https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104079
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104074
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104065
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98824
--- Comment #4 from Bernie Innocenti ---
Are there any known workarounds?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98824
Bernie Innocenti changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernie at codewiz dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104074
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104065
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103721
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103973
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5e26bf17220926d308d0e3bb82bae6e592d2e485
commit r12-6655-g5e26bf17220926d308d0e3bb82bae6e592d2e485
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104015
--- Comment #11 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #10)
> Checking the number of tries might be useful, but if so, I think
> it should be done by a test that was written for that specific
> purpose. The tst can th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 52215
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52215&action=edit
patch for endian.h issue
This patch is not sufficient: after this, I get:
libtool: compile: /X-obj/./gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-18
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Bug ID: 104080
Summary: [12 Regression] newlib doesn't have endian.h causing
build failure with 2800bc08e4ab r12-6646
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104079
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104079
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103702
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
Patch was posted with the link
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/587309.html, still
pending on review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104079
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
A little more reduced:
template
struct AT
{
static void cn() noexcept(noexcept(DT::CN()));
void SNFP( void *n ) noexcept(noexcept(cn()));
};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104079
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104079
Bug ID: 104079
Summary: internal compiler error: in nothrow_spec_p, at
cp/except.c:1192
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103124
HaoChen Gui changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103483
--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor ---
Jaosn: this is how all middle-end warnings have always behaved. They trigger
on invalid statements present in the IL. A statement is considered invalid
when any of its operands is out of bounds or in some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
--- Comment #13 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> Result pure looping 0
> Function found to be pure: foo/4
This is good - we are supposed to find it to be pure and walk all
aliases and update noninterposable ones
> Declaration updated to b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103483
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Macleod ---
The only thing I can think of is it is *guaranteed* to be out of range, then
assume that is because those other values were handled elsewhere and don't
report it?
L_3 int [5, +INF]
[local count
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103483
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeffreyalaw at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82968
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
I get this compilation error:
In file included from /home/ebotcazou/src/libgfortran/runtime/fpu.c:29:
./fpu-target.h:36:24: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type
'struct fenv'
36 | _St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104074
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linux at carewolf dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104078
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 52213 [details]
> gcc12-pr104025.patch
>
> Untested fix. I think the old input_location is the right one.
I think the bug is that cp_lexer_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104078
Bug ID: 104078
Summary: Some type determination weirdness
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Rich Felker from comment #11)
> Are you sure? If pure/const discovery is no longer applied to weak
> definitions, it shouldn't be able to propagate to a non-inlined caller. Of
> course the fix m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104077
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-17
Alias|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104077
Bug ID: 104077
Summary: bogus/missing -Wdangling-pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104076
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104076
Bug ID: 104076
Summary: bogus -Wdangling-pointer on a conditional
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
--- Comment #11 from Rich Felker ---
Are you sure? If pure/const discovery is no longer applied to weak definitions,
it shouldn't be able to propagate to a non-inlined caller. Of course the fix
may be incomplete or not working, which I guess we c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103692
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104075
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104075
Bug ID: 104075
Summary: bogus/missing -Wuse-after-free
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104074
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The following are accepted:
struct f;
template class pfm;
template using u0 = pfm<&T::recycle>;
template class pmv;
template using u1= pmv<&T::recycle>;
template class ptr;
template using u2= ptr<&T::
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Actually, this is already supposed to be handled but the code is not effective
due to a typo. This fixes it:
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc b/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc
index f639807a78a..f95
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104074
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104074
Bug ID: 104074
Summary: [12 Regression] Maybe rejected code: is not a valid
type for a template non-type parameter since
r12-6022-gbb2a7f80a98de3fe
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c4b5bd4440292eca51de1f09ccce0d139ab981e
commit r11-9474-g2c4b5bd4440292eca51de1f09ccce0d139ab981e
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104045
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Folding the fmax operation should be valid in the absence of
