david.bolvansky at gmail dot com
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: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-89549-4-IgPe6xiR8H@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03074.txt.bz2
Content-length: 186
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549
--- Comment #15 from Dávid Bolvanský <david.bolvansky at gmail dot com> ---
But there is no way to silence this "note".
>From gcc-bugs-return-661281-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:15:49 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661281-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2838 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:15:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2415 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:15:16 -0000
From: "erick.ochoa@theobroma-systems.com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/92538] Proposal for IPA init() constant propagation
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:15:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: erick.ochoa@theobroma-systems.com
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: cc attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92538-4-bUhV4jZRU6@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92538-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92538-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03075.txt.bz2
Content-length: 741
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92538
Erick Ochoa <erick.ochoa@theobroma-systems.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |erick.ochoa@theobroma-syste
| |ms.com
--- Comment #3 from Erick Ochoa <erick.ochoa@theobroma-systems.com> ---
Created attachment 47355
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47355&action=edit
Update for ipa-initcall-cp
When applied to master (commit id: d0c0f2f6d2ba374085840c79882a13a4f7bbb6f9)
this patch adds an optimization to propagate constants initialized in init
functions.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661282-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:33:22 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661282-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 21410 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:33:20 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 21359 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:33:17 -0000
From: "wilco at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:33:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-P6AjfpxIL8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03076.txt.bz2
Content-length: 574
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #12 from Wilco <wilco at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #11)
> Changing the default to "-fno-common" (and ideally
> "-Werror=strict-prototypes -Werror=old-style-declaration
> -Werror=missing-parameter-type") would have a lot smaller impact than
> changing the default standard.
Giving errors on old-style code by default sounds like a good idea. We could
add -std=legacy similar to Fortran to support building old K&R code (and that
would enable -fcommon by default).
>From gcc-bugs-return-661283-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:35:47 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661283-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23402 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:35:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23364 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:35:43 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:35:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92665-4-H2EzigpBBN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03077.txt.bz2
Content-length: 389
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47356
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47356&action=edit
Patch which I wrote for GCC 7.3
I have to double check if it applies directly as I had other patches in this
area but this is the patch which I had wrote for GCC 7.3.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661284-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:42:23 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661284-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 28610 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:42:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 28533 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:42:19 -0000
From: "bergner at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/92661] [10 Regression] AIX bootstrap failure with builtin-types.def change
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:42:00 -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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: blocker
X-Bugzilla-Who: bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92661-4-YFkCzyYI5q@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03078.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2523
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to joseph@codesourcery.com from comment #4)
> My suggestion for the target-specific built-in functions would be:
>
> * builtin_function_type in rs6000-call.c should detect the case of a
> DECIMAL_FLOAT_MODE_P mode and NULL_TREE ret_type and return NULL_TREE in
> place of the existing error in that case.
>
> * rs6000_common_init_builtins should then accept a NULL_TREE type as
> indicating not to call def_builtin (or def_builtin could accept it as
> indicating to return early).
The following implements that idea, although, we have to test the arguments for
similar issues as the return type. It fixes my powerpc64le-linux
--disable-decimal-float build.
David, can you test this on AIX?
Index: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c (revision 278692)
+++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c (working copy)
@@ -2935,6 +2935,10 @@ def_builtin (const char *name, tree type
unsigned classify = rs6000_builtin_info[(int)code].attr;
const char *attr_string = "";
+ /* Don't define the builtin if it doesn't have a type. See PR92661. */
+ if (type == NULL_TREE)
+ return;
+
gcc_assert (name != NULL);
gcc_assert (IN_RANGE ((int)code, 0, (int)RS6000_BUILTIN_COUNT));
@@ -7702,6 +7706,11 @@ builtin_function_type (machine_mode mode
if (!ret_type && h.uns_p[0])
ret_type = builtin_mode_to_type[h.mode[0]][0];
+ /* If the required decimal float type has been disabled, then return
+ without an error. */
+ if (!ret_type && DECIMAL_FLOAT_MODE_P (h.mode[0]))
+ return NULL_TREE;
+
if (!ret_type)
fatal_error (input_location,
"internal error: builtin function %qs had an unexpected "
@@ -7719,6 +7728,11 @@ builtin_function_type (machine_mode mode
if (!arg_type[i] && uns_p)
arg_type[i] = builtin_mode_to_type[m][0];
+ /* If the required decimal float type has been disabled, then return
+ without an error. */
+ if (!arg_type[i] && DECIMAL_FLOAT_MODE_P (m))
+ return NULL_TREE;
+
if (!arg_type[i])
fatal_error (input_location,
"internal error: builtin function %qs, argument %d "
>From gcc-bugs-return-661285-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:47:51 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661285-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32829 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:47:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32785 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:47:47 -0000
From: "wilco at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:47:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92665-4-gXyAhRQvLE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03079.txt.bz2
Content-length: 725
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665
Wilco <wilco at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Wilco <wilco at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Created attachment 47356 [details]
> Patch which I wrote for GCC 7.3
>
> I have to double check if it applies directly as I had other patches in this
> area but this is the patch which I had wrote for GCC 7.3.
I think it's because many intrinsics in arm_neon.h still use asm which inhibits
most optimizations.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661286-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:50:10 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661286-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 39920 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:50:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 39836 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:50:05 -0000
From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:50:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-3j3YWn1Hz2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03080.txt.bz2
Content-length: 569
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This sounds like it could be dangerous from a security context... currently no
network connection is needed to use gcc, it would be a major disappointment if
that changed...
>From gcc-bugs-return-661287-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:51:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661287-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 41687 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:51:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 41625 invoked by uid 55); 25 Nov 2019 19:51:09 -0000
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92629] internal compiler error: in convert_mpz_to_unsigned, at fortran/simplify.c:173
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:51:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92629-4-qjDGj5MQuU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92629-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92629-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03081.txt.bz2
Content-length: 677
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92629
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Mon Nov 25 19:50:38 2019
New Revision: 278699
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278699&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-25 Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
PR fortran/92629
* simplify.c (convert_mpz_to_unsigned): Skip assert for argument
range when -fno-range-check is specified.
PR fortran/92629
* gfortran.dg/pr92629.f90: New testcase.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr92629.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/simplify.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>From gcc-bugs-return-661288-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:53:32 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661288-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 44706 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:53:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 44647 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:53:27 -0000
From: "fw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:53:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: fw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-G7u9A6p7R5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03082.txt.bz2
Content-length: 820
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
--- Comment #13 from Florian Weimer <fw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #12)
> Giving errors on old-style code by default sounds like a good idea. We could
> add -std=legacy similar to Fortran to support building old K&R code (and
> that would enable -fcommon by default).
It's unfortunately not that simple. A lot of these changes (admittedly I've
only tried -Werror=implicit-function-declaration by default, something that
trips even experienced developers) tend to produce broken, but internally
consistent builds because autoconf checks give wrong results (and everything,
including the test suite, depends on those results). This was true for a
significant number of core GNU components until this year, including GCC
itself.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661289-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 19:59:48 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661289-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 50111 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 19:59:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 50060 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 19:59:44 -0000
From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/85678] -fno-common should be default
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:59:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: see_also
Message-ID: <bug-85678-4-kPQFMi5w5C@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-85678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03083.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2132
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=82922
--- Comment #14 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #11)
> Reliance on -fcommon has not been correct or compatible with any C standard
> (I don't think it was even right for K&R C). If the code is written
> correctly (with at most one definition of all externally linked symbols)
> then -fcommon does not make it incorrect or conflict with the standards.
> But if your code requires -fcommon to compile correctly, it does not conform
> to C89 or anything newer.
>
> Personally, I'd like to see many old and dangerous C practices give errors
> by default. Along with common symbols, I'd include non-prototype function
> declarations and definitions, and calling functions without declaring them.
> These are the kind of thing you'd expect to see in pre-ANSI C - other than
> that, they are probably errors in the code. It is good that gcc still
> supports such code, but I think making them errors by default will reduce
> bugs in current code. And surely that is worth the cost of adding a
> "-fold-code" flag to ancient build recipes? (The "-fold-code" flag could
> probably also imply "-fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv" to deal with other
> assumptions sometimes made in older code.)
>
> There is precedence for this. The default standard for gcc changed from
> "gnu89" to "gnu11". While most "gnu89" code will compile with the same
> semantics in "gnu11" mode, there are a fair number of incompatibilities.
> Changing the default to "-fno-common" (and ideally
> "-Werror=strict-prototypes -Werror=old-style-declaration
> -Werror=missing-parameter-type") would have a lot smaller impact than
> changing the default standard.
Related: bug 82922
>From gcc-bugs-return-661290-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 20:00:52 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661290-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 51934 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 20:00:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 51832 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 20:00:47 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:00:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub 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: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-89549-4-ZKZY0HrV99@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03084.txt.bz2
Content-length: 321
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Of course there is, -Wno-misleading-indentation or use line breaks from time to
time. With >= 4KB long lines, the user clearly doesn't care about indentation,
so the warning doesn't make sense.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661291-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 20:01:04 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661291-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52708 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 20:01:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52620 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 20:00:59 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92665] [AArch64] low lanes select not optimized out for vmlal intrinsics
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:01:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92665-4-RYbpwzb9Iw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03085.txt.bz2
Content-length: 747
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92665
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #3)
> I think it's because many intrinsics in arm_neon.h still use asm which
> inhibits most optimizations.
NO in this case it is not.
Take:
#include "arm_neon.h"
float64x1_t fun(float64x2_t a, float64x2_t b) {
return vget_low_f64(b);
}
double fun1(float64x2_t a, float64x2_t b) {
return b[0];
}
---- CUT ----
Both of these should be optimized to just
fmov d0, d1
ret
Even worse take:
#include "arm_neon.h"
float64x1_t fun(float64x2_t a, float64x2_t b) {
return vget_low_f64(b) + vget_high_f64(b);
}
double fun1(float64x2_t a, float64x2_t b) {
return b[0] + b[1];
}
---- CUT ---
>From gcc-bugs-return-661292-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 20:05:04 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661292-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 57449 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 20:05:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 57356 invoked by uid 55); 25 Nov 2019 20:05:00 -0000
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libfortran/92569] [8/9 Regression] gfortran read with end directive does not trigger with -ffrontend-optimize
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:05:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libfortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92569-4-faPmaCdjmq@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92569-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92569-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03086.txt.bz2
Content-length: 980
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92569
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Nov 25 20:04:28 2019
New Revision: 278702
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278702&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix EOF handling for arrays.
2019-11-25 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org>
Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
Backport from trunk
PR fortran/92569
* io/transfer.c (transfer_array_inner): If position is
at AFTER_ENDFILE in current unit, return from data loop.
2019-11-25 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org>
Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
Backport from trunk
PR fortran/92569
* gfortran.dg/eof_6.f90: New test.
Added:
branches/gcc-9-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/eof_6.f90
Modified:
branches/gcc-9-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-9-branch/libgfortran/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-9-branch/libgfortran/io/transfer.c
>From gcc-bugs-return-661293-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 20:14:49 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661293-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 66173 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 20:14:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 66062 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 20:14:35 -0000
From: "david.bolvansky at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/89549] [8/9/10 Regression] -Wmisleading-indentation is disabled from this point onwards, since column-tracking was disabled due to the size of the code/headers
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: david.bolvansky at gmail dot com
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: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-89549-4-UOs1kyLQoC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-89549-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03087.txt.bz2
Content-length: 221
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549
--- Comment #17 from Dávid Bolvanský <david.bolvansky at gmail dot com> ---
Check few lines above
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549#c8
>From gcc-bugs-return-661294-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 20:28:13 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661294-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 82603 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 20:28:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 82543 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 20:28:09 -0000
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92533] [F2018] Permit module names in access-stmt (public::/private::)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:28:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92533-4-s68nLZfzPV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92533-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92533-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03088.txt.bz2
Content-length: 907
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #4)
> Probably somewhere in module.c's gfc_use_module.
That's actually to early. gfc_use_module is run after all use statements have
been processed while the public/private statement comes much later.
Additionally for (cf. comment 1)
use B
use C
the information that a symbol has been loaded from B and/or C is lost – only
the true module ("A") remains. But we need to know later on that the symbol has
been loaded via B *and* C such that with "private :: B; public :: C" the
symbols are properly marked as public.
Hence, some tracking of the use-associated symbols until either resolving them
or until writing them to the .mod is needed – some kind of (symbol,
list-of-modules) container or (module, list-of-symbols)
>From gcc-bugs-return-661295-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 20:41:23 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661295-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 100900 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 20:41:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 100844 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 20:41:18 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-Q8er9PG1TE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03089.txt.bz2
Content-length: 581
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2)
> This sounds like it could be dangerous from a security context... currently
> no network connection is needed to use gcc, it would be a major
> disappointment if that changed...
I think the suggestion is that the numbers are baked into the executable, not
that Bugzilla is queried. The list of fixed bugs for a given revision of the
source code is a static property, it doesn't need to be queried dynamically.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661296-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:01:36 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661296-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123155 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:01:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123107 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:01:32 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:01:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-presEWewZr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03090.txt.bz2
Content-length: 448
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Bugs are sometimes reopened etc., so the list isn't completely static.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661297-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:02:03 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661297-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 124079 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:02:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 124028 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:02:00 -0000
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92666] New: bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:02:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
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
Message-ID: <bug-92666-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03091.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1350
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666
Bug ID: 92666
Summary: bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with
-Wno-restrict
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Bootstrap with -Wno-restrict fails due to -Werror=unused-but-set-variable in
gcc/gcov.c:
/src/gcc/svn/gcc/gcov.c: In function ‘const char* format_count(gcov_type)’:
/src//gcc/svn/gcc/gcov.c:2328:9: warning: variable ‘r’ set but not used
[-Wunused-but-set-variable]
2328 | float r = 1.0f * count / divisor;
| ^
A small test case reduced from the file is as follows. This is not
reproducible with the C front-end:
$ cat t.c && gcc -O2 -S -Wall -Wextra -Wno-restrict -xc++ t.c
extern "C" int printf (const char*, ...);
void f (unsigned n)
{
int i = 0;
while (n >>= 1)
++i;
float r = 1.0f * i;
printf ("%f", r);
}
t.c: In function ‘void f(unsigned int)’:
t.c:8:9: warning: variable ‘r’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
8 | float r = 1.0f * i;
| ^
>From gcc-bugs-return-661298-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:03:12 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661298-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 126454 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:03:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 126403 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:03:08 -0000
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92666] bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:03:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: keywords bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on assigned_to target_milestone everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92666-4-Dum3eOOoVh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92666-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92666-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03092.txt.bz2
Content-length: 604
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666
Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-25
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
>From gcc-bugs-return-661299-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:12:16 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661299-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8989 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:12:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8928 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:12:12 -0000
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92666] [10 Regression] bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:12:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: short_desc
Message-ID: <bug-92666-4-37NuxpSR0l@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92666-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92666-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03093.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1287
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666
Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|bogus |[10 Regression] bogus
|-Wunused-but-set-variable |-Wunused-but-set-variable
|in gcov.c with |in gcov.c with
|-Wno-restrict |-Wno-restrict
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I thought the problem was introduced with -Wrestrict but it looks like the
false positive is actually a regression caused by r276059:
r276059 | jason | 2019-09-23 13:48:00 -0400 (Mon, 23 Sep 2019) | 10 lines
PR c++/91809 - bit-field and ellipsis.
decay_conversion converts a bit-field access to its declared type, which
isn't what we want here; it even has a comment that the caller is expected
to have already used default_conversion to perform integral promotion. This
function handles arithmetic promotion differently, but we still don't want
to call decay_conversion before that happens.
* call.c (convert_arg_to_ellipsis): Don't call decay_conversion for
arithmetic arguments.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661300-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:14:23 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661300-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10797 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:14:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10693 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:14:19 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/92656] The zero_extend insn can't be eliminated in the combine pass
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
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: keywords bug_severity
Message-ID: <bug-92656-4-FS540fHEuG@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92656-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92656-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03094.txt.bz2
Content-length: 369
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |missed-optimization
Severity|normal |enhancement
>From gcc-bugs-return-661301-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:14:51 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661301-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 11899 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:14:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 11510 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:14:46 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/92656] The zero_extend insn can't be eliminated in the combine pass
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92656-4-lgf0ud81oW@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92656-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92656-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03095.txt.bz2
Content-length: 176
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, this comes from coremarks (what a bad benchmark).
>From gcc-bugs-return-661302-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:19:56 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661302-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19633 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:19:56 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19573 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:19:52 -0000
From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/92442] Compiling Boost.Spirit.X3 code uses exuberant amount of RAM with -gpubnames
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:19:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: memory-hog
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jason at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92442-4-uLbZaIyX5c@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92442-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92442-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03096.txt.bz2
Content-length: 475
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92442
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> There are also quite many _name_ duplicates refering to different DIEs! Like
> 178 copies of 'std::is_same_v' and others:
std::*_v are variable templates, so the different DIEs are for different
instantiations of the template. I don't remember what the right pubnames
behavior is for variable templates.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661303-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:20:06 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661303-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20431 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:20:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20345 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:20:02 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:20:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-JjsYmFVp0v@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03097.txt.bz2
Content-length: 456
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
True, but I still think the list needs to be compiled in to the binaries
statically. If that gave incorrect results in some cases (because a bug was
thought to be fixed when the static list was generated, but was later reopened)
then so be it. That's better than querying bugzilla during compilation, which
is totally unacceptable.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661304-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:36:52 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661304-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 38062 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:36:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 38025 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:36:47 -0000
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92666] [10 Regression] bogus -Wunused-but-set-variable in gcov.c with -Wno-restrict
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:36:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92666-4-BTXAuasztc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92666-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92666-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03098.txt.bz2
Content-length: 620
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92666
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The check_function_restrict() function is called to do the -Wrestrict checking.
It's called conditionally, from check_function_arguments(), when warn_restrict
is nonzero. When called, the function calls fold_for_warn() for all arguments
of the functions it checks for aliasing violations. fold_for_warn() ends up
calling mark_rvalue_use() which ultimately calls mark_exp_read() which sets
DECL_READ_P (exp) = 1 for VAR_DECL and PARM_DECL. None of this happens when
-Wno-restrict is set.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661305-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 21:49:54 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661305-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52588 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 21:49:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52555 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 21:49:50 -0000
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92667] New: spurious missing sentinel in function call with a local sentinel variable
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:49:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
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
Message-ID: <bug-92667-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03099.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1154
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92667
Bug ID: 92667
Summary: spurious missing sentinel in function call with a
local sentinel variable
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
While looking into bug 92666 I noticed the following false positive in C (it
can be reproduced in C++ making the pointer non-const so it doesn't get
folded). By being implemented fully in the front-end the warning doesn't see
that the nullptr variable is, in fact, a null pointer.
$ cat t.c && cat t.c && gcc -S -Wall t.c
void f (void)
{
const char* const null = 0;
__builtin_execl ("foo", "bar", null);
}
void f (void)
{
const char* const null = 0;
__builtin_execl ("foo", "bar", null);
}
t.c: In function ‘f’:
t.c:5:3: warning: missing sentinel in function call [-Wformat=]
5 | __builtin_execl ("foo", "bar", null);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From gcc-bugs-return-661306-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 22:08:17 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661306-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 70585 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 22:08:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 70506 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 22:08:12 -0000
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92629] internal compiler error: in convert_mpz_to_unsigned, at fortran/simplify.c:173
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 22:08:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-92629-4-xPtYZmbiEa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92629-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92629-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03100.txt.bz2
Content-length: 445
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92629
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Should have taken this one...
