https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105793
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
Guess vectorizer expects something like
tmp1 = cond ? b : -b;
a_5 = a_4 + tmp1;
from ifcvt instead of current
a_13 = b_10 + a_16;
# DEBUG a => NULL
_4 = b_10 < 1.0e+1;
# DEBUG BEGIN_STMT
a_12 = a_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105799
Bug ID: 105799
Summary: Miss optimization to simplify (v + A) * B + C in rtl.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105792
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sam at gentoo dot org
--- Comment #3 from S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105798
Bug ID: 105798
Summary: Add new -Wshadow for data member
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105797
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
// PR c++/105797
namespace std {
template struct integral_constant {
static constexpr int value = __v;
};
template struct decay { typedef _Tp type; };
template using decay_t = typename decay<_Tp>::type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56190
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Simplier example:
```
int func(int, char);
template
int testFunc(int (*)(TArgs..., char));
int x = testFunc(func);
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105797
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56190
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hiraditya at msn dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105796
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105796
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105797
Bug ID: 105797
Summary: Internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (
fn_type_unification ->
satisfaction_cache::satisfaction_cache ->
iterative_hash_template_arg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105796
Bug ID: 105796
Summary: error: no matching function for call with template
function
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105758
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f84f12066953186cce4328b7f178d3daa2fe96e
commit r13-871-g4f84f12066953186cce4328b7f178d3daa2fe96e
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105794
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Probably the same issue:
struct C {
~C();
};
int foo() {
C c;
return 1;
if (true)
;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105794
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101803
--- Comment #6 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
Since it seems like 10.4 is around the corner... any chance this will make it?
Thanks a lot!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
--- Comment #19 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
Thanks a lot!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102307
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102307
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3c10dc751e8670c7cc02a1b6db9abffb59d2fc42
commit r11-10042-g3c10dc751e8670c7cc02a1b6db9abffb59d2fc42
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105779
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105655
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105623
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105652
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105652
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:102a1472ab393c89bd74c06ff92bef55fa61812c
commit r12-8443-g102a1472ab393c89bd74c06ff92bef55fa61812c
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105655
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d81be519fd6547654f1eda6976e95524db7d39b7
commit r12-8442-gd81be519fd6547654f1eda6976e95524db7d39b7
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105623
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d90576952356735a2152c318ef1d60221b958b15
commit r12-8441-gd90576952356735a2152c318ef1d60221b958b15
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102307
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a578b17b59651144a7b2737475d993184600a802
commit r12-8440-ga578b17b59651144a7b2737475d993184600a802
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104111
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Concept evaluation depends |[DR2589] Concept evaluation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105778
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> It is the same thing done a few lines later in the preexisting code too.
> Shall I all of those change to gen_lowpart (QImode, force_reg (GET_MODE
> (operands[2]),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101231
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.0|10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101231
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:656cd10436260de997f5202b6737c7b8aebdfb4f
commit r10-10809-g656cd10436260de997f5202b6737c7b8aebdfb4f
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:656cd10436260de997f5202b6737c7b8aebdfb4f
commit r10-10809-g656cd10436260de997f5202b6737c7b8aebdfb4f
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:22b86cdc4d7fddb4991a08515e47e66fe5c41def
commit r10-10808-g22b86cdc4d7fddb4991a08515e47e66fe5c41def
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101718
--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe ---
still needed on 11.x.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101718
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:903c18c65c4eb135eb3c67a3c14fb6c20f537feb
commit r10-10807-g903c18c65c4eb135eb3c67a3c14fb6c20f537feb
Author: Iain Sandoe
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105756
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97854
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5dd5507265e3b7fecd775a106a20762a5e828421
commit r10-10805-g5dd5507265e3b7fecd775a106a20762a5e828421
Author: Iain Sandoe
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105795
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105795
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105795
Bug ID: 105795
Summary: Miscompilation with [[no_unique_address]]
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105544
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105544
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f106ef53024cc464ae446189fbad373caaff058e
commit r12-8439-gf106ef53024cc464ae446189fbad373caaff058e
Author: Iain Buclaw
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105544
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a0bc7fd42136f124726985b1ab4dcde739cd260e
commit r13-867-ga0bc7fd42136f124726985b1ab4dcde739cd260e
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Tue M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105759
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 09:59:48AM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105759
>
> --- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> JFTR: Cray and NAG also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105348
--- Comment #4 from Thiago Macieira ---
One more Qt workaround, for the record:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/413730
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30314
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105794
Bug ID: 105794
Summary: Spurious "control reaches end of non-void function"
warning with a combination of destructor, try/catch
and if (true)
Product: gcc
Versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105786
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-31
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88414
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105793
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105793
Bug ID: 105793
Summary: Missed vectorisation with conditional-select inside
loop
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105792
--- Comment #2 from Petr Sumbera ---
Created attachment 53060
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53060&action=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105758
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105792
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you attach the preprocessed source ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105792
Bug ID: 105792
Summary: SPARC GCC 12.1.0 fails with internal compiler error:
in expand_expr_real_2, at expr.cc:10160
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 105762, which changed state.
Bug 105762 Summary: [12/13 Regression] -Warray-bounds false positives for
integer-to-pointer casts since r12-2132-ga110855667782dac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105762
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105762
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105778
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53058|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105791
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Doh! V1TI needs to be added to V_128_256. I'll spin a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105767
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105791
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-31
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105778
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It is the same thing done a few lines later in the preexisting code too.
Shall I all of those change to gen_lowpart (QImode, force_reg (GET_MODE
(operands[2]), operands[2])) then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105778
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Comment on attachment 53058
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53058
gcc13-pr105778.patch
>+ operands[2] = gen_lowpart (QImode, operands[2]);
We have learned that pre-reload splits nee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105777
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105758
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-31
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105779
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105779
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105778
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105787
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
-g0f4df800b15-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 13.0.0 20220531 (experimental) (GCC)
mmovable{
operator Immovable() const { return Immovable{};}
};
void test(){
std::tuple t{ConvToImmovable{}};
}
```
The above code does not compile.
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20220531/include/c++/13.0.0/tuple:91:11:
error: use of deleted function 'Immovable::Immovable(Immova
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105759
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
JFTR: Cray and NAG also print T, so I guess this confirms Steve's analysis.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105789
Bug ID: 105789
Summary: The instance of a deallocation function template is
never a usual deallocation function
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105788
Bug ID: 105788
Summary: ICE: trying to capture 'args#0' in instantiation of
generic lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64234
lo1ol changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkh199740 at mail dot ru
--- Comment #6 from lo1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105787
Bug ID: 105787
Summary: internal compiler error: tree check: expected
enumeral_type, have record_type in tsubst_copy
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105786
Bug ID: 105786
Summary: ICE in compute_distributive_range, at
tree-data-ref.cc:593
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105785
Bug ID: 105785
Summary: DIEs for local types are emitted at wrong scope in
DWARF debug info
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-debu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105545
--- Comment #6 from Tom Hughes ---
The reason it only happens with -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS or in C++20 mode is that
both of those stop the use of the explicit instantiations for basic_string and
cause them to be implicitly instantiated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105781
--- Comment #5 from Denis Yaroshevskiy ---
Pragma is not going to be used in 99.9% of cases.
TBH I think that gcc should not require -funroll-loops at least on O3. This is
not a well known flag and people expect O3 to be max speed at the expense
82 matches
Mail list logo