-fsignaling-nans (fmax (a, +Inf) should return +Inf without raising any
exceptions, for any x not a signaling NaN). However, r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104073
Bug ID: 104073
Summary: Add option to hide stderr logging in libgccjit
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: j
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104072
Bug ID: 104072
Summary: Register variables in libgccjit
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104071
Bug ID: 104071
Summary: Add support for bitcast
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103692
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104007
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103942
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10 Regression] invalid |[9 Regression] invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
--- Comment #10 from Alexander Monakov ---
As comment #5 mentioned, it is still broken, you just need -fno-inline in
addition to -O2 for the original testcase. Andrew's remark is quite useful for
situations like this, you know :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27576
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758
--- Comment #16 from Marek Polacek ---
Yeah, I'm testing a patch which does just that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Just replace startswith (x, y) with strncmp (x, y, strlen (y)) == 0 for 11 and
earlier.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104067
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I briefly looked at the other BZ last week, but didn't make much headway. The
first thing that stood out was why are we threading around the loop. I thought
that was disabled. Anyway, Aldy and/or I will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758
--- Comment #14 from Marek Polacek ---
Oops, that broke the build:
.../c-family/c-format.c:3229:22: error: ‘startswith’ was not declared in this
scope
3229 | && startswith (format_chars, "decl-specifier"))
I've reverted the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a59360efef52468ad4648304f7ba56037f130a9a
commit r11-9472-ga59360efef52468ad4648304f7ba56037f130a9a
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102831
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101292
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104067
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Likely dup of PR103721.
I think so too. It looks eerily familiar. Aldy will be back this week and
will have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104059
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104059
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80351
Pokechu22 changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pokechu022+gccbugzilla@gmai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103991
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104070
Bug ID: 104070
Summary: libphobos: alias gc.os.MAP_ANON conflicts with alia s
gc.os.MAP_ANON on kfreebsd-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104054
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
--- Comment #9 from Rich Felker ---
Can you provide a link to the commit that might have fixed it? I imagine it's
simple enough to backport, in which case I'd like to do so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103163
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Not sure how it became a regression in GCC 12, but it sure looks worth
> fixing.
I reported how the ice became a regression in comment #1. It used to not ice
b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103662
--- Comment #9 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> I'm inclined to make this P1 even though it is gfortran only. As a last
> resort
> it should work to make the receiver side a ref-all pointer.
Yes, I also think this is important bug (lik
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104031
--- Comment #13 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The change also fixed original nix-2.4 test failure. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
--- Comment #8 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> > Do weak aliases fall under some implicit ODR here?
>
> The whole definition of "weak" is that it entitles you to make a definition
> that will be exempt from ODR, where a non-weak definit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Similar code triggers the same warning (and error due to -Werror) on current
linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/lib/subcmd/subcmd-util.h?id=0c947b8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
Bug ID: 104069
Summary: -Werror=use-after-free false positive on
elfutils-0.186
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104031
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104031
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aeca44768d54b089243004d1ef00d34dfa9f6530
commit r12-6643-gaeca44768d54b089243004d1ef00d34dfa9f6530
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103676
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If we consider such an inline asm invalid, we could error on it, ICE is not the
right thing. But what exactly should we error on? Alternative containing
multiple register classes for multi-word operands i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103676
--- Comment #21 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> r10-3981-gf6ff841bc8dd87ce364deb217dc6d1ec5dc31de8 still doesn't ICE,
> r10-3984-g22060d0e575e7754eb1355763d22bbe37c3caa13 already ICEs.
>
> I guess there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103973
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
--- Comment #7 from Rich Felker ---
> Do weak aliases fall under some implicit ODR here?
The whole definition of "weak" is that it entitles you to make a definition
that will be exempt from ODR, where a non-weak definition, if any, replaces it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104067
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102330
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104048
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104067
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51405
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53932
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54319
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55428
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65211
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65673
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66892
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |11.1.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67046
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Priority|P3
1 - 100 of 260 matches
Mail list logo