Fixed on trunk. Waiting a couple days before backports.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661307-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 22:25:30 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661307-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 96912 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 22:25:30 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 96820 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 22:25:25 -0000
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92668] New: -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 22:25:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
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
Message-ID: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03101.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1062
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668
Bug ID: 92668
Summary: -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to
the same symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Unlike the C++ front-end and unlike Clang, the C front-end issues
-Wtautological-compare for comparisons involving distinct macros that expand to
the same symbol. GCC should be consistent with itself, and what Clang does
seems reasonable, so probably also with it.
$ cat t.c && gcc -S -Wall -Wextra -Wtautological-compare t.c
int a;
#define X a
#define Y a
int f (void)
{
if (X == Y) return 1;
return 0;
}
t.c: In function ‘f’:
t.c:8:9: warning: self-comparison always evaluates to true
[-Wtautological-compare]
8 | if (X == Y) return 1;
| ^~
>From gcc-bugs-return-661308-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 22:27:02 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661308-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 98593 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 22:27:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 98507 invoked by uid 55); 25 Nov 2019 22:26:57 -0000
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libfortran/92569] [8/9 Regression] gfortran read with end directive does not trigger with -ffrontend-optimize
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 22:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libfortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92569-4-jJ77bkKcJr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92569-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92569-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03102.txt.bz2
Content-length: 944
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92569
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Nov 25 22:26:26 2019
New Revision: 278710
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278710&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix EOF handling for arrays.
2019-11-25 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org>
Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
Backport from trunk
PR fortran/92569
* io/transfer.c (transfer_array_inner): If position is
at AFTER_ENDFILE in current unit, return from data loop.
2019-11-25 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org>
Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
Backport from trunk
PR fortran/92569
* gfortran.dg/eof_6.f90: New test.
Added:
branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/eof_6.f90
Modified:
branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-8-branch/libgfortran/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-8-branch/libgfortran/io/transfer.c
>From gcc-bugs-return-661309-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 22:27:38 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661309-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 99776 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 22:27:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 99726 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 22:27:34 -0000
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libfortran/92569] [8/9 Regression] gfortran read with end directive does not trigger with -ffrontend-optimize
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 22:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libfortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92569-4-rbPm1j6G0U@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92569-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92569-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03103.txt.bz2
Content-length: 490
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92569
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed on all affected branches, closing.
Thanks for the bug report!
>From gcc-bugs-return-661310-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 22:33:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661310-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 105521 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 22:33:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 105479 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 22:33:09 -0000
From: "msebor at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 22:33:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
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: keywords short_desc
Message-ID: <bug-92668-4-PmkoHrFRgG@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03104.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1247
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668
Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |diagnostic
Summary|-Wtautological-compare |[9/10 Regression]
|warns for macros that |-Wtautological-compare
|expand to the same symbol |warns for macros that
| |expand to the same symbol,
| |inconsistent with C++
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Bisection points to r226242 when the warning option was introduced so it's not
a regression. The C++ front-end warns at that revision as well, but stopped
warning in 9.0 as of r267272: C++: more location wrapper nodes (PR c++/43064,
PR c++/43486). So what appears to be a "regression" is actually losing the
warning in C++. I think the fix should be a) to avoid the warning in C, and b)
ensure the warning is suppressed in C++ as a feature, not as an accident of the
location wrapper, and that it doesn't come back.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661311-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 22:36:07 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661311-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 108081 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 22:36:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 108021 invoked by uid 48); 25 Nov 2019 22:36:02 -0000
From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 22:36:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92668-4-O5rzla9lua@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03105.txt.bz2
Content-length: 848
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668
Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-25
CC| |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, I wonder why
473 /* If both are in a macro, only warn if they're spelled the same.
*/
474 if (!spelled_the_same_p (EXPR_LOCATION (lhs), EXPR_LOCATION (rhs)))
475 return;
in warn_tautological_cmp doesn't trigger. Confirmed to make one FE behave as
the other.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661312-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Nov 25 23:18:18 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661312-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14169 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2019 23:18:18 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14135 invoked by uid 55); 25 Nov 2019 23:18:15 -0000
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:18:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92668-4-s5ZgjQrOqC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03106.txt.bz2
Content-length: 178
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
Isn't this the same as bug 70477?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661313-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 01:29:45 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661313-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 73903 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 01:29:45 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 73854 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 01:29:41 -0000
From: "wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 01:29:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92651-4-lTI6Htw3He@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03107.txt.bz2
Content-length: 794
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
--- Comment #4 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Btw, which variant is actually the fastest for you? abs expansion doesn't
> do any cost comparison but just uses direct abs, max and then the xor with
> shift as third option (and after that fall back to compare & jump which later
> might be if-converted into cmov).
Actually the xor with shift is could be the fastest, which improves about 8% on
525.x264_r comparing to the pmaxsd one, and with cmove the improvement is 6.5%.
I don't think this conversion should happen on every cmove instruction,
regardless of how many sse register it would use. I think the simplest way to
avoid this is adjusting the cost.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661314-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 01:30:49 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661314-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 75350 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 01:30:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 75276 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 01:30:45 -0000
From: "wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 01:30:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92651-4-MUE2WQKe8x@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03108.txt.bz2
Content-length: 250
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
--- Comment #5 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Do you mean r274481 rather than r277481, right?
Yes. Thanks for your correction.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661315-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 02:32:38 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661315-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 36162 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 02:32:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 36107 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 02:32:33 -0000
From: "jiangning.liu at amperecomputing dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92649] dead store elimination
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 02:32:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jiangning.liu at amperecomputing dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92649-4-Ey5vTqk8rl@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03109.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2520
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92649
--- Comment #5 from Jiangning Liu <jiangning.liu at amperecomputing dot com> ---
Unrolling 1024 iterations would increase code size a lot, so usually we don't
do that. 1024 is only an example. Without knowing we could eliminate most of
them, we don't really want to do loop unrolling, I guess.
Yes. Assigning 5 to all a's elements is only an example as well. It could be
any random value or predefined number.
Let me give a more complicated case,
extern int rand(void);
#define LIVE_SIZE 100
#define DATA_SIZE 256
int f(void)
{
int a[DATA_SIZE], b[DATA_SIZE][DATA_SIZE];
int i,j;
long long s = 0;
int next;
for (i=0; i<DATA_SIZE; i++) {
a[i] = rand() % 16384;
for (j=0; j<DATA_SIZE; j++)
b[i][j] = rand() % 16384;
}
for (i=0; i<DATA_SIZE; i++) {
next = 0;
for (j=0; j<LIVE_SIZE; j++) {
if (a[j] % 2) {
a[j]++;
next++;
}
}
for (j=next; j<DATA_SIZE; j++)
a[j] = b[i][j];
}
for (i=0; i<LIVE_SIZE; i++)
s += a[i];
return s;
}
I expect this small program can be optimized to be,
extern int rand(void);
#define LIVE_SIZE 100
#define DATA_SIZE 256
int f(void)
{
int a[DATA_SIZE], b[DATA_SIZE][DATA_SIZE];
int i,j;
long long s = 0;
int next;
for (i=0; i<DATA_SIZE; i++) {
a[i] = rand() % 16384;
for (j=0; j<DATA_SIZE; j++)
b[i][j] = rand() % 16384;
}
for (i=0; i<DATA_SIZE; i++) {
next = 0;
for (j=0; j<LIVE_SIZE; j++) {
if (a[j] % 2) {
a[j]++;
next++;
}
}
for (j=next; j<LIVE_SIZE; j++) // Replace DATA_SIZE with
LIVE_SIZE
a[j] = b[i][j];
}
for (i=0; i<LIVE_SIZE; i++)
s += a[i];
return s;
}
The array range liveness analysis can know only the first LIVE_SIZE array
elements affect function result, so all remaining stores can be eliminated.
Shall we "invent" a new pass to handle this optimization?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661316-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 04:58:17 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661316-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15110 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 04:58:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14967 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 04:58:13 -0000
From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92668] [9/10 Regression] -Wtautological-compare warns for macros that expand to the same symbol, inconsistent with C++
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 04:58:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: DUPLICATE
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_status cc resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92668-4-t1LpACb1qE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92668-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03111.txt.bz2
Content-length: 890
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92668
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to joseph@codesourcery.com from comment #3)
> Isn't this the same as bug 70477?
At first I thought of bug 696502, but I'd forgotten that that one was about
-Wlogical-op and not -Wtautological-compare, so on second thought it looks like
you're right, bug 70477 is actually the one to close this as a dup of.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 70477 ***
>From gcc-bugs-return-661317-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 04:58:18 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661317-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15114 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 04:58:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15023 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 04:58:14 -0000
From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/70477] -Wtautological-compare too aggressive?
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 04:58:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-70477-4-z0LepxrYQU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-70477-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-70477-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03110.txt.bz2
Content-length: 185
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70477
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 92668 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>From gcc-bugs-return-661318-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 05:05:33 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661318-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 22207 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 05:05:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 22179 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 05:05:29 -0000
From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92667] spurious missing sentinel in function call with a local sentinel variable
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 05:05:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92667-4-fAjBp9hW3I@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92667-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92667-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03112.txt.bz2
Content-length: 419
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92667
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
possibly related: bug 38481
>From gcc-bugs-return-661319-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 06:31:10 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661319-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91115 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 06:31:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 90284 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 06:31:01 -0000
From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/46558] dbgcnt.c messages not marked for translation
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 06:31:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-46558-4-GGHPfODVUY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-46558-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-46558-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03113.txt.bz2
Content-length: 521
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46558
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think I remember seeing Martin Liska sending patches modifying code in this
area recently; cc-ing him to see if he's fixed this...
>From gcc-bugs-return-661320-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 06:33:52 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661320-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 93874 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 06:33:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 93778 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 06:33:47 -0000
From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/61414] enum class bitfield size-checking needs a separate warning flag controlling it
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 06:33:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_file_loc
Message-ID: <bug-61414-4-uy2J9myFe2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61414-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61414-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03114.txt.bz2
Content-length: 652
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61414
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
| |patches/2019-11/msg02329.ht
| |ml
--- Comment #22 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Patch discussion on the gcc-patches mailing list starts here for this month:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg02329.html
>From gcc-bugs-return-661321-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 07:19:25 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661321-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 128393 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 07:19:25 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 128307 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 07:19:21 -0000
From: "fiesh at zefix dot tv" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 07:19:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: fiesh at zefix dot tv
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-wtRSfHuQay@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03115.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1925
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
--- Comment #6 from fiesh at zefix dot tv ---
My suggestion would be to uniformly include the information about whether a bug
has been closed, irrespective of its nature. So yes, un-optimal code
generation might also be listed, and I think the use case of providing
workaround code exists for it just like it exists for an ice-on-valid.
As Jonathan already said, the list should be baked into the compiler. I'm not
suggesting making compilation or even execution of GCC depend on some external
database query; that's a horrid idea.
As for the use cases: Along the years, I've often found myself to write code of
the following nature:
// https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__llvm__) && __GNUC__ <= 10
// The workaround code
#else
// The good code
#endif
We then re-visit these places on compiler updates in case the bug wasn't fixed
for the major version. This can be about new features (as a concrete example,
we have code that would like to use std::transform_reduce, so it could do it in
compilers with 91495 closed), or about bugs (as a concrete example, we have a
template with a template template parameter that leads to an internal compiler
error. We have workaround code in there that uses copy and paste code to
circumvent the issue, but once 92654 is fixed, I'd prefer the good code to be
used automatically.)
This would also allow requiring certain bugs be fixed with ifdef-error-endif
constructs instead of depending on the compiler's version explicitly.
I'm not claiming this is a feature request that's perfectly thought through,
and maybe the cons outweigh the pros. But I'd like to put this up for
discussion because I believe the current means of circumventing bugs is not
great, and it largely isn't because the information about the bug numbers is
lost needlessly.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661322-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 07:51:09 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661322-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 17441 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 07:51:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 17236 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 07:51:04 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/92657] High stack usage due ftree-ch
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 07:51:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: keywords bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92657-4-tmVxUaX5DR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92657-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92657-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03116.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1197
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92657
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |missed-optimization
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>From a quick look it's a classical testcase for excessive store-motion plus
PRE and GCSE managing to do half of that.
So in essence there are probably duplicates of this bug and what we miss
is something of a register pressure estimation framework on GIMPLE (we do
have multiple sketches of that spread across some passes). The main issue
here is (as can be seen here) that implementing such estimation in one
pass doesn't solve the issue but merely pushes it elsewhere.
Note that for i?86 with SSE STV is also an offender:
t.c:157:6:mlx5e_grp_sw_update_stats 1376 static
t.c:157:6:mlx5e_grp_sw_update_stats 936 static with -mno-stv
>From gcc-bugs-return-661323-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:01:38 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661323-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25812 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:01:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25740 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:01:30 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92649] dead store elimination
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:01:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92649-4-in2wglk0Q7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03117.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1734
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92649
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I wonder if it makes sense for a production compiler to do this kind of
transformation. When presented with a program representation as SSA
on a CFG such transform would be quite ad-hoc or rather translating the
SSA + CFG representation into something a lot more high-level. On that
high-level it would indeed be kind of a liveness analysis and dead code
removal by means of iteration domain adjustments.
I wonder whether the polyhedral representation that -floop-nest-optimize
uses provides any advantage here (we certainly do not transfer knowledge
that the polyhedral represents all uses of a specific array and thus
unneeded computes can be eliminated - but if we did, would it make such
transforms automagically by simply pruning the polyhedral?)
In GCC the closest "high-level" representation we try to build is the
RDG loop-distribution builds, but obviously that doesn't even cover
the iteration domain.
As said, we're still missing a classical loop fusion transform - such
transform would benefit from a better "high-level" representation of
("simple") "loops" as well (and ideally fusion would work in concert
with distribution, not as separate passes). When we then have such
then pruning iteration domains from liveness analysis can be implemented
in such a framework (and liveness analysis should work on that high-level
representation). Alternatively loop splitting sounds like a transform
this could piggy-back on (given liveness analysis is done), split the
domain and elide one of the loops as dead.
I would advise against trying to invent a new pass just for this particular
transform.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661324-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:14:01 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661324-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 39029 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:14:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 38959 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 08:13:56 -0000
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92651-4-GxYXeXTgeR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03118.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1936
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
>
> --- Comment #4 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > Btw, which variant is actually the fastest for you? abs expansion doesn't
> > do any cost comparison but just uses direct abs, max and then the xor with
> > shift as third option (and after that fall back to compare & jump which later
> > might be if-converted into cmov).
>
> Actually the xor with shift is could be the fastest, which improves
> about 8% on 525.x264_r comparing to the pmaxsd one, and with cmove the
> improvement is 6.5%.
I see. So I wonder if it makes sense to add some costing checks to
abs expansion... - the simplest way is probably to make the x86 backends
have abs patterns and drive expansion itself here.
> I don't think this conversion should happen on every cmove instruction,
> regardless of how many sse register it would use. I think the simplest way to
> avoid this is adjusting the cost.
Well, for STV the issue is that "costing" is done on individual
chains. Note that STV doesn't transform cmovs, it transforms min/max
instructions which exist on integer modes just for the sake of STV ...
STV (like many other combine-like transforms) doesn't consider the
global picture (multiple min/max chains in the same code region, etc.)
but only works locally. So any costing wrenches you throw in has
an effect on _all_ chains.
Clearly abs expansion had a successful non-cmov path before the STV
changes and the intention was not to make min/max the new abs expansion
of choice. So I guess we need to rectify that - and the easiest and
least intrusive way (for other targets) is to add abs expansion
patterns.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661326-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:16:42 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661326-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 42178 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:16:42 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 42119 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:16:38 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/92661] [10 Regression] AIX bootstrap failure with builtin-types.def change
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:16:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: blocker
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: version target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-92661-4-YT0qGqO61I@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92661-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03120.txt.bz2
Content-length: 348
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|unknown |10.0
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
>From gcc-bugs-return-661325-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:16:28 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661325-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 41418 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:16:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 41376 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:16:24 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92660] overflow warning message enhancement
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:16:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
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: keywords bug_severity
Message-ID: <bug-92660-4-NVOAOxphnN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92660-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92660-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03119.txt.bz2
Content-length: 361
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92660
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |diagnostic
Severity|normal |enhancement
>From gcc-bugs-return-661327-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:19:18 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661327-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 44299 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:19:18 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 44256 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:19:14 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W0J1ZyBjKysvOTI2NjJdIGNoYW5nZSBpbiBnY2MgOCB2cyA5OiBjYWxsIG9m?= =?UTF-8?B?IG92ZXJsb2FkZWQg4oCYYmFzaWNfc3RyaW5nKDxicmFjZS1lbmNsb3NlZCBp?= =?UTF-8?B?bml0aWFsaXplciBsaXN0PinigJkgaXMgYW1iaWd1b3Vz?Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:19:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92662-4-tZtgT9FTHF@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03121.txt.bz2
Content-length: 143
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92662
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So - duplicate then?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661329-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:23:29 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661329-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 48997 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:23:29 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 48941 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:23:25 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:23:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: WONTFIX
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_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-M5cGO9CN1b@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03123.txt.bz2
Content-length: 764
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So you'd use __gcc_bug_fixed () at compile-time (obviously) so to me a
configure check in your software project that queries bugzilla would be
feasible.
At least I don't see how this is all useful given our bugzilla database
is _very_ far from being a source you could automatically fill this
information from. For this reason - WONTFIX.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661328-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:23:16 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661328-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 48266 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:23:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 48184 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:23:10 -0000
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92534] [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-42.c fails after r278262
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:23:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92534-4-sE2GxVoEuv@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92534-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92534-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03122.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1251
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This issue won't be reproduced with latest trunk but I still can reproduce with
the original reported revision. I checked the dumpings, it changes starting
from inlining, the bg() doesn't have the loop of interest now. I tried to
bisect, but it failed early on some intermediate commits with building errors
on some file in cp.
The root cause is that we have two slp nodes whose stmts are in the same group,
they share the same first_stmt DR (_30) for the realign set up work. When
transforming the node which doesn't have the first_stmt in the group, we can't
guarantee the first_stmt DR has been initialized yet even we emit stmts late
just before the last stmt in the node.
Since we only get first_stmt_info_for_drptr set during BB vectorization, we can
ensure compute_in_loop case won't have first_stmt_info_for_drptr different from
first_stmt_info, meanwhile we can ensure it is impossible to get
dr_explicit_realign_optimized during BB vectorization. Then as Richard pointed
out in PR92534, we can setup realignment later after we get the fixed
first_stmt_info_for_drptr DR when we have different first_stmt_info.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661330-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:24:37 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661330-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 50448 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:24:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 50246 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:24:26 -0000
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92534] [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-42.c fails after r278262
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:24:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92534-4-By7AFbhAbA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92534-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92534-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03124.txt.bz2
Content-length: 169
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Oops, sorry, the above comment should be for PR91790.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661331-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:26:31 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661331-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 53843 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:26:30 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 53763 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:26:26 -0000
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92534] [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-42.c fails after r278262
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:26:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92534-4-cNa9JWqhRc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92534-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92534-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03125.txt.bz2
Content-length: 477
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This issue disappears since r278495 and should be fixed by r278544.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661333-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:27:22 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661333-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 55808 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:27:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 55775 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:27:18 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/92664] Wrong .debug_line section information when compiling stdin input with -g3
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 7.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-debug
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: keywords bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed cf_known_to_fail
Message-ID: <bug-92664-4-579j1Cl8kT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92664-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92664-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03127.txt.bz2
Content-length: 718
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92664
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |wrong-debug
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail| |9.2.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
[insert "doctor it hurts when I do this ..." here ;)]
Not specific to arm or cross-compiling, confirmed with GCC 9.2 on x86_64.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661332-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:27:10 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661332-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 55118 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:27:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 55023 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:27:04 -0000
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/91790] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 2 follows the use)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:27:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-checking, ice-on-valid-code, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-91790-4-O1LYs3Fln1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-91790-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-91790-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03126.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1489
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This issue won't be reproduced with latest trunk but I still can reproduce with
the original reported revision. I checked the dumpings, it changes starting
from inlining, the bg() doesn't have the loop of interest now. I tried to
bisect, but it failed early on some intermediate commits with building errors
on some file in cp.
