https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95196
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAIT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95196
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:693abdb66aba25f3fb25c3cd8d65dbb64ecd37a0
commit r12-4638-g693abdb66aba25f3fb25c3cd8d65dbb64ecd37a0
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-22
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102907
Bug ID: 102907
Summary: aarch64/shrn-combine-[123].c fail with SVE
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
--- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon ---
Sure, I just filed PR 102906 for the ivopts-4.c issue on arm.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102906
Bug ID: 102906
Summary: [12 regression] gcc.target/arm/ivopts-4.c fails since
r12-4526
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102832
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102663
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102663
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Gallager :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c3e80a16af287e804b87b8015307085399755cd4
commit r12-4636-gc3e80a16af287e804b87b8015307085399755cd4
Author: Eric Gallager
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102894
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102894
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0c1f737a485f05c591c94b50acfb416c45a4c916
commit r12-4634-g0c1f737a485f05c591c94b50acfb416c45a4c916
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92621
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92621
--- Comment #23 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:24e99e6ec1cc57f3660c00ff677c7feb16aa94d2
commit r12-4632-g24e99e6ec1cc57f3660c00ff677c7feb16aa94d2
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102829
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102826
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #3)
> However, in the gfortran config part of gcc, it should not has the finclude
> part for F951 under all circumstances or there should be some option to
> control t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102810
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://stackoverflow.com/q |
|/69583120/5264491
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102894
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Ev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102882
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
OK, that confirms that the allocations are being done by the std::string
objects inside the library.
But I really don't want to have to use custom allocators every time we use
std::string in such tests.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> The object is only destroyed after the destructor finishes, which is never
> in this case.
But it's still wrong to re-enter the destructor after it starts, ev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102794
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> What I see is clang performing checks at a place it shouldn't.
> It can be better seen on
> struct Test {
> constexpr Test() = default;
>
> constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102817
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Furthermore the "scalar" variants work:
...
type(t), parameter :: u= t(4)
...
y = (u%a)
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102876
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |testsuite
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102817
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Strange. We happen to call gfc_free_shape with inconsistent data:
(gdb) p rank
$84 = 2
(gdb) p shape[1]
$85 = (mpz_t *) 0x0
Not good.
Interestingly the following works:
integer :: z(1,2) =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 regression] r12-4526|[12 regression] r12-4526
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98342
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Has this bug been fully fixed now, so that we can close it?
It seems so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102905
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102892
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102891
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98342
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92482
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||everythingfunctional@proton
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99922
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102627
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102508
--- Comment #2 from Iain Sandoe ---
thanks for the simplified test case.
As noted in pr98935, statement expressions are not handled (I deferred handling
them in the initial implementation since they are an extension)... however, it
is intended t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102675
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #6)
>
> Another possibility is to revert your patch so that others can bootstrap.
The problem won't go away as long as we keep syncing with upstream.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102816
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102742
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102742
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:690180eb4b35df3f4b5def690878ecaeb5492e41
commit r12-4630-g690180eb4b35df3f4b5def690878ecaeb5492e41
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102675
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102905
Bug ID: 102905
Summary: [12 regression] several vector test cases fail on
power 7 after r12-4490
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102897
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||100810
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102898
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101208
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102904
Bug ID: 102904
Summary: go testsuite does not always cause a timeout
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #6 from friedkeenan at protonmail dot com ---
Well it says "being destroyed" not "already destroyed", because the object is
currently being destroyed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
What I see is clang performing checks at a place it shouldn't.
It can be better seen on
struct Test {
constexpr Test() = default;
constexpr ~Test() {
delete this;
}
};
consteval bool te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c31d2d14f798dc7ca9cc078200d37113749ec3bd
commit r12-4629-gc31d2d14f798dc7ca9cc078200d37113749ec3bd
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102903
Bug ID: 102903
Summary: Invalid gfortran.dg testcases or wrong-code with
-fcheck=all -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102886
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I posted a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/582380.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102843
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #4 from friedkeenan at protonmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Just compile your testcase with additional
> -Dconstexpr= -Dconsteval= -D'static_assert(x)='
> to see how it is compiled, there is that infini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102900
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE via gfc_class_data_get |ICE via gfc_class_data_get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Just compile your testcase with additional
-Dconstexpr= -Dconsteval= -D'static_assert(x)='
to see how it is compiled, there is that infinite recursion with all compilers
I've tried.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #2 from friedkeenan at protonmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Why do you think this is a compiler bug?
> If you delete this, you invoke the destructor and then the operator delete,
> so when you do this i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
-system-zlib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20211022 (experimental) [master r12-4624-gae5c540662e] (GCC)
[576] %
[576] % gcctk -O2 small.c; ./a.out
[577] %
[577] % gcctk -O3 small.c
[578] % timeout -s 9 10 ./a.out
Killed
[579] %
[579] % cat small.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102901
Bug ID: 102901
Summary: ICE (segfault) when compiling pdt_13.f03 with
-fcheck=all in gfc_check_pdt_dummy ->
structure_alloc_comps
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100917
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102900
Bug ID: 102900
Summary: ICE via gfc_class_data_get in alloc_comp_class_4.f03
with -fcheck=all
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102503
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
Bug ID: 102899
Summary: Performing `delete this` within destructor in constant
evaluation results in infinitely recursive error
message
Product: gcc
Version: 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100906
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100906
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7cb6d66bd52e884ff33c61e46a9ee9facc2ac60
commit r12-4628-gb7cb6d66bd52e884ff33c61e46a9ee9facc2ac60
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102843
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102898
Bug ID: 102898
Summary: declaration of 'using Foo = enum class Foo' changes
meaning of 'Foo'
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 81981, which changed state.
Bug 81981 Summary: [8 Regression] -fsanitize=undefined makes a
-Wmaybe-uninitialized warning disappear
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102862
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102886
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100916
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100916
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100907
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
In both case I get
FAIL! chrcmp: 66 != 65281
FAIL! chrcmp: 66 != 65281
FAIL! chrcmp: 67 != 65282
FAIL! chrcmp: 68 != 65283
FAIL! chrcmp: 69 != 65284
FAIL! chrcmp: 70 != 65285
FAIL! chrcmp: 71 != 652
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100907
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102503
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Thanks for the fix!
This was reported to us by a user of the arm embedded toolchains that was
upgrading from gcc 7. We won't be releasing any new releases for GCC 8 and 9,
but may be for 10 and 11 is cer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |MOVED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> Then, please file it here: https://github.com/libffi/libffi/issues.
Done.
https://github.com/libffi/libffi/issues/666
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96870
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Then, please file it here: https://github.com/libffi/libffi/issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #2)
> Does it happen in libffi upstream?
>
> https://github.com/libffi/libffi
Yes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102890
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102890
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
Target M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2a9a98a369528c8689ecb68db576f8e7dc2fa45
commit r12-4627-gc2a9a98a369528c8689ecb68db576f8e7dc2fa45
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92621
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #22 from Tobias Burnus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102897
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102897
Bug ID: 102897
Summary: [12 Regression] simplify_permutation ICEs on assert
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102895
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> There's identical IL before the vrp2 pass (the one after strlen) but on the
> GCC 11 branch vrp2 eliminates the call to foo while on trunk it does not.
>
> On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
Bug ID: 102896
Summary: src/moxie/ffi.c:239:arrayIndexOutOfBounds
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libffi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102895
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo