Summary: | local class and -O1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | gcc | Reporter: | martin |
Component: | c++ | Assignee: | Jason Merrill <jason> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | gcc-bugs, loewis, neil |
Priority: | P3 | Keywords: | rejects-valid |
Version: | unknown | ||
Target Milestone: | 3.0.x | ||
Host: | Target: | ||
Build: | Known to work: | ||
Known to fail: | Last reconfirmed: |
Description
martin
2000-02-29 02:06:00 UTC
State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-Why: Confirmed as a bug From: loewis@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, martin@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, ulf.larsson@mbox337.swipnet.se Cc: Subject: Re: c++/9 Date: 9 Mar 2000 07:02:06 -0000 Synopsis: local class and -O1 State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: loewis State-Changed-When: Wed Mar 8 23:02:06 2000 State-Changed-Why: Confirmed as a bug http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=9&database=gcc Severity-Changed-From-To: critical-serious Severity-Changed-Why: Can work around with -O0. Responsible-Changed-From-To: unassigned->jason Responsible-Changed-Why: State-Changed-From-To: analyzed-feedback State-Changed-Why: Fixed for gcc 3.0. State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed State-Changed-Why: Fixed in CVS. No feedback is forthcoming; I don't think we need to wait for it (we don't for other fixes). From: neil@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, jason@gcc.gnu.org, martin@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de, ulf.larsson@mbox337.swipnet.se Cc: Subject: Re: c++/9 Date: 25 Nov 2000 15:25:01 -0000 Synopsis: local class and -O1 State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed State-Changed-By: neil State-Changed-When: Sat Nov 25 07:25:01 2000 State-Changed-Why: Fixed in CVS. No feedback is forthcoming; I don't think we need to wait for it (we don't for other fixes). http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=9&database=gcc On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:55:38PM +0000, sje at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #4 from Steve Ellcey <sje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> I think this is my fault. My patch shouldn't have affected x86 at all but I
> see my build/test on x86 only tested C and C++, I didn't have Fortran
> configured in when I checked for regressions.
>
Thanks for the quick reply. Your commit and Andrew's
came in about the same time. I haven't had a chance
to backout different revisions to narrow down the
issue.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:42:12AM +0000, sje at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88898
>
> --- Comment #6 from Steve Ellcey <sje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Author: sje
> Date: Fri Jan 18 00:41:40 2019
> New Revision: 268054
>
> URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268054&root=gcc&view=rev
> Log:
> 2018-01-17 Steve Ellcey <sellcey@cavium.com>
>
> PR fortran/88898
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-2.f90: Add aarch64 target specifier to
> warning checks.
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/pr79154-1.f90: Ditto.
> * gfortran.dg/gomp/pr83977.f90: Ditto.
>
> Modified:
> trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-2.f90
> trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/pr79154-1.f90
> trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/pr83977.f90
>
I can confirm that the patch has fixed the regression.
Do you want to close the PR or would you rather have
me do it?
|