The root cause is that we have two slp nodes whose stmts are in the same group,
they share the same first_stmt DR (_30) for the realign set up work. When
transforming the node which doesn't have the first_stmt in the group, we can't
guarantee the first_stmt DR has been initialized yet even we emit stmts late
just before the last stmt in the node.
Since we only get first_stmt_info_for_drptr set during BB vectorization, we can
ensure compute_in_loop case won't have first_stmt_info_for_drptr different from
first_stmt_info, meanwhile we can ensure it is impossible to get
dr_explicit_realign_optimized during BB vectorization. Then as Richard pointed
out in PR92534, we can setup realignment later after we get the fixed
first_stmt_info_for_drptr DR when we have different first_stmt_info.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661334-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:31:27 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661334-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 58963 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:31:26 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 58898 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:31:23 -0000
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/91790] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 2 follows the use)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:31:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-checking, ice-on-valid-code, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-91790-4-lyoLZG6MxG@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-91790-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-91790-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03128.txt.bz2
Content-length: 324
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47357
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47357&action=edit
Defer vect_setup_realignment for different first_stmt_info
Verified the fix on P7 BE, still bootstrapping.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661335-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:33:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661335-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60997 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:33:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60932 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 08:33:09 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92645] Hand written vector code is 450 times slower when compiled with GCC compared to Clang
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:33:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92645-4-mpfJX9hMKd@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92645-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92645-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03129.txt.bz2
Content-length: 689
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92645
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Nov 26 08:32:38 2019
New Revision: 278719
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278719&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-26 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR tree-optimization/92645
* tree-vect-slp.c (vect_build_slp_tree_2): For unary ops
do not build the operation from scalars if the operand is.
* gcc.target/i386/pr92645.c: New testcase.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr92645.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-vect-slp.c
>From gcc-bugs-return-661336-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:37:08 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661336-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 63401 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:37:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 63359 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:37:03 -0000
From: "fiesh at zefix dot tv" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92663] Add __gcc_has_bug or __gcc_bug_fixed
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:37:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: fiesh at zefix dot tv
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: WONTFIX
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92663-4-bNGZgHuGDJ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92663-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03130.txt.bz2
Content-length: 129
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92663
--- Comment #8 from fiesh at zefix dot tv ---
Ok, thanks for the feedback!
>From gcc-bugs-return-661337-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:44:02 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661337-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 69582 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:44:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 69449 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 08:43:58 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92644] [9/10 Regression] ICE in wide_int_to_tree_1, at tree.c:1530
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:44:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92644-4-oF4mXoxB4m@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92644-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92644-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03131.txt.bz2
Content-length: 602
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92644
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 26 08:43:27 2019
New Revision: 278720
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278720&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/92644
* tree-ssa-phiopt.c (minmax_replacement): Add INTEGRAL_TYPE_P check
next to INTEGER_CST checks.
* g++.dg/opt/pr92644.C: New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/pr92644.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-phiopt.c
>From gcc-bugs-return-661338-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:51:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661338-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 75876 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:51:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 75817 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:51:10 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/88617] ICE in ix86_compute_frame_layout, at config/i386/i386.c:11238 since r248029
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:51:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-88617-4-Iv8yy4Hxk2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-88617-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-88617-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03132.txt.bz2
Content-length: 364
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88617
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Daniel Santos from comment #3)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> > @Daniel: Can you please take a look?
>
> My apologies for missing this one! I'll take a look.
@Daniel: Any update about this one please?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661339-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:52:27 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661339-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 77300 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:52:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 77208 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:52:22 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92649] dead store elimination by iteration domain pruning
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:52:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92649-4-BxEn170EJA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03133.txt.bz2
Content-length: 735
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92649
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Or it could be handled by constexpr-like evaluation of the loops, where we'd
evaluate the side-effects at compile time both to PHIs after loop and written
memory, and then FRE-like propagate that to the second loop if there is some
cheap simple expression with which it can be replaced. Though, unsure if it
wouldn't handle only toy testcases like these.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661340-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 08:57:03 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661340-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 82478 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 08:57:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 82400 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 08:56:58 -0000
From: "leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:57:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-0EW6atI98g@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03134.txt.bz2
Content-length: 951
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #7 from Klaus Leppkes <leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de> ---
1.) According to Jacob, g++ gives warning: ("Whether this PR is valid or
invalid is unclear, matching constraints for "m" are unsupported, we even warn
on "=m" (...) : "0" (...) which is the reason why "+m" is lowered to "=m" (...)
: "m" (...).").
Which flags to I need to specify to see such warnings? I tried the usual
suspects like -Wall -Wextra...
2.) I see 2 possibilities and how to proceed from here:
a) It's a non consistency in g++, the bug report should be marked as confirmed
and at some point it should be fixed.
b) The behavior is correct, google benchmark needs to be fixed. For now I just
overloaded DoNotOptimize for double and long double lvalues refs with "g"
instead of "m" and it seems to work fine. But I wonder if this effects other
cases, which then needs to be handled for gcc too.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661341-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:02:35 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661341-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91665 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:02:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91568 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:02:31 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/46558] dbgcnt.c messages not marked for translation
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:02:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on assigned_to everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-46558-4-1CQXelzUf8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-46558-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-46558-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03135.txt.bz2
Content-length: 810
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46558
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> I think I remember seeing Martin Liska sending patches modifying code in
> this area recently; cc-ing him to see if he's fixed this...
Yep, I can definitely mark the table headers for translation.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661342-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:02:45 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661342-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 92418 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:02:45 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 92288 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:02:40 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:02:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-db15Le28mj@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03136.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1094
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Klaus Leppkes from comment #7)
> 1.) According to Jacob, g++ gives warning: ("Whether this PR is valid or
> invalid is unclear, matching constraints for "m" are unsupported, we even
> warn on "=m" (...) : "0" (...) which is the reason why "+m" is lowered to
> "=m" (...) : "m" (...).").
> Which flags to I need to specify to see such warnings? I tried the usual
> suspects like -Wall -Wextra...
The warning is enabled by default, try:
void foo (int x) { asm ("" : "=m" (x) : "0" (x)); }
warning: matching constraint does not allow a register
> b) The behavior is correct, google benchmark needs to be fixed. For now I
> just overloaded DoNotOptimize for double and long double lvalues refs with
> "g" instead of "m" and it seems to work fine. But I wonder if this effects
> other cases, which then needs to be handled for gcc too.
There is no reason not to use "+g" for DoNotOptimize for all types, there is
nothing double/long double specific on it.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661343-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:09:07 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661343-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 97413 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:09:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 97333 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 09:09:03 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug sanitizer/92154] new glibc breaks arm bootstrap due to libsanitizer
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:09:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: sanitizer
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92154-4-Pqenvqqpoc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92154-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92154-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03137.txt.bz2
Content-length: 700
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92154
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 26 09:08:31 2019
New Revision: 278722
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278722&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/92154
* sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h: Cherry-pick
llvm-project revision 947f9692440836dcb8d88b74b69dd379d85974ce.
* sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cpp: Likewise.
Modified:
trunk/libsanitizer/ChangeLog
trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cpp
trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h
>From gcc-bugs-return-661345-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:21:59 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661345-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 111521 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:21:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 111481 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:21:55 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92669] 10 Regression] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn at gcc/cfganal.c:1034 since r278666
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:21:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cf_known_to_work target_milestone everconfirmed cf_known_to_fail
Message-ID: <bug-92669-4-HIDdlbv98l@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03139.txt.bz2
Content-length: 569
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92669
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
Known to work| |9.2.0
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail| |10.0
>From gcc-bugs-return-661344-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:21:42 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661344-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 110755 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:21:42 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 110714 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:21:38 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92669] New: 10 Regression] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn at gcc/cfganal.c:1034 since r278666
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:21:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
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 keywords bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter cc target_milestone cf_gcchost cf_gcctarget
Message-ID: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03138.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2225
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92669
Bug ID: 92669
Summary: 10 Regression] ICE in
pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn at
gcc/cfganal.c:1034 since r278666
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux-gnu
Target: aarch64-linux-gnu
I see the following ICE:
$ ./xgcc -B.
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/declare-variant-9.c
-Os -mtune=cortex-a57 -c
during RTL pass: fma_steering
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/declare-variant-9.c:
In function ‘test1’:
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/gomp/declare-variant-9.c:41:1:
internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
41 | }
| ^
0x115ddea crash_signal
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/gcc/toplev.c:328
0x7fe9f924414f ???
/usr/src/debug/glibc-2.30-1.2.x86_64/signal/../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/sigaction.c:0
0xad6a6b pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn(function*, int*, int*, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/gcc/cfganal.c:1034
0xad6af5 pre_and_rev_post_order_compute(int*, int*, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/gcc/cfganal.c:1047
0x163c134 func_fma_steering::analyze()
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/gcc/config/aarch64/cortex-a57-fma-steering.c:930
0x163c575 func_fma_steering::execute_fma_steering()
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/gcc/config/aarch64/cortex-a57-fma-steering.c:1047
0x163c82f pass_fma_steering::execute(function*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/gcc/config/aarch64/cortex-a57-fma-steering.c:1083
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661346-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:31:16 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661346-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 121526 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:31:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 121454 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:31:11 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92644] [9 Regression] ICE in wide_int_to_tree_1, at tree.c:1530
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:31:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: short_desc
Message-ID: <bug-92644-4-8tFg9tAeY6@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92644-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92644-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03140.txt.bz2
Content-length: 534
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92644
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[9/10 Regression] ICE in |[9 Regression] ICE in
|wide_int_to_tree_1, at |wide_int_to_tree_1, at
|tree.c:1530 |tree.c:1530
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661347-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:33:18 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661347-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123498 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:33:18 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123433 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:33:14 -0000
From: "leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:33:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de
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: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-gE4pkWZjGE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03141.txt.bz2
Content-length: 555
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #9 from Klaus Leppkes <leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de> ---
Created attachment 47358
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47358&action=edit
Problem with g instead of m example
g++ -c error_large_lvalue.cpp
error_large_lvalue.cpp: In function ‘void DoNotOptimize(Tp&) [with Tp =
Large]’:
error_large_lvalue.cpp:16:48: error: inconsistent operand constraints in an
‘asm’
16 | asm volatile("" : "+g,r"(value) : : "memory");
>From gcc-bugs-return-661349-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:36:27 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661349-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 127123 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:36:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 127032 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:36:23 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:36:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-1aSDQSwJex@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03143.txt.bz2
Content-length: 251
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I said "+g", not "+g,r". g stands for general operand, so it allows a
non-immediate operand, whether it is in memory or register.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661348-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:36:18 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661348-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 126390 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:36:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 126313 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:36:14 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92669] [10 Regression] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn at gcc/cfganal.c:1034 since r278666
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:36:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92669-4-UXuIdevXjX@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03142.txt.bz2
Content-length: 189
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92669
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
fma-steering is an aarch64 specific pass so this is a target issue.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661350-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:38:36 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661350-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129579 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:38:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129502 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:38:32 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:38:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-fWyIcx6vU8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03144.txt.bz2
Content-length: 570
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Klaus Leppkes from comment #9)
>
> g++ -c error_large_lvalue.cpp
> error_large_lvalue.cpp: In function ‘void DoNotOptimize(Tp&) [with Tp =
> Large]’:
> error_large_lvalue.cpp:16:48: error: inconsistent operand constraints in an
> ‘asm’
> 16 | asm volatile("" : "+g,r"(value) : : "memory");
You just need "+g" and not "+g,r". That is what we have been saying, +m and +g
are similar.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661351-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:42:49 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661351-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2413 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:42:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2332 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:42:45 -0000
From: "leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:42:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-xE6T8PuaKS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03145.txt.bz2
Content-length: 518
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #12 from Klaus Leppkes <leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de> ---
"I said "+g", not "+g,r". g stands for general operand, so it allows a
non-immediate operand, whether it is in memory or register."
error_large_lvalue.cpp: In function ‘void DoNotOptimize(Tp&) [with Tp =
Large]’:
error_large_lvalue.cpp:16:46: error: inconsistent operand constraints in an
‘asm’
16 | asm volatile("" : "+g"(value) : : "memory");
>From gcc-bugs-return-661352-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 09:47:36 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661352-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6455 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 09:47:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6401 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 09:47:32 -0000
From: "leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:47:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-rRBobdIRd2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03146.txt.bz2
Content-length: 768
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #13 from Klaus Leppkes <leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> (In reply to Klaus Leppkes from comment #9)
> >
> > g++ -c error_large_lvalue.cpp
> > error_large_lvalue.cpp: In function ‘void DoNotOptimize(Tp&) [with Tp =
> > Large]’:
> > error_large_lvalue.cpp:16:48: error: inconsistent operand constraints in an
> > ‘asm’
> > 16 | asm volatile("" : "+g,r"(value) : : "memory");
>
> You just need "+g" and not "+g,r". That is what we have been saying, +m and
> +g are similar.
+g,m is working. I thought the set of type with "m" is a strict subset of the
types with "g". What am I missing here?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661353-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 10:06:01 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661353-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19134 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 10:06:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19045 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 10:05:53 -0000
From: "wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 10:06:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92651-4-Ps8B5q9PQZ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03147.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2355
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
--- Comment #7 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #6)
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> ---
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > > Btw, which variant is actually the fastest for you? abs expansion doesn't
> > > do any cost comparison but just uses direct abs, max and then the xor with
> > > shift as third option (and after that fall back to compare & jump which later
> > > might be if-converted into cmov).
> >
> > Actually the xor with shift is could be the fastest, which improves
> > about 8% on 525.x264_r comparing to the pmaxsd one, and with cmove the
> > improvement is 6.5%.
>
> I see. So I wonder if it makes sense to add some costing checks to
> abs expansion... - the simplest way is probably to make the x86 backends
> have abs patterns and drive expansion itself here.
>
> > I don't think this conversion should happen on every cmove instruction,
> > regardless of how many sse register it would use. I think the simplest way to
> > avoid this is adjusting the cost.
>
> Well, for STV the issue is that "costing" is done on individual
> chains. Note that STV doesn't transform cmovs, it transforms min/max
> instructions which exist on integer modes just for the sake of STV ...
>
> STV (like many other combine-like transforms) doesn't consider the
> global picture (multiple min/max chains in the same code region, etc.)
> but only works locally. So any costing wrenches you throw in has
> an effect on _all_ chains.
>
> Clearly abs expansion had a successful non-cmov path before the STV
> changes and the intention was not to make min/max the new abs expansion
> of choice. So I guess we need to rectify that - and the easiest and
> least intrusive way (for other targets) is to add abs expansion
> patterns.
Thanks for your explanation. The concern is if we add abs expansion patterns on
x86 target, other expansions may be affected by the change like what is done
with smax. And it is a little bit redundant to add such expansion just by
duplicate the original code to generate the xor version.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661354-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:05:49 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661354-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 68565 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:05:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 68485 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:05:42 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:05:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-JoeVDiiZQK@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03148.txt.bz2
Content-length: 285
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
By all types I really meant integral/floating point/vector types, you are
clearing using it with aggregates, those can live just in memory and so should
use "+m".
>From gcc-bugs-return-661356-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:22:26 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661356-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 82541 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:22:26 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 82509 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:22:22 -0000
From: "euloanty at live dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92670] Same error message duplicates for C++20 "deprecated" attribute
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:22:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: euloanty at live dot com
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92670-4-P4ttXMomOM@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03150.txt.bz2
Content-length: 154
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92670
--- Comment #1 from fdlbxtqi <euloanty at live dot com> ---
The same error message generates twice.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661355-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:22:02 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661355-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 81787 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:22:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 81740 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:21:58 -0000
From: "euloanty at live dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92670] New: Same error message duplicates for C++20 "deprecated" attribute
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:22:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: euloanty at live dot com
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
Message-ID: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03149.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2241
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92670
Bug ID: 92670
Summary: Same error message duplicates for C++20 "deprecated"
attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: euloanty at live dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Here is an example:
[[deprecated("sha1 is no longer a secure algorithm, see wikipedia. The
SHAppening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1#The_SHAppening")]]
inline constexpr void flush(sha1& sh);
Then:
D:\hg\fast_io\examples\0048.hash>g++ -o sha1 sha1.cc -Ofast -std=c++2a
-fconcepts
sha1.cc: In function 'int main(int, char**)':
sha1.cc:16:12: warning: 'constexpr void
fast_io::{anonymous}::flush(fast_io::{anonymous}::sha1&)' is deprecated: sha1
is no longer a secure algorithm, see wikipedia. The SHAppening:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1#The_SHAppening
[ttps://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wdeprecated-declarationsdeprecated-declarations]
16 | flush(sha1);
| ^
In file included from ../../include/fast_io_hash.h:4,
from sha1.cc:3:
../../include/fast_io_hash/sha1.h:234:23: note: declared here
234 | inline constexpr void flush(sha1& sh)
| ^~~~~
sha1.cc:16:12: warning: 'constexpr void
fast_io::{anonymous}::flush(fast_io::{anonymous}::sha1&)' is deprecated: sha1
is no longer a secure algorithm, see wikipedia. The SHAppening:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1#The_SHAppening
[ttps://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wdeprecated-declarationsdeprecated-declarations]
16 | flush(sha1);
| ^
In file included from ../../include/fast_io_hash.h:4,
from sha1.cc:3:
../../include/fast_io_hash/sha1.h:234:23: note: declared here
234 | inline constexpr void flush(sha1& sh)
| ^~~~~
Full source code is here:
https://bitbucket.org/ejsvifq_mabmip/fast_io/src/default/include/fast_io_hash/sha1.h
https://bitbucket.org/ejsvifq_mabmip/fast_io/src/default/examples/0048.hash/sha1.cc
>From gcc-bugs-return-661357-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:23:50 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661357-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 83894 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:23:50 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 83846 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:23:46 -0000
From: "euloanty at live dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92670] Same warning message duplicates for C++20 "deprecated" attribute
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:23:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: euloanty at live dot com
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: short_desc
Message-ID: <bug-92670-4-b8l3dbpZA0@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03151.txt.bz2
Content-length: 515
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92670
fdlbxtqi <euloanty at live dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Same error message |Same warning message
|duplicates for C++20 |duplicates for C++20
|"deprecated" attribute |"deprecated" attribute
--- Comment #2 from fdlbxtqi <euloanty at live dot com> ---
Should be
>From gcc-bugs-return-661358-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:24:46 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661358-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 85180 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:24:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 84829 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:24:15 -0000
From: "euloanty at live dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92670] Same warning message duplicates for C++20 "deprecated" attribute
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:24:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: euloanty at live dot com
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92670-4-S115II1hZ3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03152.txt.bz2
Content-length: 192
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92670
--- Comment #3 from fdlbxtqi <euloanty at live dot com> ---
(In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #2)
> Should be
Should be warning message
>From gcc-bugs-return-661359-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:26:17 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661359-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 86989 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:26:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 86958 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:26:13 -0000
From: "dcb314 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92671] New: gcc/c/c-parser.c: minor ( and ) tidyup
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:26:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
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
Message-ID: <bug-92671-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03153.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1791
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92671
Bug ID: 92671
Summary: gcc/c/c-parser.c: minor ( and ) tidyup
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
trunk/gcc/c/c-parser.c:1374:42: style: Clarify calculation precedence for '&'
and '?'. [clarifyCalculation]
trunk/gcc/c/c-parser.c:1375:42: style: Clarify calculation precedence for '&'
and '?'. [clarifyCalculation]
trunk/gcc/c/c-parser.c:1376:43: style: Clarify calculation precedence for '&'
and '?'. [clarifyCalculation]
Diff is
Index: gcc/c/c-parser.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/c/c-parser.c (revision 278700)
+++ gcc/c/c-parser.c (working copy)
@@ -1382,9 +1382,9 @@
warn_cxx_compat = (flags >> 5) & 1;
warn_overlength_strings = (flags >> 6) & 1;
/* See above for why is this needed. */
- warn_c90_c99_compat = (flags >> 7) & 1 ? 1 : ((flags >> 8) & 1 ? -1 : 0);
- warn_c99_c11_compat = (flags >> 9) & 1 ? 1 : ((flags >> 10) & 1 ? -1 : 0);
- warn_c11_c2x_compat = (flags >> 11) & 1 ? 1 : ((flags >> 12) & 1 ? -1 : 0);
+ warn_c90_c99_compat = ((flags >> 7) & 1) ? 1 : (((flags >> 8) & 1) ? -1 :
0);
+ warn_c99_c11_compat = ((flags >> 9) & 1) ? 1 : (((flags >> 10) & 1) ? -1 :
0);
+ warn_c11_c2x_compat = ((flags >> 11) & 1) ? 1 : (((flags >> 12) & 1) ? -1 :
0);
}
/* Helper data structure for parsing #pragma acc routine. */
>From gcc-bugs-return-661360-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:37:59 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661360-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 101411 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:37:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 101347 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 11:37:54 -0000
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92649] dead store elimination by iteration domain pruning
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:37:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92649-4-6EIMViOkH4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92649-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03154.txt.bz2
Content-length: 804
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92649
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92649
>
> Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
>
> --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Or it could be handled by constexpr-like evaluation of the loops
But that's probibitly expensive for large number of iterations and
doesn't work for non-constant niters (but related ones for earlier
vs. later one)
>From gcc-bugs-return-661362-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:41:24 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661362-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 103948 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:41:24 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 103755 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:41:20 -0000
From: "leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/92597] std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm volatile
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92597-4-biInxtkeoo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92597-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03156.txt.bz2
Content-length: 544
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #15 from Klaus Leppkes <leppkes at stce dot rwth-aachen.de> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> By all types I really meant integral/floating point/vector types, you are
> clearing using it with aggregates, those can live just in memory and so
> should use "+m".
1.) So in principle:
std::is_fundamental<Tp>::value==true? g : m ?
2.) What is the difference between +m with just m (+g vs. g etc.)?
Is there any doc available where I can have a further read?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661361-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:41:23 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661361-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 103802 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:41:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 103743 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:41:19 -0000
From: "me at cimba dot li" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92672] New: OpenMP shared clause not respected without pointer to the variable
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:41:00 -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: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: me at cimba dot li
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
Message-ID: <bug-92672-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03155.txt.bz2
Content-length: 5991
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92672
Bug ID: 92672
Summary: OpenMP shared clause not respected without pointer to
the variable
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: me at cimba dot li
Target Milestone: ---
It seems that if the address of a stack variable is never taken, it is treated
by child OpenMP tasks with firstprivate semantics, even though it is declared
as shared.
The following example compiles to different code (that behaves differently) if
"&i;" is removed:
#include <iostream>
#include <omp.h>
int main()
{
omp_lock_t lock;
omp_init_lock(&lock);
int i = 1;
&i;
#pragma omp parallel shared(i)
#pragma omp single
{
omp_set_lock(&lock);
#pragma omp task shared(i)
{
// enter task, then suspend until i = 2
omp_set_lock(&lock);
std::cout << i;
omp_unset_lock(&lock);
}
i = 2;
// unset lock after i is set to 2 and child task is created
// child task is possibly started and suspended at this point
omp_unset_lock(&lock);
}
omp_destroy_lock(&lock);
std::cout << std::endl;
return 0;
}
- With "&i", the code prints 2. The task’s verbose assembly is as follows:
.LFE2010:
.size main._omp_fn.0, .-main._omp_fn.0
.type main._omp_fn.1, @function
main._omp_fn.1:
.LFB2011:
.cfi_startproc
.cfi_personality 0x3,__gxx_personality_v0
.cfi_lsda 0x3,.LLSDA2011
pushq %rbp #
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
.cfi_offset 6, -16
movq %rsp, %rbp #,
.cfi_def_cfa_register 6
subq $16, %rsp #,
movq %rdi, -8(%rbp) # .omp_data_i, .omp_data_i
# test.cc:18: omp_set_lock(&lock);
movq -8(%rbp), %rax # .omp_data_i, tmp86
movq (%rax), %rax # .omp_data_i_2(D)->lock, _3
movq %rax, %rdi # _3,
call omp_set_lock #
# test.cc:19: std::cout << i;
movq -8(%rbp), %rax # .omp_data_i, tmp87
movq 8(%rax), %rax # .omp_data_i_2(D)->i, _6
movl (%rax), %eax # *_6, i.0_7
# test.cc:19: std::cout << i;
movl %eax, %esi # i.0_7,
movl $_ZSt4cout, %edi #,
call _ZNSolsEi #
# test.cc:20: omp_unset_lock(&lock);
movq -8(%rbp), %rax # .omp_data_i, tmp88
movq (%rax), %rax # .omp_data_i_2(D)->lock, _9
movq %rax, %rdi # _9,
call omp_unset_lock #
# test.cc:15: #pragma omp task shared(i)
leave
.cfi_def_cfa 7, 8
ret
.cfi_endproc
- Without "&i", the code prints 1. The task’s verbose assembly is as follows:
.LFE2010:
.size main._omp_fn.0, .-main._omp_fn.0
.type main._omp_fn.1, @function
main._omp_fn.1:
.LFB2011:
.cfi_startproc
.cfi_personality 0x3,__gxx_personality_v0
.cfi_lsda 0x3,.LLSDA2011
pushq %rbp #
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
.cfi_offset 6, -16
movq %rsp, %rbp #,
.cfi_def_cfa_register 6
subq $32, %rsp #,
movq %rdi, -24(%rbp) # .omp_data_i, .omp_data_i
# test.cc:15: #pragma omp task shared(i)
movq -24(%rbp), %rax # .omp_data_i, tmp84
movl 8(%rax), %eax # .omp_data_i_2(D)->i, tmp85
movl %eax, -4(%rbp) # tmp85, i
# test.cc:18: omp_set_lock(&lock);
movq -24(%rbp), %rax # .omp_data_i, tmp86
movq (%rax), %rax # .omp_data_i_2(D)->lock, _4
movq %rax, %rdi # _4,
call omp_set_lock #
# test.cc:19: std::cout << i;
movl -4(%rbp), %eax # i, tmp87
movl %eax, %esi # tmp87,
movl $_ZSt4cout, %edi #,
call _ZNSolsEi #
# test.cc:20: omp_unset_lock(&lock);
movq -24(%rbp), %rax # .omp_data_i, tmp88
movq (%rax), %rax # .omp_data_i_2(D)->lock, _8
movq %rax, %rdi # _8,
call omp_unset_lock #
# test.cc:15: #pragma omp task shared(i)
leave
.cfi_def_cfa 7, 8
ret
.cfi_endproc
Basically the task input data, a structure called .omp_data_i, contains i and
the lock (sorry if the assembly is not the best way to look at this).
- With "&i", i is a pointer and is dereferenced after omp_set_lock is called
- Without "&i", i is passed as a value in this structure and is pushed on the
stack before omp_set_lock. Therefore, flushes implied by the lock functions
never affect the access to i and the task sees the outdated value when
acquiring the lock.
I have also tried:
- setting i as volatile, which has no impact
- adding flushes:
- both as OpenMP pragmas and volatile __asm__("mfence":::"memory"); on x86
- both after setting i in the generating task, and before accessing i in
the child task
>From gcc-bugs-return-661363-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:49:29 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661363-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 112059 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:49:29 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 112019 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:49:25 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug debug/92664] Wrong .debug_line section information when compiling stdin input with -g3
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:49:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: debug
X-Bugzilla-Version: 7.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-debug
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: cc attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92664-4-ArQOQUl83r@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92664-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92664-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03157.txt.bz2
Content-length: 512
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92664
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47359
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47359&action=edit
gcc10-pr92664.patch
Untested fix.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661364-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 11:56:31 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661364-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 116326 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 11:56:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 116291 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 11:56:28 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92669] [10 Regression] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn at gcc/cfganal.c:1034 since r278666
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:56:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-92669-4-lCh2KvMQgJ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03158.txt.bz2
Content-length: 500
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92669
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Mine. The only pass computing only preorder...
>From gcc-bugs-return-661365-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:03:49 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661365-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 122286 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:03:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 122030 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 12:03:42 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/90992] [9/10 Regression] -Wnoexcept produce false positive
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:03:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-90992-4-hi1GxcPyXR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-90992-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-90992-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03159.txt.bz2
Content-length: 3008
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90992
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> This suppresses the second warning if the first is suppressed:
>
> --- a/gcc/cp/except.c
> +++ b/gcc/cp/except.c
> @@ -1158,11 +1158,11 @@ maybe_noexcept_warning (tree fn)
> {
> if (TREE_NOTHROW (fn))
> {
> - warning (OPT_Wnoexcept, "noexcept-expression evaluates to %<false%> "
> - "because of a call to %qD", fn);
> - warning_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn), OPT_Wnoexcept,
> - "but %qD does not throw; perhaps "
> - "it should be declared %<noexcept%>", fn);
> + if (warning (OPT_Wnoexcept, "noexcept-expression evaluates to
> %<false%> "
> + "because of a call to %qD", fn))
> + warning_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn), OPT_Wnoexcept,
> + "but %qD does not throw; perhaps "
> + "it should be declared %<noexcept%>", fn);
> }
> }
>
>
>
> And this makes the first warning depend on whether the second one is in a
> system header:
>
> --- a/gcc/cp/except.c
> +++ b/gcc/cp/except.c
> @@ -1158,11 +1158,20 @@ maybe_noexcept_warning (tree fn)
> {
> if (TREE_NOTHROW (fn))
> {
> + location_t loc = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn);
> +
> + const bool warn_in_system_headers = global_dc->dc_warn_system_headers;
> + if (in_system_header_at (input_location) && !in_system_header_at (loc)
> + && !warn_in_system_headers)
> + global_dc->dc_warn_system_headers = 1;
> warning (OPT_Wnoexcept, "noexcept-expression evaluates to %<false%> "
> "because of a call to %qD", fn);
> - warning_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn), OPT_Wnoexcept,
> + warning_at (loc, OPT_Wnoexcept,
> "but %qD does not throw; perhaps "
> "it should be declared %<noexcept%>", fn);
> + if (in_system_header_at (input_location) && !in_system_header_at (loc)
> + && !warn_in_system_headers)
> + global_dc->dc_warn_system_headers = 0;
> }
> }
>
>
> I don't know which of these is preferable, because I'm not sure if the point
> of the warning is to suggest changing Automatic, or the code in the system
> header.
I'd say the second looks insufficient, system headers vs. non-system headers is
just one of the reasons why a warning might be disabled, it can be #pragma GCC
diagnostic ignored too. Purely from diagnostic POV, I'd say it should be
auto_diagnostic_group d;
if (warning (OPT_Wnoexcept, "...", fn))
inform (loc, "...", fn);
Have you posted the patch?
The warning has been added by Jason in r160842.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661367-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:04:40 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661367-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 125846 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:04:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 125108 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 12:04:34 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92669] [10 Regression] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn at gcc/cfganal.c:1034 since r278666
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:04:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92669-4-ztt8OlOdjy@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03161.txt.bz2
Content-length: 491
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92669
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Nov 26 12:03:58 2019
New Revision: 278723
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278723&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-26 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR middle-end/92669
* cfganal.c (pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn): Deal with
NULL pre_order.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cfganal.c
>From gcc-bugs-return-661366-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:04:06 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661366-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123265 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:04:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123218 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 12:04:01 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92669] [10 Regression] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute_fn at gcc/cfganal.c:1034 since r278666
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:04:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92669-4-NsCCi3gaUB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92669-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03160.txt.bz2
Content-length: 429
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92669
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661368-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:16:38 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661368-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10841 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:16:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10713 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 12:16:28 -0000
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92651] [10 Regression] Unnecessary stv transform in some x86 backend
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:16:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92651-4-tLkeKiK4q2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03162.txt.bz2
Content-length: 3218
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
>
> --- Comment #7 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> ---
> (In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #6)
> > On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com wrote:
> >
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
> > >
> > > --- Comment #4 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> ---
> > > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > > > Btw, which variant is actually the fastest for you? abs expansion doesn't
> > > > do any cost comparison but just uses direct abs, max and then the xor with
> > > > shift as third option (and after that fall back to compare & jump which later
> > > > might be if-converted into cmov).
> > >
> > > Actually the xor with shift is could be the fastest, which improves
> > > about 8% on 525.x264_r comparing to the pmaxsd one, and with cmove the
> > > improvement is 6.5%.
> >
> > I see. So I wonder if it makes sense to add some costing checks to
> > abs expansion... - the simplest way is probably to make the x86 backends
> > have abs patterns and drive expansion itself here.
> >
> > > I don't think this conversion should happen on every cmove instruction,
> > > regardless of how many sse register it would use. I think the simplest way to
> > > avoid this is adjusting the cost.
> >
> > Well, for STV the issue is that "costing" is done on individual
> > chains. Note that STV doesn't transform cmovs, it transforms min/max
> > instructions which exist on integer modes just for the sake of STV ...
> >
> > STV (like many other combine-like transforms) doesn't consider the
> > global picture (multiple min/max chains in the same code region, etc.)
> > but only works locally. So any costing wrenches you throw in has
> > an effect on _all_ chains.
> >
> > Clearly abs expansion had a successful non-cmov path before the STV
> > changes and the intention was not to make min/max the new abs expansion
> > of choice. So I guess we need to rectify that - and the easiest and
> > least intrusive way (for other targets) is to add abs expansion
> > patterns.
>
> Thanks for your explanation. The concern is if we add abs expansion patterns on
> x86 target, other expansions may be affected by the change like what is done
> with smax. And it is a little bit redundant to add such expansion just by
> duplicate the original code to generate the xor version.
Sure. Another option would be to enhance STV even further
(or add some peephole patterns - combine runs before STV2) to
transform the
psubd xmm3, xmm0
psubd xmm0, xmm1
pmaxsd xmm0, xmm3
into
psubd %xmm3, %xmm0
pabsd %xmm0, %xmm0
for enhancing STV that means adding abs() patterns (or adding
combine-like matching to the pass which I'd suggest not do).
Clearly that the above conversion isn't done is a generic
missed optimization. Maybe you can benchmark that as well
though I guess it won't come near the xor variant?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661369-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:18:52 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661369-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12669 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:18:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12630 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 12:18:47 -0000
From: "juergen.reuter at desy dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92673] New: OCaml fails to link with recent trunk
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:18:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
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
Message-ID: <bug-92673-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03163.txt.bz2
Content-length: 3682
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92673
Bug ID: 92673
Summary: OCaml fails to link with recent trunk
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
Target Milestone: ---
I tested both OCaml 4.02.3 and 4.09.0. For both, linking with gcc 10.0, your
development version r278668 svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc fails (cf. below). This
problem was observed both on Debian Linux as well as on MacOSX. I don't know
whether this is a regression on the side of the linker of gcc, or the linker
has become stricter, and there is some sloppyness in the build/link system of
OCaml. I reported this also with the OCaml development team:
https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/issues/9144
gcc information:
Path: /usr/local/packages/gcc_10.0
Working Copy Root Path: /usr/local/packages/gcc_10.0
URL: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Relative URL: ^/trunk
Repository Root: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc
Repository UUID: 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
Revision: 278668
Node Kind: directory
Schedule: normal
Last Changed Author: gjl
Last Changed Rev: 278668
Last Changed Date: 2019-11-25 09:59:06 +0100 (Mon, 25 Nov 2019)
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin18.7.0/10.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin18.7.0
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr/local/ --with-gmp=/usr/local/
--with-mpfr=/usr/local/ --with-mpc=/usr/local/ --enable-checking=release
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 10.0.0 20191125 (experimental) (GCC)
4.02.3:
gcc -Wl,-no_compact_unwind -o ocamlrun
prims.o libcamlrun.a -lcurses -lpthread
duplicate symbol '_caml_code_fragments_table' in:
libcamlrun.a(backtrace.o)
libcamlrun.a(fix_code.o)
duplicate symbol '_caml_code_fragments_table' in:
libcamlrun.a(backtrace.o)
libcamlrun.a(startup.o)
duplicate symbol '_caml_code_fragments_table' in:
libcamlrun.a(backtrace.o)
libcamlrun.a(ints.o)
duplicate symbol '_caml_code_fragments_table' in:
libcamlrun.a(backtrace.o)
libcamlrun.a(extern.o)
duplicate symbol '_caml_code_fragments_table' in:
libcamlrun.a(backtrace.o)
libcamlrun.a(intern.o)
duplicate symbol '_caml_code_fragments_table' in:
libcamlrun.a(backtrace.o)
libcamlrun.a(meta.o)
duplicate symbol '_caml_code_fragments_table' in:
libcamlrun.a(backtrace.o)
libcamlrun.a(debugger.o)
ld: 7 duplicate symbols for architecture x86_64
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
4.09.0:
gcc -shared -flat_namespace -undefined suppress -Wl,-no_compact_unwind -o
libcamlrun_shared.so interp_bpic.o misc_bpic.o stacks_bpic.o fix_code_bpic.o
startup_aux_bpic.o startup_byt_bpic.o freelist_bpic.o major_gc_bpic.o
minor_gc_bpic.o memory_bpic.o alloc_bpic.o roots_byt_bpic.o globroots_bpic.o
fail_byt_bpic.o signals_bpic.o signals_byt_bpic.o printexc_bpic.o
backtrace_byt_bpic.o backtrace_bpic.o compare_bpic.o ints_bpic.o floats_bpic.o
str_bpic.o array_bpic.o io_bpic.o extern_bpic.o intern_bpic.o hash_bpic.o
sys_bpic.o meta_bpic.o parsing_bpic.o gc_ctrl_bpic.o md5_bpic.o obj_bpic.o
lexing_bpic.o callback_bpic.o debugger_bpic.o weak_bpic.o compact_bpic.o
finalise_bpic.o custom_bpic.o dynlink_bpic.o spacetime_byt_bpic.o afl_bpic.o
unix_bpic.o bigarray_bpic.o main_bpic.o -lm -lpthread
duplicate symbol '_caml_debug_info' in:
backtrace_byt_bpic.o
backtrace_bpic.o
ld: 1 duplicate symbol for architecture x86_64
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>From gcc-bugs-return-661370-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:37:16 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661370-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27638 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:37:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27556 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 12:37:12 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92626] [9/10 Regression] Performance regression in compress-rar on CLX server
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:37:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization, needs-bisection
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92626-4-2UKm7sHEaP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92626-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92626-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03164.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1212
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92626
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Neither the "source code" you've attached, nor
https://openbenchmarking.org/innhold/0e3b246e384347a8e31dbc2b62d05eec351d5d64
looks like any kind of source code to me, all I see is prebuilt binaries of a
proprietary compress program which doesn't have source available (all I can see
is unrar sources, but from what I can see, the "benchmark" uses the
compression, not decompression, and uses the proprietary binaries).
So, I don't see how this can be related to gcc.
Unless the difference is in the libraries the rar binary depends on, which is
glibc, libgcc and libstdc++.
In that case, the first step would be to find out which one of those it is if
any.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661371-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:48:56 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661371-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 42051 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:48:56 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 42017 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 12:48:51 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/92674] New: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4406 since r240291
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:48:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
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 keywords bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter cc target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03165.txt.bz2
Content-length: 5456
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92674
Bug ID: 92674
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gimple_phi_arg, at
gimple.h:4406 since r240291
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I see the following ICE, it's reduced from icewm package:
$ cat 1.ii
class YWMApp {
public:
YWMApp(const char *);
};
class YIcon {
public:
static int getIcon(const char *);
};
YWMApp::YWMApp(const char *) { YIcon::getIcon(""); }
char main_overrideTheme;
main() { YWMApp app(&main_overrideTheme); }
$ cat 2.ii
class mstring {
public:
int compareTo(const mstring &) const;
};
int mstring::compareTo(const mstring &) const {}
class refcounted {
public:
virtual void __destroy();
};
class YIcon;
template < class > class ref {
YIcon *ptr;
public:
~ref() { ptr->__destroy(); }
};
class upath {
public:
upath(const char *);
mstring path() { return fPath; }
mstring fPath;
};
int cacheFind_r;
class YIcon : public refcounted {
ref< YIcon > getIcon(const char *);
int cacheFind(upath);
public:
ref< YIcon > *getItemPtr();
} iconCache;
int YIcon::cacheFind(upath name) {
ref< YIcon > __trans_tmp_2;
while (cacheFind_r) {
{
__trans_tmp_2 = *getItemPtr();
}
ref< YIcon > found = __trans_tmp_2;
mstring __trans_tmp_1;
name.path().compareTo(__trans_tmp_1);
}
}
ref< YIcon > YIcon::getIcon(const char *name) { cacheFind(name); }
$ g++ -O2 -fPIC 1.ii 2.ii -flto=16
1.ii:11:1: warning: ISO C++ forbids declaration of ‘main’ with no type
[-Wreturn-type]
11 | main() { YWMApp app(&main_overrideTheme); }
| ^~~~
2.ii: In member function ‘int mstring::compareTo(const mstring&) const’:
2.ii:5:48: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void
[-Wreturn-type]
5 | int mstring::compareTo(const mstring &) const {}
| ^
2.ii: In destructor ‘ref< <template-parameter-1-1> >::~ref()’:
2.ii:16:15: warning: invalid use of incomplete type ‘class YIcon’
16 | ~ref() { ptr->__destroy(); }
| ^~
2.ii:11:7: note: forward declaration of ‘class YIcon’
11 | class YIcon;
| ^~~~~
2.ii: In member function ‘int YIcon::cacheFind(upath)’:
2.ii:42:1: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void
[-Wreturn-type]
42 | }
| ^
2.ii: In member function ‘ref<YIcon> YIcon::getIcon(const char*)’:
2.ii:43:66: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void
[-Wreturn-type]
43 | ref< YIcon > YIcon::getIcon(const char *name) { cacheFind(name); }
| ^
1.ii:7:14: warning: ‘getIcon’ violates the C++ One Definition Rule [-Wodr]
7 | static int getIcon(const char *);
| ^
2.ii:43:14: note: ‘getIcon’ was previously declared here
43 | ref< YIcon > YIcon::getIcon(const char *name) { cacheFind(name); }
| ^
2.ii:43:14: note: code may be misoptimized unless ‘-fno-strict-aliasing’ is
used
during IPA pass: inline
2.ii: In function ‘getIcon.constprop.isra’:
2.ii:43:14: internal compiler error: in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4406
43 | ref< YIcon > YIcon::getIcon(const char *name) { cacheFind(name); }
| ^
0x639113 gimple_phi_arg
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple.h:4406
0x639113 gimple_phi_arg
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple.h:4414
0x639113 gimple_phi_arg_def
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple.h:4457
0x639113 walk_ssa_copies
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c:835
0xac7f71 ipa_polymorphic_call_context::ipa_polymorphic_call_context(tree_node*,
tree_node*, gimple*, tree_node**)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/ipa-polymorphic-call.c:898
0xa00ed6 possible_polymorphic_call_targets(tree_node*, gimple*, bool*, void**)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/ipa-utils.h:134
0xa00ed6 gimple_fold_call
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple-fold.c:4348
0xa0176b fold_stmt_1
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple-fold.c:5112
0xd5dea6 fold_marked_statements
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-inline.c:5288
0xd6cbd1 optimize_inline_calls(tree_node*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-inline.c:5369
0x15fac04 inline_transform(cgraph_node*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/ipa-inline-transform.c:720
0xc0eeaa execute_one_ipa_transform_pass
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/passes.c:2231
0xc0eeaa execute_all_ipa_transforms(bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/passes.c:2270
0x897561 cgraph_node::expand()
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cgraphunit.c:2189
0x89853b expand_all_functions
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cgraphunit.c:2335
0x89853b symbol_table::compile()
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cgraphunit.c:2685
0x7f49e9 lto_main()
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/lto/lto.c:658
>From gcc-bugs-return-661372-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:49:32 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661372-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 43706 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:49:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 43656 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 12:49:28 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/92674] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4406 since r240291
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:49:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc target_milestone everconfirmed cf_known_to_fail
Message-ID: <bug-92674-4-O6OwzHUaCk@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03166.txt.bz2
Content-length: 602
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92674
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
CC| |kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail| |10.0, 8.3.0, 9.2.0
>From gcc-bugs-return-661373-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 12:59:29 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661373-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52366 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 12:59:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52319 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 12:59:23 -0000
From: "xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:59:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-aiveazQU36@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03167.txt.bz2
Content-length: 662
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang
--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang> ---
Is it appropriate?
Though on both 32-bit and 64-bit x86 "1ul" is good for a size_t, but I believe
there is some platform where "1ull" is necessary.
Maybe I'm wrong. But if I'm correct, suggesting "1ul" is encouraging bad code.
I'll use "(size_t) 1 << 32" for this.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661374-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:01:19 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661374-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 54388 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:01:19 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 54307 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:01:11 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/92626] [9/10 Regression] Performance regression in compress-rar on CLX server
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:01:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization, needs-bisection
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92626-4-oCcczmdMM0@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92626-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92626-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03168.txt.bz2
Content-length: 584
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92626
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'd say libgcc is extremely unlikely, for glibc it depends on whether the
different clear snapshots (or releases or what it is) have each glibc compiled
by a particular gcc snapshot or not, libstdc++ is unlikely, but it could be it,
or in theory it could be kernel too, as long as you build it each time with the
different gcc snapshot.
So, I'd really recommend swapping the libraries one by one and rebenchmarking
each time, including swapping the kernel.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661375-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:10:41 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661375-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 59770 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:10:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 59702 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:10:37 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/92674] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4406 since r240291
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:10:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-92674-4-y25kOwG4sa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03169.txt.bz2
Content-length: 834
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92674
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
__trans_tmp_2$ptr_16 = PHI <>
when inlining fold_marked_stmts prunes dead EH edges immediately but that
causes things like the above where IPA devirt now walking the SSA use-def
chain. fold_marked_stmts needs to first fold and _then_ purge edges
like so many other passes do. The alternative would be to use
a bottom-up walk of the CFG but I guess that's too intricated there.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661376-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:11:19 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661376-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60669 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:11:18 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 60640 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:11:11 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92673] OCaml fails to link with recent trunk
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:11:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92673-4-20xZFnKnlD@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92673-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92673-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03170.txt.bz2
Content-length: 488
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92673
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Try -fcommon, it's default recently was swapped to -fno-common.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661377-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:15:02 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661377-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 62809 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:15:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 62701 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:14:58 -0000
From: "jg at jguk dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92642] Enhance shift-count-overflow output
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:15:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: jg at jguk dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92642-4-PQAWhn3bye@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92642-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92642-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03171.txt.bz2
Content-length: 798
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92642
--- Comment #4 from Jonny Grant <jg at jguk dot org> ---
This test case for similar does have a nice warning.
Interestingly, G++ does not indicate that 5147483647 is already 34 bits long:
100110010110100000101110111111111
which is more than an 'int' (32bit) which as Jonathan has highlighted, to be
the way numbers are treated in C/C++ when they do not have UL suffix.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
size_t i = 5147483647 << 32;
printf("%zu\n", i);
}
#1 with x86-64 gcc (trunk)
<source>: In function 'int main()':
<source>:5:23: warning: result of '(5147483647 << 32)' requires 66 bits to
represent, but 'long int' only has 64 bits [-Wshift-overflow=]
5 | size_t i = 5147483647 << 32;
| ~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~
>From gcc-bugs-return-661378-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:25:39 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661378-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 69706 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:25:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 69682 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:25:34 -0000
From: "juergen.reuter at desy dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92673] OCaml fails to link with recent trunk
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:25:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
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: resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92673-4-OyRr845OVB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92673-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92673-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03172.txt.bz2
Content-length: 592
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92673
Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Try -fcommon, it's default recently was swapped to -fno-common.
The default for gcc was changed? Which commit was this? I cannot find any
reference in the ChangeLog.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661379-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:26:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661379-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 70528 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:26:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 70493 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:26:10 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/92674] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4406 since r240291
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:26:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92674-4-oFQmspXGic@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03173.txt.bz2
Content-length: 417
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92674
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Oh, it's not there but
#8 0x00000000011ba073 in expand_call_inline (
bb=<basic_block 0x7ffff663b4e0 (11)>, stmt=<gimple_call 0x7ffff6641080>,
id=0x7fffffffd6e0) at /tmp/trunk/gcc/tree-inline.c:5160
5160 gimple_purge_dead_eh_edges (return_block);
does the purging.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661380-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:27:05 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661380-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 71784 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:27:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 71567 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:27:00 -0000
From: "matz at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W0J1ZyBjKysvOTI2NjJdIGNoYW5nZSBpbiBnY2MgOCB2cyA5OiBjYWxsIG9m?= =?UTF-8?B?IG92ZXJsb2FkZWQg4oCYYmFzaWNfc3RyaW5nKDxicmFjZS1lbmNsb3NlZCBp?= =?UTF-8?B?bml0aWFsaXplciBsaXN0PinigJkgaXMgYW1iaWd1b3Vz?Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: matz at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92662-4-fPLMHfXn2C@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03174.txt.bz2
Content-length: 794
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92662
--- Comment #4 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Even though bugzilla isn't really for educating people, I'd still like to ask
why the two conversion sequences are deemed either incomparable or equal. In
S b { moveme(t) };
the return value of moveme() has type Test&&. There exists a conversion
operator exactly matching that type, and giving S&&, which can be used for
initialization. Why is the sequence going via 'const S &' as good as that one,
even though it requires a change in refness?
(In a way it's simply irritating that, despite the same signatures of all
involved functions, the compiler differs between both cases, in particular the
call to str() in 'S a {moveme(t).str()}' also gives type S&&).
>From gcc-bugs-return-661381-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:34:13 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661381-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 79067 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:34:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 78999 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:34:09 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/92674] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gimple_phi_arg, at gimple.h:4406 since r240291
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:34:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92674-4-wb47jB2RGo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92674-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03175.txt.bz2
Content-length: 331
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92674
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47360
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47360&action=edit
patch
I am testing the attached. The testcase seems to be too much reduced to be
useful for the testsuite.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661382-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:43:39 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661382-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 85122 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:43:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 85074 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:43:34 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92582] [10 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault with concept on constructor
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:43:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: priority bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92582-4-hrQ0E8OiVz@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92582-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92582-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03176.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1057
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92582
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Reduced testcase:
template <class a, class> concept b = requires(a(c)) { c; };
template <typename> struct A {
template <typename c> static constexpr bool d = b<c, int>;
template <typename c> A(c) requires d<c>;
};
A<void> e { 0 };
With s/concept/concept bool/ and -std=c++17 -fconcepts instead of -std=c++2a
this compiled before r276764 and starting with that revision ICEs.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661383-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:44:37 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661383-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 86140 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:44:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 86105 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:44:33 -0000
From: "jules at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/91985] Unsupported DFP not diagnosed with constants or built-in functions
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:44:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: accepts-invalid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jules at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-91985-4-Ov1KW8wVaC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-91985-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-91985-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03177.txt.bz2
Content-length: 3295
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91985
jules at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jules at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from jules at gcc dot gnu.org ---
SVN r278684 appears to cause a problem with offloading compilation in lto1 with
an nvptx offloading-enabled compiler. The following backtrace is from
libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/nestedfn5.f90, but many other tests fail
also.
lto1: internal compiler error: in operator[], at vec.h:867
0x894d9a vec<tree_node*, va_heap, vl_embed>::operator[](unsigned int)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/vec.h:867
0x893924 vec<tree_node*, va_heap, vl_ptr>::operator[](unsigned int)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/vec.h:1433
0x1366f4a streamer_tree_cache_get_tree
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/tree-streamer.h:98
0x136b605 streamer_get_pickled_tree(lto_input_block*, data_in*)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/tree-streamer-in.c:1110
0xde36fc lto_input_tree_1(lto_input_block*, data_in*, LTO_tags, unsigned int)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto-streamer-in.c:1505
0xde3958 lto_input_tree(lto_input_block*, data_in*)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto-streamer-in.c:1552
0x136a982 lto_input_ts_list_tree_pointers
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/tree-streamer-in.c:863
0x136b4aa streamer_read_tree_body(lto_input_block*, data_in*, tree_node*)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/tree-streamer-in.c:1075
0xde3303 lto_read_tree_1
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto-streamer-in.c:1375
0xde3480 lto_read_tree
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto-streamer-in.c:1416
0xde389e lto_input_tree_1(lto_input_block*, data_in*, LTO_tags, unsigned int)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto-streamer-in.c:1528
0xde34fa lto_input_scc(lto_input_block*, data_in*, unsigned int*, unsigned
int*)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto-streamer-in.c:1440
0x88dd1c lto_read_decls
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto/lto-common.c:1830
0x88ed54 lto_file_finalize
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto/lto-common.c:2227
0x88edae lto_create_files_from_ids
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto/lto-common.c:2237
0x88ef93 lto_file_read
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto/lto-common.c:2292
0x891ee9 read_cgraph_and_symbols(unsigned int, char const**)
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto/lto-common.c:2744
0x8698f3 lto_main()
/scratch/jbrown/nvptx-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/lto/lto.c:630
It looks like something is unprepared to handle a NULL_TREE or error_mark_node
-- I've not finished investigating.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661384-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:51:01 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661384-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91837 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:51:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91604 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:50:57 -0000
From: "joel.hutton at arm dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/92391] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c FAILs
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:51:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joel.hutton at arm dot com
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92391-4-hhom0GHk93@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03178.txt.bz2
Content-length: 173
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
--- Comment #6 from Joel Hutton <joel.hutton at arm dot com> ---
This should be fixed with Richard Sandifords changes.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661385-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:52:08 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661385-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 94338 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:52:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 94284 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:52:02 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92654] [8/9/10 Regression] internal compiler error: in lookup_template_class_1
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:52:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc target_milestone short_desc
Message-ID: <bug-92654-4-zpzyJnavfR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92654-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92654-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03179.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2672
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92654
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |8.4
Summary|internal compiler error: in |[8/9/10 Regression]
|lookup_template_class_1 |internal compiler error: in
| |lookup_template_class_1
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The #c0 testcase started to ICE with r259043, before it has been rejected:
pr92654.C: In instantiation of ‘am() [with <template-parameter-1-1> =
p]::<lambda(auto:1)> [with auto:1 = a::c<int, 0>]’:
pr92654.C:13:4: required from ‘void ad(ab, a::e<i, ac ...>) [with ab = am()
[with <template-parameter-1-1> = p]::<lambda(auto:1)>; i = int; i ...ac = {0,
1}]’
pr92654.C:19:4: required from ‘void k(ab) [with auto j = 2; ab = am() [with
<template-parameter-1-1> = p]::<lambda(auto:1)>]’
pr92654.C:24:12: required from ‘void ah(ab) [with ag = n; ab = am() [with
<template-parameter-1-1> = p]::<lambda(auto:1)>]’
pr92654.C:32:7: required from ‘void am() [with <template-parameter-1-1> = p]’
pr92654.C:42:18: required from here
pr92654.C:35:4: error: could not convert template argument ‘b’ from ‘const
a::c<int, 0>’ to ‘n’
if constexpr (o<b>::aq)
^~
pr92654.C: In instantiation of ‘am() [with <template-parameter-1-1> =
p]::<lambda(auto:1)> [with auto:1 = a::c<int, 1>]’:
pr92654.C:13:4: required from ‘void ad(ab, a::e<i, ac ...>) [with ab = am()
[with <template-parameter-1-1> = p]::<lambda(auto:1)>; i = int; i ...ac = {0,
1}]’
pr92654.C:19:4: required from ‘void k(ab) [with auto j = 2; ab = am() [with
<template-parameter-1-1> = p]::<lambda(auto:1)>]’
pr92654.C:24:12: required from ‘void ah(ab) [with ag = n; ab = am() [with
<template-parameter-1-1> = p]::<lambda(auto:1)>]’
pr92654.C:32:7: required from ‘void am() [with <template-parameter-1-1> = p]’
pr92654.C:42:18: required from here
pr92654.C:35:4: error: could not convert template argument ‘b’ from ‘const
a::c<int, 1>’ to ‘n’
>From gcc-bugs-return-661386-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:53:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661386-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 95534 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:53:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 95503 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:53:09 -0000
From: "schwab@linux-m68k.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92673] OCaml fails to link with recent trunk
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:53:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: schwab@linux-m68k.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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: resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92673-4-09MV226kN3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92673-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92673-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03180.txt.bz2
Content-length: 292
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92673
Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
>From gcc-bugs-return-661387-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 13:53:58 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661387-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 97499 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 13:53:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 97415 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 13:53:52 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92583] [8/9/10 Regression] internal compiler error: in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15552
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:53:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc target_milestone short_desc
Message-ID: <bug-92583-4-wqQgTbDbHF@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92583-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92583-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03181.txt.bz2
Content-length: 822
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92583
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |8.4
Summary|internal compiler error: in |[8/9/10 Regression]
|tsubst_copy, at |internal compiler error: in
|cp/pt.c:15552 |tsubst_copy, at
| |cp/pt.c:15552
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Like PR92654, started to ICE with r259043.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661388-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:06:05 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661388-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 109452 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:06:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 109306 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 14:05:52 -0000
From: "ro at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/92391] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c FAILs
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:06:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92391-4-pGFQ55gzK3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03182.txt.bz2
Content-length: 829
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Joel Hutton from comment #6)
> This should be fixed with Richard Sandifords changes.
Unfortunately, it isn't. As of last night (r278688), I see
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump slp1
"vectorizing stmts using SLP"
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c scan-tree-dump slp1 "vectorizing stmts using SLP"
for both 32 and 64-bit.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661389-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:06:45 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661389-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 111887 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:06:45 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 111820 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 14:06:42 -0000
From: "ro at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/92391] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c FAILs
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:06:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.isobsolete attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92391-4-ReKmeKcj4C@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03183.txt.bz2
Content-length: 560
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #47187|0 |1
is obsolete| |
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47361
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47361&action=edit
32-bit sparc-sun-solaris2.11 bb-slp-40.c.162t.slp1
Current dump.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661390-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:12:36 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661390-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 116945 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:12:35 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 116890 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 14:12:31 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/92510] [10 Regression] ICE in native_encode_rtx, at simplify-rtx.c:6272
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:12:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92510-4-fzTY80AsvA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92510-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92510-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03184.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1786
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92510
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Started with r275959. Slightly cleaned up testcase:
/* { dg-options "-O1 -ftree-loop-vectorize -fno-forward-propagate
-fno-tree-scev-cprop" } */
int v;
long int
foo (long int x)
{
signed char i;
for (i = 0; i < 8; ++i)
x |= !!v;
return x + i;
}
The ICE happens during combine of
(insn 14 13 15 2 (set (subreg:DI (reg:V1DI 96 [ vect_x_12.7 ]) 0)
(ne:DI (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
(const_int 0 [0]))) "pr92510.c":9:7 701 {*setcc_di_1}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
(nil)))
into
(insn 15 14 16 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 99)
(ior:DI (reg:DI 100)
(subreg:DI (reg:V1DI 96 [ vect_x_12.7 ]) 0)))
(clobber (reg:CC 17 flags))
]) "pr92510.c":11:12 454 {*iordi_1}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 100)
(expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:CC 17 flags)
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:V1DI 96 [ vect_x_12.7 ])
(nil)))))
subst creates there:
(ior:DI (subreg:DI (ne:V1DI (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
(const_int 0 [0])) 0)
(reg:DI 100))
if_then_else_cond then uses (const_int 1) as true and native_encode_rtx is
unhappy about trying to interpret a VOIDmode CONST_INT as something with
non-scalar mode (V1DImode).
>From gcc-bugs-return-661391-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:24:30 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661391-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8922 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:24:30 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8465 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 14:24:26 -0000
From: "jg at jguk dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92675] New: sign-conversion C++ unsigned int j = -1;
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:24:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jg at jguk dot org
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
Message-ID: <bug-92675-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03185.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1047
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92675
Bug ID: 92675
Summary: sign-conversion C++ unsigned int j = -1;
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jg at jguk dot org
Target Milestone: ---
Could G++ also give a nice error for -Wsign-conversion ?
unsigned int j = -1;
GCC does already for C code, as does Clang C++
#1 with x86-64 gcc (trunk)
<source>:1:18: warning: unsigned conversion from 'int' to 'unsigned int'
changes value from '-1' to '4294967295' [-Wsign-conversion]
1 | unsigned int j = -1;
| ^~
Clang gives a nice error with C++:
#1 with x86-64 clang (trunk)
<source>:1:18: warning: implicit conversion changes signedness: 'int' to
'unsigned int' [-Wsign-conversion]
unsigned int j = -1;
~ ^~
1 warning generated.
Compiler returned: 0
Compiler returned: 1
>From gcc-bugs-return-661392-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:32:32 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661392-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15725 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:32:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15666 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 14:32:27 -0000
From: "joel.hutton at arm dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/92391] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c FAILs
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:32:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joel.hutton at arm dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92391-4-ycI6Vo8xB4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03186.txt.bz2
Content-length: 809
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
--- Comment #9 from Joel Hutton <joel.hutton at arm dot com> ---
Weird, I tested on gcc202.
% uname -a
Linux gcc202 4.19.0-5-sparc64-smp #1 SMP Debian 4.19.37-6 (2019-07-18) sparc64
GNU/Linux
% cat gcc/testsuite/gcc/gcc.sum
Test run by joelh on Tue Nov 26 17:22:27 2019
Native configuration is sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu
=== gcc tests ===
Schedule of variations:
unix
Running target unix
Running /home/joelh/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect.exp ...
UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c
UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
=== gcc Summary ===
# of unsupported tests 2
/home/joelh/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc version 10.0.0 20191126 (experimental) (GCC)
>From gcc-bugs-return-661393-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:33:33 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661393-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16863 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:33:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16843 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 14:33:29 -0000
From: "jg at jguk dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:33:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: jg at jguk dot org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-o0JShqVnKS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03187.txt.bz2
Content-length: 861
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #2 from Jonny Grant <jg at jguk dot org> ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #1)
> Is it appropriate?
>
> Though on both 32-bit and 64-bit x86 "1ul" is good for a size_t, but I
> believe there is some platform where "1ull" is necessary.
>
> Maybe I'm wrong. But if I'm correct, suggesting "1ul" is encouraging bad
> code. I'll use "(size_t) 1 << 32" for this.
UL means Unsigned Long, so if that type is also 64bit like size_t, then it is
fine.
I would rather use the real type, if the compiler is too stupid to start with a
type big enough... the same code with 5147483647 works fine, because the
compiler starts with the number as a 'long int' which is already 64bit, no
suffix required.
#include <stddef.h>
int f()
{
size_t i = 1;
i = i << 32;
return i;
}
>From gcc-bugs-return-661394-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:41:08 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661394-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25253 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:41:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25205 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 14:41:03 -0000
From: "xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-2rQYY02Lhv@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03188.txt.bz2
Content-length: 914
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at mengyan1223 dot wang> ---
(In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #2)
> (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #1)
> > Is it appropriate?
> >
> > Though on both 32-bit and 64-bit x86 "1ul" is good for a size_t, but I
> > believe there is some platform where "1ull" is necessary.
> >
> > Maybe I'm wrong. But if I'm correct, suggesting "1ul" is encouraging bad
> > code. I'll use "(size_t) 1 << 32" for this.
>
> UL means Unsigned Long, so if that type is also 64bit like size_t, then it
> is fine.
That is true on *your platform*.
I can't find any specification in C standard saying "the bitwidth of long
should >= the bitwidth of size_t". So at least theoretically it may be
insufficient.
Writing unportable thing is OK (if you don't care about other platforms) but
*suggesting* unportable thing is bad.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661395-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 14:56:46 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661395-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 41749 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 14:56:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 41716 invoked by uid 55); 26 Nov 2019 14:56:42 -0000
From: "ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/92391] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c FAILs
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 14:56:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92391-4-QupF8gT3N6@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03189.txt.bz2
Content-length: 718
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #9 from Joel Hutton <joel.hutton at arm dot com> ---
> Weird, I tested on gcc202.
[...]
> # of unsupported tests 2
I see the same when testing this single test individually. However,
within a full parallel test run, the test *is* run.
Unless I'm very much mistaken, the problem is that
check_effective_target_vect_char_add uses the same cache as
check_effective_target_vect_int (vect_int), which *is* supported on
sparc*-*-*, so depending on which of the two effective-target keyworks
happens to be used first affects which tests are run.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661396-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:08:33 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661396-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 53201 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:08:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 53149 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:08:29 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/92510] [10 Regression] ICE in native_encode_rtx, at simplify-rtx.c:6272
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:08:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status assigned_to attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92510-4-E6peAzK1Aa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92510-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92510-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03190.txt.bz2
Content-length: 799
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92510
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47362
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47362&action=edit
gcc10-pr92510.patch
I think the right fix is to change comparison mode only if it is from and to
scalar integral mode. If imode == omode, this code isn't reached, and it looks
completely wrong to say change comparison with DImode to V8QImode etc.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661397-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:10:45 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661397-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 54731 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:10:45 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 54647 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:10:40 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libgomp/92315] [10 regression] libgomp.c/pr58392.c and several others FAIL
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:10:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libgomp
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92315-4-Y4yf9iB9yP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92315-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92315-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03191.txt.bz2
Content-length: 480
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92315
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think this should be fixed by r277964. Please reopen if not.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661398-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:13:23 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661398-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 56759 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:13:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 56718 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:13:19 -0000
From: "david at westcontrol dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:13:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: david at westcontrol dot com
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-hRtF0QgaDF@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03192.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1574
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |david at westcontrol dot com
--- Comment #4 from David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com> ---
(In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #2)
> (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #1)
> > Is it appropriate?
> >
> > Though on both 32-bit and 64-bit x86 "1ul" is good for a size_t, but I
> > believe there is some platform where "1ull" is necessary.
> >
> > Maybe I'm wrong. But if I'm correct, suggesting "1ul" is encouraging bad
> > code. I'll use "(size_t) 1 << 32" for this.
>
> UL means Unsigned Long, so if that type is also 64bit like size_t, then it
> is fine.
>
>
> I would rather use the real type, if the compiler is too stupid to start
> with a type big enough... the same code with 5147483647 works fine, because
> the compiler starts with the number as a 'long int' which is already 64bit,
> no suffix required.
>
I recommend you learn the details of how C works before declaring the compiler
"stupid". This sort of thing is not up to the compiler. When you write "1 <<
32", the "1" is of type "int". The compiler is not allowed to choose a
different type - the best it can do is give you a warning. And the compiler
already /does/ give a warning - a perfectly good warning. It is not the
compiler's job to teach you how to program in C.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661400-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:27:05 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661400-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 68861 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:27:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 68509 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:27:01 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-wa3aWOanI3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03194.txt.bz2
Content-length: 472
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3)
> I can't find any specification in C standard saying "the bitwidth of long
> should >= the bitwidth of size_t". So at least theoretically it may be
> insufficient.
Right. Also size_t itself might only be 32 bits, so (size_t) 1 << 32 is no
better than 1 << 32.
I don't think this suggestion is a good idea.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661399-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:27:03 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661399-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 68538 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:27:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 68471 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:26:58 -0000
From: "joel.hutton at arm dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/92391] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-40.c FAILs
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joel.hutton at arm dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-92391-4-OWyLZhr1CH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92391-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03193.txt.bz2
Content-length: 995
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92391
--- Comment #11 from Joel Hutton <joel.hutton at arm dot com> ---
I see, I think you're right. I was able to replicate the failure when running
the whole 'vect' testsuite. I tried the following change:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
index 5fe1e83492c..a4418a31516 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
@@ -5753,7 +5753,7 @@ proc check_effective_target_vect_bswap { } {
# one vector length.
proc check_effective_target_vect_char_add { } {
- return [check_cached_effective_target_indexed vect_int {
+ return [check_cached_effective_target_indexed vect_char_add {
expr {
[istarget i?86-*-*] || [istarget x86_64-*-*]
|| ([istarget powerpc*-*-*]
which appeared to work, however I'm not familiar with how
check_cached_effective_target_indexed works, so I'm not sure if this is
sufficient.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661401-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:28:11 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661401-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 90043 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:28:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 89959 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:28:07 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92675] sign-conversion C++ unsigned int j = -1;
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:28:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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: keywords bug_severity
Message-ID: <bug-92675-4-GO4PuVZU84@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92675-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92675-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03195.txt.bz2
Content-length: 521
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92675
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |diagnostic
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
That's an idiomatic way to get the largest unsigned value, it would be a shame
if it warned.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661402-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:29:30 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661402-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91552 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:29:30 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 91448 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:29:26 -0000
From: "david at westcontrol dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:29:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: david at westcontrol dot com
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-4JLZnbU28F@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03196.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1980
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #6 from David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com> ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #1)
> > > Is it appropriate?
> > >
> > > Though on both 32-bit and 64-bit x86 "1ul" is good for a size_t, but I
> > > believe there is some platform where "1ull" is necessary.
> > >
> > > Maybe I'm wrong. But if I'm correct, suggesting "1ul" is encouraging bad
> > > code. I'll use "(size_t) 1 << 32" for this.
> >
> > UL means Unsigned Long, so if that type is also 64bit like size_t, then it
> > is fine.
>
> That is true on *your platform*.
>
> I can't find any specification in C standard saying "the bitwidth of long
> should >= the bitwidth of size_t". So at least theoretically it may be
> insufficient.
>
> Writing unportable thing is OK (if you don't care about other platforms) but
> *suggesting* unportable thing is bad.
There is no requirement for "size_t" to be of any particular size in relation
to the other integer types. On 64-bit Windows, for example, size_t is 64 bits
but unsigned long is 32 bits.
So there is no portable integer constant suffix that would suit for "size_t".
However, the "size_t" here is a red herring - the problem is that the
expression "1 << 32" overflows, but it would not overflow if the "1" was of a
64 bit type. The most portable choice here would be "1ull" or "1ll" (the
compiler has no way to guess which you want). But that would not work with
pre-C99 standards.
All in all, the whole idea sounds counter-productive to me. If you need
spoon-feeding about the details of C here, you would be better off reading a
book on the language than using trial and error and guessing from compiler
messages. And if you don't need spoon-feeding but just made a little mistake
in your code (as we all do on occasion), then the current warning is fine.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661403-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:43:51 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661403-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 110622 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:43:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 110565 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:43:47 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/92235] [10 Regression] ICE in host_detect_local_cpu, segfault (profiled lto) on powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:43:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92235-4-B1FDre4qwN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92235-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92235-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03197.txt.bz2
Content-length: 733
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92235
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
That line was:
if (pass && (flags & ECF_MALLOC))
{
rtx temp = gen_reg_rtx (GET_MODE (valreg));
^^^^^^^ this one.
rtx_insn *last, *insns;
ICE there would mean we have an ECF_MALLOC call with void reutrn value, but I
think that is both quite unlikely in GCC sources and handle_malloc_attribute
wouldn't have created it.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661404-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:47:57 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661404-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 117335 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:47:57 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 117288 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:47:52 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W0J1ZyBjKysvOTI2NjJdIGNoYW5nZSBpbiBnY2MgOCB2cyA5OiBjYWxsIG9m?= =?UTF-8?B?IG92ZXJsb2FkZWQg4oCYYmFzaWNfc3RyaW5nKDxicmFjZS1lbmNsb3NlZCBp?= =?UTF-8?B?bml0aWFsaXplciBsaXN0PinigJkgaXMgYW1iaWd1b3Vz?Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:47:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92662-4-ONnEJKglZr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03198.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1077
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92662
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Michael Matz from comment #4)
> the return value of moveme() has type Test&&. There exists a conversion
> operator exactly matching that type,
See Bug 86521 comment 4, it's similar here.
Before choosing which conversion operator to use, the compiler considers the
constructors of S, finding S(const S&) and S(S&&) as candidates. There is a
viable conversion from Test&& to const S& and also one from Test&& to S&&. Both
of those conversion sequences have conversion rank "user-defined" (because they
use a user-defined conversion operator) but they use different conversion
operators. Two different user-defined conversions are ambiguous, it doesn't
matter that one is a better match for being called on an rvalue.
The moveme(t).str() case is different, because there's no user-defined
conversion. Overload resolution chooses which str() to call, and that *does*
consider the ref-qualifiers when deciding which str() is a better match.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661405-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:51:57 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661405-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 122001 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:51:57 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 121972 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:51:53 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/92676] New: [10 Regression] lto1: error: comdat-local function called by construct.constprop outside its comdat since r278669
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:51:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
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 keywords bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter cc target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-92676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03199.txt.bz2
Content-length: 3394
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92676
Bug ID: 92676
Summary: [10 Regression] lto1: error: comdat-local function
called by construct.constprop outside its comdat since
r278669
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Since the revision, I see the following ICE:
$ g++ -O2 -flto=auto -fPIC -DPIC -c 1.ii -o x.o && g++ 2.ii x.o
1.ii:169:5: warning: ‘xmlrpc_c::value_struct::operator
std::map<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char>, xmlrpc_c::value>()
const::cMemberWrapper::cMemberWrapper(int)’ used but never defined
169 | cMemberWrapper(int);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/usr/bin/ld: x.o (symbol from plugin): in function `std::piecewise_construct':
(.text+0x0): multiple definition of `std::piecewise_construct';
/tmp/ccuP4DF0.o:(.bss+0x0): first defined here
lto1: error: comdat-local function called by construct.constprop outside its
comdat
_ZNSt4pairIKNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEEN8xmlrpc_c5valueEEC2IJRS6_EJEEESt21piecewise_construct_tSt5tupleIJDpT_EESD_IJDpT0_EE.isra.0/49
(__ct_base .isra) @0x7f1faa6f02c0
Type: function definition analyzed
Visibility:
comdat_group:_ZNSt4pairIKNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEEN8xmlrpc_c5valueEEC5IJRS6_EJEEESt21piecewise_construct_tSt5tupleIJDpT_EESD_IJDpT0_EE
Same comdat group as:
_ZNSt4pairIKNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEEN8xmlrpc_c5valueEEC2IJRS6_EJEEESt21piecewise_construct_tSt5tupleIJDpT_EESD_IJDpT0_EE/15
References:
Referring:
Read from file: x.o
Clone of
_ZNSt4pairIKNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEEN8xmlrpc_c5valueEEC2IJRS6_EJEEESt21piecewise_construct_tSt5tupleIJDpT_EESD_IJDpT0_EE/15
Availability: local
Function flags: count:1073741824 (estimated locally) local
Called by: construct.constprop/46 (1073741824 (estimated locally),1.00 per
call) (can throw external)
Calls: get/30 (1073741824 (estimated locally),1.00 per call) (can throw
external) forward/31 (1073741824 (estimated locally),1.00 per call) (can throw
external) __ct_comp /32 (1073741824 (estimated locally),1.00 per call) (can
throw external)
during IPA pass: sra
lto1: internal compiler error: verify_cgraph_node failed
0x887cbe cgraph_node::verify_node()
../../gcc/cgraph.c:3411
0x87a60c symtab_node::verify()
../../gcc/symtab.c:1268
0x87bd7f symtab_node::verify_symtab_nodes()
../../gcc/symtab.c:1288
0xaeb00f symtab_node::checking_verify_symtab_nodes()
../../gcc/cgraph.h:648
0xaeb00f symbol_table::remove_unreachable_nodes(_IO_FILE*)
../../gcc/ipa.c:672
0xbecd09 execute_todo
../../gcc/passes.c:2051
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
lto-wrapper: fatal error: g++ returned 1 exit status
compilation terminated.
/usr/bin/ld: error: lto-wrapper failed
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>From gcc-bugs-return-661407-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:52:59 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661407-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 126553 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:52:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 126133 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:52:54 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/92676] [10 Regression] lto1: error: comdat-local function called by construct.constprop outside its comdat since r278669
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:52:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
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: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92676-4-Z1rbUwgZmm@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03201.txt.bz2
Content-length: 229
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92676
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47364
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47364&action=edit
2.ii
>From gcc-bugs-return-661406-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:52:28 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661406-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 122913 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:52:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 122854 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:52:25 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/92676] [10 Regression] lto1: error: comdat-local function called by construct.constprop outside its comdat since r278669
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:52:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
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: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92676-4-BDhG6UDFqe@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03200.txt.bz2
Content-length: 229
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92676
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47363
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47363&action=edit
1.ii
>From gcc-bugs-return-661410-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:54:47 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661410-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 130975 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:54:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 130920 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:54:43 -0000
From: "jg at jguk dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:54:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: jg at jguk dot org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-AU6Xzpi7ul@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03203.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1624
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #7 from Jonny Grant <jg at jguk dot org> ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #1)
> > > Is it appropriate?
> > >
> > > Though on both 32-bit and 64-bit x86 "1ul" is good for a size_t, but I
> > > believe there is some platform where "1ull" is necessary.
> > >
> > > Maybe I'm wrong. But if I'm correct, suggesting "1ul" is encouraging bad
> > > code. I'll use "(size_t) 1 << 32" for this.
> >
> > UL means Unsigned Long, so if that type is also 64bit like size_t, then it
> > is fine.
> >
> >
> > I would rather use the real type, if the compiler is too stupid to start
> > with a type big enough... the same code with 5147483647 works fine, because
> > the compiler starts with the number as a 'long int' which is already 64bit,
> > no suffix required.
> >
>
> I recommend you learn the details of how C works before declaring the
> compiler "stupid". This sort of thing is not up to the compiler. When you
> write "1 << 32", the "1" is of type "int". The compiler is not allowed to
> choose a different type - the best it can do is give you a warning. And the
> compiler already /does/ give a warning - a perfectly good warning. It is
> not the compiler's job to teach you how to program in C.
Hi David,
Compiler manages it okay with this example below. Therefore the compiler
appears to be allowed to choose 'long int' for the number being shifted in this
test case.
#include <stddef.h>
size_t i = 5147483647 << 2;
>From gcc-bugs-return-661408-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:54:34 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661408-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129636 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:54:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129533 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:54:30 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92670] Same warning message duplicates for C++20 "deprecated" attribute
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:54:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: DUPLICATE
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: keywords bug_status see_also resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92670-4-qKY7XmvvP6@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92670-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03202.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1435
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92670
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
As requested by https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ please provide a complete testcase,
your example doesn't even compile.
Here's a proper testcase:
struct sha1;
[[deprecated("old")]]
void flush(sha1&);
void f(sha1& s)
{
flush(s);
}
This prints:
depr.cc: In function 'void f(sha1&)':
depr.cc:8:10: warning: 'void flush(sha1&)' is deprecated: old
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
8 | flush(s);
| ^
depr.cc:4:6: note: declared here
4 | void flush(sha1&);
| ^~~~~
depr.cc:8:10: warning: 'void flush(sha1&)' is deprecated: old
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
8 | flush(s);
| ^
depr.cc:4:6: note: declared here
4 | void flush(sha1&);
| ^~~~~
I think this is a dup of PR 67960
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 67960 ***
>From gcc-bugs-return-661409-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:54:34 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661409-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129690 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:54:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129558 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:54:30 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/67960] [8/9/10 Regression] Prefixing a function with [[deprecated]] produces multiple warnings
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:54:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-67960-4-osZnNHlx7L@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-67960-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-67960-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03204.txt.bz2
Content-length: 441
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67960
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |euloanty at live dot com
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 92670 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>From gcc-bugs-return-661412-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:57:00 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661412-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 4609 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:56:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 4014 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:56:54 -0000
From: "matthijs at stdin dot nl" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:56:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 7.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: lto, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: matthijs at stdin dot nl
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: MOVED
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-83967-4-1jtHzHPt00@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-83967-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-83967-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03206.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1119
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83967
Matthijs Kooijman <matthijs at stdin dot nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |matthijs at stdin dot nl
--- Comment #14 from Matthijs Kooijman <matthijs at stdin dot nl> ---
I actually think this is a different problem from the fixed
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22502. Using gcc 8.2.1 and
binutils 2.31.51.20181213 from the STM32 Arduino core
(https://github.com/stm32duino/Arduino_Core_STM32), I can still reproduce this
problem using the example from comment 11 (and also in an actual implementation
using stm32duino). I also tested the example from the linked bug, which *is*
indeed fixed, leading me to believe this is a different problem (or the fix is
not complete yet).
The example from this bug is a lot bigger than the one from 22502, so there is
probably something in here that triggers this. Maybe that the weak
implementation is defined in assembly rather than C?
>From gcc-bugs-return-661411-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:56:45 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661411-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2770 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:56:45 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2709 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:56:40 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:56:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-ios90fzzUV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03205.txt.bz2
Content-length: 326
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Because 5147483647 doesn't fit in an int, so it picks a larger type, because
that's what the standard requires. 1 does fit in an int, so the compiler picks
int, because that's what the standard requires.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661413-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:57:21 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661413-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6254 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:57:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6193 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:57:17 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:57:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-6Wo2aJh5YM@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03207.txt.bz2
Content-length: 565
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #6)
> All in all, the whole idea sounds counter-productive to me. If you need
> spoon-feeding about the details of C here, you would be better off reading a
> book on the language than using trial and error and guessing from compiler
> messages. And if you don't need spoon-feeding but just made a little
> mistake in your code (as we all do on occasion), then the current warning is
> fine.
^ This.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661414-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 15:58:29 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661414-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8329 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 15:58:29 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8263 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 15:58:25 -0000
From: "jg at jguk dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92675] sign-conversion C++ unsigned int j = -1;
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:58:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: jg at jguk dot org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92675-4-q3npG49j9X@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92675-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92675-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03208.txt.bz2
Content-length: 324
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92675
--- Comment #2 from Jonny Grant <jg at jguk dot org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> That's an idiomatic way to get the largest unsigned value, it would be a
> shame if it warned.
Personally I would use UINT_MAX from limits.h, feels more idiomatic.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661415-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:01:47 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661415-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 11857 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:01:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 11811 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:01:42 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/92676] [10 Regression] lto1: error: comdat-local function called by construct.constprop outside its comdat since r278669
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:01:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: priority bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cf_known_to_work assigned_to target_milestone everconfirmed cf_known_to_fail
Message-ID: <bug-92676-4-fCd5b1j2yF@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92676-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03209.txt.bz2
Content-length: 711
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92676
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
Known to work| |9.2.0
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail| |10.0
>From gcc-bugs-return-661416-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:02:04 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661416-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12665 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:02:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 12544 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:01:55 -0000
From: "matz at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W0J1ZyBjKysvOTI2NjJdIGNoYW5nZSBpbiBnY2MgOCB2cyA5OiBjYWxsIG9m?= =?UTF-8?B?IG92ZXJsb2FkZWQg4oCYYmFzaWNfc3RyaW5nKDxicmFjZS1lbmNsb3NlZCBp?= =?UTF-8?B?bml0aWFsaXplciBsaXN0PinigJkgaXMgYW1iaWd1b3Vz?Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:02:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: matz at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92662-4-ZNBqeuHRlM@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92662-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03210.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1106
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92662
--- Comment #6 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
>
> Before choosing which conversion operator to use, the compiler considers the
> constructors of S, finding S(const S&) and S(S&&) as candidates. There is a
> viable conversion from Test&& to const S& and also one from Test&& to S&&.
> Both of those conversion sequences have conversion rank "user-defined"
> (because they use a user-defined conversion operator) but they use different
> conversion operators. Two different user-defined conversions are ambiguous,
Ah, it makes sense now ...
> it doesn't matter that one is a better match for being called on an rvalue.
... except may be this should matter ;-) But it is as it is.
> The moveme(t).str() case is different, because there's no user-defined
> conversion. Overload resolution chooses which str() to call, and that *does*
> consider the ref-qualifiers when deciding which str() is a better match.
Right overload resolution vs. UCS, okay got it, many thanks :)
>From gcc-bugs-return-661417-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:08:34 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661417-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19207 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:08:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19095 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:08:29 -0000
From: "jg at jguk dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:08:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: jg at jguk dot org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-1GqqoiAvqH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03211.txt.bz2
Content-length: 440
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
--- Comment #10 from Jonny Grant <jg at jguk dot org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> Because 5147483647 doesn't fit in an int, so it picks a larger type, because
> that's what the standard requires. 1 does fit in an int, so the compiler
> picks int, because that's what the standard requires.
Fair enough. Let's close this PR if no support for this suggestion.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661418-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:34:46 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661418-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 42101 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:34:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 41992 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:34:42 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92677] New: [10 Regression] ICE in get_group_load_store_type, at tree-vect-stmts.c:2261 since r271704
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:34:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
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 keywords bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter cc target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-92677-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03212.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2086
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92677
Bug ID: 92677
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in get_group_load_store_type, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:2261 since r271704
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: alejandro at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Starting from the following revision I see:
$ cat vect.i
int a, c;
int *b;
long d;
double *e;
void fn1() {
long f;
double g, h;
while (c) {
if (d) {
g = *e;
*(b + 4) = g;
}
if (f) {
h = *(e + 2);
*(b + 6) = h;
}
e += a;
b += 8;
c--;
d += 2;
}
}
$ gcc vect.i -c -mavx2 -O3
during GIMPLE pass: vect
vect.i: In function ‘fn1’:
vect.i:6:6: internal compiler error: in get_group_load_store_type, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:2261
6 | void fn1() {
| ^~~
0x7289ae get_group_load_store_type
../../gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c:2261
0x7289ae get_load_store_type
../../gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c:2475
0x1021b1a vectorizable_load
../../gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c:8717
0x1039905 vect_analyze_stmt(_stmt_vec_info*, bool*, _slp_tree*, _slp_instance*,
vec<stmt_info_for_cost, va_heap, vl_ptr>*)
../../gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c:10846
0x1051ef3 vect_analyze_loop_operations
../../gcc/tree-vect-loop.c:1608
0x1051ef3 vect_analyze_loop_2
../../gcc/tree-vect-loop.c:2139
0x1051ef3 vect_analyze_loop(loop*, vec_info_shared*)
../../gcc/tree-vect-loop.c:2554
0x1070ed4 try_vectorize_loop_1
../../gcc/tree-vectorizer.c:892
0x10718d9 vectorize_loops()
../../gcc/tree-vectorizer.c:1125
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661419-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:35:32 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661419-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 43591 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:35:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 43515 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:35:28 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92677] [10 Regression] ICE in get_group_load_store_type, at tree-vect-stmts.c:2261 since r271704
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:35:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc cf_known_to_work target_milestone everconfirmed cf_known_to_fail
Message-ID: <bug-92677-4-WAIJYpIDoM@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92677-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92677-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03213.txt.bz2
Content-length: 723
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92677
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to work| |9.2.0
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail| |10.0
>From gcc-bugs-return-661420-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:36:55 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661420-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 46064 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:36:55 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 45971 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:36:51 -0000
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/92677] [10 Regression] ICE in get_group_load_store_type, at tree-vect-stmts.c:2261 since r271704
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:36:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: priority
Message-ID: <bug-92677-4-BqShdwow4i@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92677-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92677-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03214.txt.bz2
Content-length: 294
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92677
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P1
>From gcc-bugs-return-661421-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:42:46 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661421-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52332 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:42:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 52230 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:42:42 -0000
From: "deng at randomsample dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug sanitizer/92678] New: UB sanitizer and pointer to member functions with multiple inheritance
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:42:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: sanitizer
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: deng at randomsample dot de
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 cc target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-92678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03215.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2010
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92678
Bug ID: 92678
Summary: UB sanitizer and pointer to member functions with
multiple inheritance
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: deng at randomsample dot de
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Consider this example:
#include <iostream>
class B1 {
public:
int b1;
virtual void mf1() { std::cout << "b1=" << b1 << std::endl; }
};
class B2 {
public:
int b2;
virtual void mf2() { std::cout << "b2=" << b2 << std::endl; }
};
class C : public B1, public B2 { };
void call_memfun (C obj, void (C::*pmf)())
{
(obj.*pmf)();
}
int main()
{
C obj;
obj.b2=1;
call_memfun(obj, &C::mf2);
}
Compilation with gcc 9.2.1:
g++ -Wall -g -fsanitize=undefined -o test test.cpp
Running 'test' results in the following output:
test.cpp:19:15: runtime error: member call on address 0x7ffff4d24610 which does
not point to an object of type 'C'
0x7ffff4d24600: note: object is base class subobject at offset 16 within object
of type 'C'
01 00 00 00 28 30 40 00 00 00 00 00 b6 15 40 00 00 00 00 00 40 30 40 00 00
00 00 00 01 00 00 00
^
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
vptr for 'B2'
base class of 'C'
So the sanitizer complains that 'pmf' in 'call_memfun' is actually a pointer to
B2::mf2(), which looks like a false-positive warning to me? If 'C' only
inherits from 'B2', the warning disappears.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661422-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:53:34 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661422-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 63563 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:53:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 63503 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:53:30 -0000
From: "marcello.m at yahoo dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92679] New: Test case with failing unordered_map search when key is type_index
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:53:00 -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: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marcello.m at yahoo dot com
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
Message-ID: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03216.txt.bz2
Content-length: 768
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92679
Bug ID: 92679
Summary: Test case with failing unordered_map search when key
is type_index
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marcello.m at yahoo dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Hello,
Attached files are from gcc 9.1.0 but I've tested earlier and later versions
using https://godbolt.org/ with the same results.
Expected output:
1
1.000000
STRING
VECTOR
Actual output from 7.1 to 8.3:
VECTOR
VECTOR
VECTOR
VECTOR
Actual output from 9.1 and later:
Segmentation fault
Regards.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661423-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:54:41 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661423-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 65665 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:54:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 65591 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:54:37 -0000
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92123] [F2018/array-descriptor] Scalar allocatable/pointer with array descriptor (via bind(C)): ICE with select rank or error scalar variable with POINTER or ALLOCATABLE in procedure with BIND(C) is not yet supported
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:54:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92123-4-b53ZMDM8hO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92123-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92123-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03217.txt.bz2
Content-length: 501
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92123
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Is there a specification (or even description) for fn spec somewhere?
I can't say I understand exactly what it does.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661424-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:55:53 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661424-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 67203 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:55:53 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 67129 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:55:49 -0000
From: "marcello.m at yahoo dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92679] Test case with failing unordered_map search when key is type_index
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:55:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marcello.m at yahoo dot com
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: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-92679-4-8fXc74mbvi@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03218.txt.bz2
Content-length: 281
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92679
--- Comment #1 from Marcello Mansueto <marcello.m at yahoo dot com> ---
Created attachment 47365
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47365&action=edit
Preprocessed version of the file that triggers the bug
>From gcc-bugs-return-661425-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 16:59:10 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661425-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 70372 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 16:59:10 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 70334 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 16:59:05 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/91944] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6156
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:59:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc target_milestone short_desc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-91944-4-HpWlrCk6Pe@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-91944-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-91944-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03219.txt.bz2
Content-length: 907
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91944
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2019-10-23 00:00:00 |2019-11-26
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|10.0 |8.4
Summary|[10 Regression] ICE in |[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in
|gfc_conv_array_initializer, |gfc_conv_array_initializer,
|at |at
|fortran/trans-array.c:6156 |fortran/trans-array.c:6156
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Started with my r241630 change.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661426-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:00:38 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661426-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 72326 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:00:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 72051 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:00:16 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/91944] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6156
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:00:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status assigned_to attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-91944-4-1j7MB6SqaI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-91944-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-91944-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03220.txt.bz2
Content-length: 579
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91944
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 47366
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47366&action=edit
gcc10-pr91944.patch
Untested fix.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661427-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:10:32 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661427-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 88911 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:10:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 88737 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:10:28 -0000
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92123] [F2018/array-descriptor] Scalar allocatable/pointer with array descriptor (via bind(C)): ICE with select rank or error scalar variable with POINTER or ALLOCATABLE in procedure with BIND(C) is not yet supported
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:10:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92123-4-GFNSjga2VO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92123-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92123-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03221.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1436
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92123
--- Comment #17 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #16)
> Is there a specification (or even description) for fn spec somewhere?
> I can't say I understand exactly what it does.
Maybe gimple.c's gimple_call_arg_flags:
case 'x':
case 'X':
return EAF_UNUSED;
case 'R':
return EAF_DIRECT | EAF_NOCLOBBER | EAF_NOESCAPE;
case 'r':
return EAF_NOCLOBBER | EAF_NOESCAPE;
case 'W':
return EAF_DIRECT | EAF_NOESCAPE;
case 'w':
return EAF_NOESCAPE;
case '.':
default:
return 0;
+ tree-into-ssa.c's pass_build_ssa::execute
if (TREE_STRING_POINTER (fnspec)[i] == 'R'
|| TREE_STRING_POINTER (fnspec)[i] == 'r')
{
tree name = ssa_default_def (fun, arg);
if (name)
SSA_NAME_POINTS_TO_READONLY_MEMORY (name) = 1;
}
+ decl_return_flags in calls.c:
switch (TREE_STRING_POINTER (attr)[0])
{
case '1':
case '2':
case '3':
case '4':
return ERF_RETURNS_ARG | (TREE_STRING_POINTER (attr)[0] - '1');
case 'm':
return ERF_NOALIAS;
case '.':
default:
return 0;
}
The constants are defined in tree-core.h.
The name 'fn spec' contains a space to make it only internally available,
hence, also not well documented.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661428-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:16:36 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661428-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 112908 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:16:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 112825 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:16:32 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/92123] [F2018/array-descriptor] Scalar allocatable/pointer with array descriptor (via bind(C)): ICE with select rank or error scalar variable with POINTER or ALLOCATABLE in procedure with BIND(C) is not yet supported
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:16:00 -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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92123-4-P3zyEpUCCI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92123-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92123-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03222.txt.bz2
Content-length: 351
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92123
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00895.html
contained documentation but in the end we went with an internal "fn spec"
attribute rather than user visible fnspec:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-05/msg00383.html
>From gcc-bugs-return-661429-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:18:35 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661429-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 115600 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:18:35 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 115512 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:18:30 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92679] Test case with failing unordered_map search when key is type_index
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:18:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92679-4-c04krpIAPb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03223.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2109
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92679
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Without optimisation it prints your expected output for me (with any version of
GCC). It only fails with optimisation.
ASan seems to show a problem in your code:
==428329==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope on address
0x7ffcfe3b22f0 at pc 0x0000004060c0 bp 0x7ffcfe3b1be0 sp 0x7ffcfe3b1bd8
READ of size 8 at 0x7ffcfe3b22f0 thread T0
#0 0x4060bf in std::_Function_base::_M_empty() const
/home/jwakely/gcc/8/include/c++/8.3.1/bits/std_function.h:260
#1 0x4060bf in std::function<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > (int&)>::operator()(int&) const
/home/jwakely/gcc/8/include/c++/8.3.1/bits/std_function.h:685
#2 0x4060bf in any_visitor<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >
>::accept<int>(std::function<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >
(int&)>)::{lambda(std::any&)#1}::operator()(std::any&) const /tmp/92679.cc:18
#3 0x4060bf in std::_Function_handler<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > (std::any&),
any_visitor<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>,
std::allocator<char> >
>::accept<int>(std::function<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >
(int&)>)::{lambda(std::any&)#1}>::_M_invoke(std::_Any_data const&, std::any&)
/home/jwakely/gcc/8/include/c++/8.3.1/bits/std_function.h:283
#4 0x407187 in std::function<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >
(std::any&)>::operator()(std::any&) const
/home/jwakely/gcc/8/include/c++/8.3.1/bits/std_function.h:687
#5 0x407187 in any_visitor<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >::operator()(std::any&)
/tmp/92679.cc:26
#6 0x4032d0 in main /tmp/92679.cc:45
#7 0x7fe45c0001a2 in __libc_start_main ../csu/libc-start.c:308
#8 0x4023cd in _start (/tmp/a.out+0x4023cd)
>From gcc-bugs-return-661430-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:21:14 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661430-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 118011 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:21:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 117904 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:21:09 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92679] Test case with failing unordered_map search when key is type_index
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:21:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92679-4-rbPevj16Vj@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03224.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2355
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92679
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Non-preprocessed testcase:
#include <iostream>
#include <typeindex>
#include <functional>
#include <any>
#include <unordered_map>
template <typename TReturn>
struct any_visitor {
using function = std::function<TReturn(std::any &)>;
std::unordered_map<std::type_index, function> functions;
template <typename TArg>
void accept(std::function<TReturn(TArg &)> f) {
functions.insert(std::make_pair(std::type_index(typeid(TArg)),
function([&f](std::any &x) -> TReturn {
return f(std::any_cast<TArg &>(x));
})));
}
TReturn operator()(std::any &x) {
try {
auto function = functions.at(std::type_index(x.type()));
return function(x);
} catch (...) {
throw std::runtime_error("No visitor registered");
}
}
};
int main() {
auto visitor = any_visitor<std::string>();
visitor.accept<int>([](int x) { return std::to_string(x); });
visitor.accept<double>([](double x) { return std::to_string(x); });
visitor.accept<std::string>([](std::string &x) { return x; });
visitor.accept<std::vector<double>>(
[](std::vector<double>&) { return "VECTOR"; });
std::any x;
x = 1;
std::cout << visitor(x) << "\n";
x = 1.;
std::cout << visitor(x) << "\n";
x = std::string("STRING");
std::cout << visitor(x) << "\n";
x = std::vector<double>{0., 1., 2., 3., 4., 5.};
std::cout << visitor(x) << "\n";
}
The bug is here:
void accept(std::function<TReturn(TArg &)> f) {
functions.insert(std::make_pair(std::type_index(typeid(TArg)),
function([&f](std::any &x) -> TReturn {
^^^^
You're binding a reference to a function parameter, which goes out of scope as
soon as the function returns. When you later invoke the std::function it uses a
dangling reference.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661431-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:22:36 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661431-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123092 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:22:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123048 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:22:32 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92679] Test case with failing unordered_map search when key is type_index
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:22:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92679-4-noFzUJuYqg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03225.txt.bz2
Content-length: 182
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92679
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Change the capture from [&f] to simply [f] and it works fine.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661433-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:27:32 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661433-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129376 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:27:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129284 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:27:28 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92679] Test case with failing unordered_map search when key is type_index
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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:
Message-ID: <bug-92679-4-sZHQGbREwn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03227.txt.bz2
Content-length: 322
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92679
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Or simply:
template <typename TArg, typename F>
void accept(F f) {
functions[std::type_index(typeid(TArg))]
= [f](std::any &x) -> TReturn { return f(std::any_cast<TArg &>(x)); };
}
>From gcc-bugs-return-661432-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:27:22 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661432-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 128651 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:27:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 128601 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:27:18 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92659] Suggestions for bitshift
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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_status cc resolution
Message-ID: <bug-92659-4-0UlSQnkzRE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92659-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03226.txt.bz2
Content-length: 497
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92659
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661434-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:30:47 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661434-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2418 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 17:30:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2297 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 17:30:43 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/92640] Incorrect warning: exception of type 'const derived&' will be caught by earlier handler for 'const base&'
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:30:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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_status cf_reconfirmed_on see_also everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-92640-4-Eq2omEDpQt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92640-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92640-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03228.txt.bz2
Content-length: 554
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92640
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-11-26
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=69373
Ever confirmed|0 |1
>From gcc-bugs-return-661435-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 19:01:47 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661435-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 94940 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 19:01:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 94890 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 19:01:42 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug sanitizer/92678] UB sanitizer and pointer to member functions with multiple inheritance
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 19:01:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: sanitizer
X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-92678-4-yU91nsZ7Go@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03229.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1058
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92678
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The problem is that the PMF call is maybe instrumented too late, during
genericization the first argument is (struct C *) obj + (sizetype) pmf.__delta
and so -fsanitize=vptr decides that it should check whether *((struct C *) obj
+ (sizetype) pmf.__delta) has dynamic type C, but it should really check that
*obj has dynamic type C, or perhaps that *((struct C *) obj + (sizetype)
pmf.__delta) has dynamic type B2. clang++ seems to check the former.
The question is if it is possible to figure this out from the lowered code that
has been through cp_fold already and the pmf could be all kinds of weird
expressions, or if we need to move the instrumentation earlier.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661436-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 19:17:24 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661436-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 112790 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 19:17:24 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 112722 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 19:17:20 -0000
From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/92680] New: PGO bootstrap is broken with --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto-lean and in-itree mpfr
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 19:17:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
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
Message-ID: <bug-92680-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03230.txt.bz2
Content-length: 815
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92680
Bug ID: 92680
Summary: PGO bootstrap is broken with
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto-lean and in-itree
mpfr
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Build with bootstrap-lto-lean with in-tree mpfr fails in profile mismatch on
set_d.o. This is caused by fact that mpfr actually misconfigures itself with
LTO. Its configure script scans assembly to detect format of long double and
this gives wrong answer with LTO leading to suboptimal configuration.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661437-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 19:19:15 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661437-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 115433 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 19:19:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 115401 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2019 19:19:11 -0000
From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug other/92681] New: PGO bootstrap is broken with --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto-lean is not training non-C++ frontends
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 19:19:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: other
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
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
Message-ID: <bug-92681-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2019-11/txt/msg03231.txt.bz2
Content-length: 612
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92681
Bug ID: 92681
Summary: PGO bootstrap is broken with
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto-lean is not training
non-C++ frontends
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This definitly leads to suboptimal compile time experience with Ada, Fortran,
go, etc.
>From gcc-bugs-return-661438-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Nov 26 19:21:40 2019
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-661438-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 120514 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2019 19:21:40 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 120506 invoked by uid 89); 26 Nov 2019 19:21:40 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 testsºYES_20,HTML_MESSAGE,PYZOR_CHECK,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=Payment, Morning, H*M:COM, H*MI:COM
X-HELO: CAN01-TO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
Received: from mail-to1can01hn2095.outbound.protection.outlook.com (HELO CAN01-TO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) (52.100.146.95) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 19:21:38 +0000
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=V8RVfbgwtRth22Q02PTxUNZnjjS0hxNfGzA9n7l/2u8hn+JfJza/T+Om8u+vwqJISFTiFv4LyIug08OO5PrZyK36jpy8TcZ8zG6kmwWeRNj514hEA4flZN+pkTmaCDEjG9la6+9GxTClSgYM/qusiNZUOESxYynjqRUFj1RRbrQkgT9DSO0LPzoiM3BgxKi94p2kZTrOyoil4AeAV9bcxN+OOIeCEY+h0Vglev0Aab3y2LQKssa3UVNzF6CedwjejiFzHLba/H4Pf+gXkzoSSwm1iGApzPg7SYRmLgqyWk2a4VN9No6Vpsls/p/i9/lfG+nsxtYCctktCEKLf74exg=ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=m+L4CQoCCX3dhXqypvzLXWFsH/0WQlD3bjrRyDBo9Gg=; b=eR8Sn7drptcCAQ1PBTWh59EW2ayLZ5uGEkC7KOyNutdLaMj8YXQX9lm/9rgE30ptglGO5BExdjyLRVCQL0dTG/WaRgnCqJIfwbLeUTxZ5L9g0KZFZxkyIBbcS50U7mWFTvFHZBde+c38VtIcHGG5rBGT46tigyxambSEND/vwUfa8VaakFCHLCtlbcrSwxF0iOW83CwcWZzYaiVh6CwXpGeF/grKN83IZGI8tm3rKT/crmco6gZkU9rZqZ0dyUdBS5hSwd4dVuQTcluKTHBgtrVceD0ETe+j3lILN3Ro3DQHqeG+jO7xdYjOMHWscds6a4rojooMPnb/YcwNB7suEg=ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=smu.ca; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=smu.ca; dkim=pass header.d=smu.ca; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=smuhalifax.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-smuhalifax-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=m+L4CQoCCX3dhXqypvzLXWFsH/0WQlD3bjrRyDBo9Gg=; b=UGgps5idsBa8d9LXVjVEQww1CLvaPgI9/bXFOU6hiSfc7dq8gwPabqPVNq5SkbQzCazy7MDgEc8X6mGpr8GMcgguzQp3zs6JIv1CHUwaULs3IZAjKmEj+SqUloVLEzvQZq784fCPiH3cUk+BnesM0+RtI0Pid/H24T3gWSei5yUReceived: from YQXPR0101MB0824.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (52.132.76.17) by YQXPR0101MB0950.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (52.132.77.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2474.17; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 19:21:36 +0000
Received: from YQXPR0101MB0824.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::4de9:d6d0:c1b4:bd75]) by YQXPR0101MB0824.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::4de9:d6d0:c1b4:bd75%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2474.023; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 19:21:36 +0000
From: Ebunoluwa Oladele <Ebunoluwa.Oladele@smu.ca>
To: "gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Project Payment
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 19:21:00 -0000
Message-ID: <YQXPR0101MB08240F58828704B6C0AE0B1685450@YQXPR0101MB0824.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Reply-To: "fhuang@mufgbank-jp.com" <fhuang@mufgbank-jp.com>
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfromëunoluwa.Oladele@smu.ca;
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:639;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: smu.ca does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 60bpAoVRe5uXlOLGz5UW6tRq6JYVBiZ3Wdfkx9kcD1YgCu2rEE4DHTfSALjHtYsWUKvrAmGKwJf1sJ+Bv14nXck57ur5Fnr7aHlDoVf8VT4Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SW-Source: 2019-11/txt/msg03232.txt.bz2
Content-length: 113
Good Morning, i wish to discuss a business agreement with you. Kindly reply immediately. Via Mr Fu Hzuang CEO
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2019-11-25 16:11 ` [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers iains at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-03-21 15:56 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-22 17:26 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (12 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: iains at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-21 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
unpatched GCC master, gcc-9.x, gcc-8.x and gcc-7.5 work for me with any SDK >=
Xcode commandline tools 11.3b.
If there's no additional information I propose we close this PR after another
week.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2019-11-25 16:11 ` [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-21 15:56 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-03-22 17:26 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2020-03-22 18:00 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2020-03-22 17:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #24 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> unpatched GCC master, gcc-9.x, gcc-8.x and gcc-7.5 work for me with any SDK >=
> Xcode commandline tools 11.3b.
I've recently tried both building gcc 8.3.0 (build only) and master
(full bootstrap and test) on macOS 10.14.6 and 10.15.3, each with Xcode
11.3.1. Both worked *provided the build and target compilers were
configured with the approriate --with-sysroot to account for the lack of
/usr/include and startup objects in /usr/lib*.
> If there's no additional information I propose we close this PR after another
> week.
I guess that's fine.
Thanks.
Rainer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-22 17:26 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2020-03-22 18:00 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-22 19:02 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (10 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: iains at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-22 18:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #25 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #24)
> > --- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > unpatched GCC master, gcc-9.x, gcc-8.x and gcc-7.5 work for me with any SDK >=
> > Xcode commandline tools 11.3b.
>
> I've recently tried both building gcc 8.3.0 (build only) and master
> (full bootstrap and test) on macOS 10.14.6 and 10.15.3, each with Xcode
> 11.3.1. Both worked *provided the build and target compilers were
> configured with the approriate --with-sysroot to account for the lack of
> /usr/include and startup objects in /usr/lib*.
That's not going to change, I think (at least, the underlying behaviour).
We could entertain and implement a change to Darwin's configuration that
automatically discovers the /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools .. or
/Applications/Xcode... for Darwin versions >= X and complains of fails to
configure if those can't be seen (asking for a --with-sysroot=).
We can already invoke GCC like "xcrun /path/to/gcc-exe" provided that is not
called "gcc" or "g++" it will work to set the SDKROOT which gcc honours from
7.5+.
The only irritation is that we can't use 'gcc' or 'g++' in that position,
because xcrun places the clang/++ aliases ahead of the GCC in the PATH (even if
the GCC install is first) [last time I tried].
----
There's also an API to obtain the info - but only on 10.15+ and it forces one
to install XCode I suspect to use it, I'm not keen on making new dependencies
on things outside our control - I'd rather make use of OSS equivalents.
> > If there's no additional information I propose we close this PR after another
> > week.
>
> I guess that's fine.
I think we have the /usr/local/include issue tracked elsewhere.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-22 18:00 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-03-22 19:02 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2020-03-23 2:10 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2020-03-22 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #26 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #25 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #24)
>> > --- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>> > unpatched GCC master, gcc-9.x, gcc-8.x and gcc-7.5 work for me with any
>> > SDK >=
>> > Xcode commandline tools 11.3b.
>>
>> I've recently tried both building gcc 8.3.0 (build only) and master
>> (full bootstrap and test) on macOS 10.14.6 and 10.15.3, each with Xcode
>> 11.3.1. Both worked *provided the build and target compilers were
>> configured with the approriate --with-sysroot to account for the lack of
>> /usr/include and startup objects in /usr/lib*.
>
> That's not going to change, I think (at least, the underlying behaviour).
Indeed, we'll have to live with that.
> We could entertain and implement a change to Darwin's configuration that
> automatically discovers the /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools .. or
> /Applications/Xcode... for Darwin versions >= X and complains of fails to
> configure if those can't be seen (asking for a --with-sysroot=).
That's one option, certainly easier for the users. At the least, the
issue should be documented in install.texi so they can add
--with-sysroot manually if need be. I just noticed that the install
docs only have a small section on PowerPC Darwin, nothing else...
> We can already invoke GCC like "xcrun /path/to/gcc-exe" provided that is not
> called "gcc" or "g++" it will work to set the SDKROOT which gcc honours from
> 7.5+.
>
> The only irritation is that we can't use 'gcc' or 'g++' in that position,
> because xcrun places the clang/++ aliases ahead of the GCC in the PATH (even if
> the GCC install is first) [last time I tried].
Sounds like a bad mess and totally unexpected. Besides, the additional
exec will have some cost. No idea how measurable it would be for a
bootstrap, though.
> There's also an API to obtain the info - but only on 10.15+ and it forces one
> to install XCode I suspect to use it, I'm not keen on making new dependencies
> on things outside our control - I'd rather make use of OSS equivalents.
Understood. In particular when Xcode.app can be installed anywhere, not
just in /Applications. Maybe something to talk about with Jeremy
Sequoia, perhaps it can be provided from some stable location?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-22 19:02 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2020-03-23 2:10 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-21 0:57 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-03-23 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #27 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #26)
> > --- Comment #25 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > (In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #24)
> >> > --- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> >> > unpatched GCC master, gcc-9.x, gcc-8.x and gcc-7.5 work for me with any
> >> > SDK >=
> >> > Xcode commandline tools 11.3b.
> >>
> >> I've recently tried both building gcc 8.3.0 (build only) and master
> >> (full bootstrap and test) on macOS 10.14.6 and 10.15.3, each with Xcode
> >> 11.3.1. Both worked *provided the build and target compilers were
> >> configured with the approriate --with-sysroot to account for the lack of
> >> /usr/include and startup objects in /usr/lib*.
> >
> > That's not going to change, I think (at least, the underlying behaviour).
>
> Indeed, we'll have to live with that.
>
> > We could entertain and implement a change to Darwin's configuration that
> > automatically discovers the /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools .. or
> > /Applications/Xcode... for Darwin versions >= X and complains of fails to
> > configure if those can't be seen (asking for a --with-sysroot=).
>
> That's one option, certainly easier for the users. At the least, the
> issue should be documented in install.texi so they can add
> --with-sysroot manually if need be. I just noticed that the install
> docs only have a small section on PowerPC Darwin, nothing else...
>
> > We can already invoke GCC like "xcrun /path/to/gcc-exe" provided that is not
> > called "gcc" or "g++" it will work to set the SDKROOT which gcc honours from
> > 7.5+.
> >
> > The only irritation is that we can't use 'gcc' or 'g++' in that position,
> > because xcrun places the clang/++ aliases ahead of the GCC in the PATH (even if
> > the GCC install is first) [last time I tried].
>
> Sounds like a bad mess and totally unexpected. Besides, the additional
> exec will have some cost. No idea how measurable it would be for a
> bootstrap, though.
>
> > There's also an API to obtain the info - but only on 10.15+ and it forces one
> > to install XCode I suspect to use it, I'm not keen on making new dependencies
> > on things outside our control - I'd rather make use of OSS equivalents.
>
> Understood. In particular when Xcode.app can be installed anywhere, not
> just in /Applications. Maybe something to talk about with Jeremy
> Sequoia, perhaps it can be provided from some stable location?
I think it has come up in some other bug...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-23 2:10 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-09-21 0:57 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-24 14:38 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-09-21 0:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |documentation
--- Comment #28 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #26)
> > --- Comment #25 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > We could entertain and implement a change to Darwin's configuration that
> > automatically discovers the /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools .. or
> > /Applications/Xcode... for Darwin versions >= X and complains of fails to
> > configure if those can't be seen (asking for a --with-sysroot=).
>
> That's one option, certainly easier for the users. At the least, the
> issue should be documented in install.texi so they can add
> --with-sysroot manually if need be. I just noticed that the install
> docs only have a small section on PowerPC Darwin, nothing else...
>
Adding "documentation" keyword for this part at least
(I recently got a new laptop and am now on Catalina and ran into this bug, so
that's why I'm coming back to it)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-21 0:57 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-24 14:38 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-24 14:57 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-24 14:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #29 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #28)
> (I recently got a new laptop and am now on Catalina and ran into this bug,
> so that's why I'm coming back to it)
(Thus, moving from WAITING to NEW)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-24 14:38 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-24 14:57 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-24 15:13 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: iains at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-24 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #30 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #29)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #28)
> > (I recently got a new laptop and am now on Catalina and ran into this bug,
> > so that's why I'm coming back to it)
>
> (Thus, moving from WAITING to NEW)
perhaps you'd like to draft a documentation change?
(I'm happy to review, but extremely short of darwin-time right now, so
addressing backports and fixes as a priority).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-24 14:57 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-24 15:13 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-25 0:22 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-24 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #31 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #30)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #29)
> > (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #28)
> > > (I recently got a new laptop and am now on Catalina and ran into this bug,
> > > so that's why I'm coming back to it)
> >
> > (Thus, moving from WAITING to NEW)
>
> perhaps you'd like to draft a documentation change?
For install.texi? Sure; taking.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-24 15:13 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-25 0:22 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-25 20:27 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-25 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #32 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #26)
> That's one option, certainly easier for the users. At the least, the
> issue should be documented in install.texi so they can add
> --with-sysroot manually if need be. I just noticed that the install
> docs only have a small section on PowerPC Darwin, nothing else...
So wait, is the idea to add separate sections for each other architecture of
Darwin supported? Or should we just have one architecture-independent Darwin
section?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-25 0:22 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-25 20:27 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-17 19:42 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: iains at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-25 20:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #33 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #32)
> (In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #26)
> > That's one option, certainly easier for the users. At the least, the
> > issue should be documented in install.texi so they can add
> > --with-sysroot manually if need be. I just noticed that the install
> > docs only have a small section on PowerPC Darwin, nothing else...
>
>
> So wait, is the idea to add separate sections for each other architecture of
> Darwin supported? Or should we just have one architecture-independent Darwin
> section?
When musing over this, I was thinking perhaps to have a relatively small entry
[on the install webpage] for Darwin (replacing the powerpc-specific one) and
just put the headlines there with a link to a new page in the wiki where we
could expand upon things.
I think that we would, at least, need subsections for
darwin <= 10
darwin 11..14
darwin 15..19
darwin 20+
since there are some differences (e.g earlier systems _must_ have the
installation into / to work properly, the middle set can have either the /
install or the --sysroot= case, and the set from darwin15+ must use the
--sysroot= )
there could be cause to want to describe stuff for powerpc, i686, x86_64 and
arm64 separately ..
.. that was why a pointer to a new wiki page seemed possibly a better solution
than much churn on the webpage.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-25 20:27 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-08-17 19:42 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-20 3:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-20 4:03 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-08-17 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
| |il/gcc-patches/2023-August/
| |627793.html
Keywords| |patch
--- Comment #34 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/627793.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2023-08-17 19:42 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-08-20 3:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-20 4:03 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-08-20 3:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #35 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Gallager <egallager@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9a5d1fceb86a61c9ead380df89ce3c4ba387d2e5
commit r14-3335-g9a5d1fceb86a61c9ead380df89ce3c4ba387d2e5
Author: Eric Gallager <egallager@gcc.gnu.org>
Date: Wed May 25 12:45:33 2022 -0400
improve error when /usr/include isn't found [PR90835]
This is a pretty simple patch that ought to help Darwin users understand
better why their build is failing when they forget to pass the
--with-sysroot= flag to configure.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/90835
* Makefile.in: improve error message when /usr/include is
missing
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2023-08-20 3:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-08-20 4:03 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-08-20 4:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|egallager at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
--- Comment #36 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
ok I've done as much as I feel like doing for the moment with
r14-3335-g9a5d1fceb86a61, so I'm unassigning for now; leaving open, though, as
Iain had some suggestions for improving things further...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-08-20 4:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-90835-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2019-11-25 16:11 ` [Bug target/90835] Incompatibilities with macOS 10.15 headers iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-21 15:56 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-22 17:26 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2020-03-22 18:00 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-22 19:02 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2020-03-23 2:10 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-21 0:57 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-24 14:38 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-24 14:57 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-24 15:13 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-25 0:22 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-25 20:27 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-17 19:42 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-20 3:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-20 4:03 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).