https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712
--- Comment #12 from Carlos Galvez ---
I just tested latest and greatest trunk (git commit
2415024e0f81f8c09bf08f947c790b43de9d0bbc) and the problem persists. Slightly
different line numbers but essentially same backtrace:
#0 linear_search_fde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110067
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #6)
> Yep - sorry for the noise, that should've been obvious. Patch at
> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/v8/v8/+/4583222.
I would not have said it was obvious;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110109
--- Comment #2 from JuzheZhong ---
(define_insn_and_split "*vlmul_extx2"
[(set (match_operand: 0 "register_operand" "=vr, ?&vr")
(subreg:
(match_operand:VLMULEXT2 1 "register_operand" " 0, vr") 0))]
"TARGET_VECTOR"
"#
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110102
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> We shouldn't be doing this transformation here, because A is a
> program-defined type and we don't know its properties.
True, though I wouldn't expect that to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Oh, I bet you're right. Oops.
I'll let the bisect run anyway, as I need to jump through all the hoops to send
V8 a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Yep from looking at
https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/refs/heads/main/src/heap/cppgc/stats-collector.h
, there is no include of algorithm .
The bug is almost definitely in the v8 sources.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> There is no std::remove in that preprocessed source ...
Actually there is but after the use of std::remove.
std::remove is used on line 75440 but only declare
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is no std::remove in that preprocessed source ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
It doesn't seem to be resolving to the STL template which takes an iterator,
given the error & warning?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110110
Bug ID: 110110
Summary: [14 regression] nodejs/v8 fails to compile with error:
cannot convert
‘std::vector::iterator’ to ‘const char*’
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97720
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on|95741 |
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97339
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97720
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
*** Bug 97339 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110109
--- Comment #1 from Li Pan ---
GCC 13 doesn't have this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109541
--- Comment #13 from Sam James ---
By the way, I think this needs --enable-checking=rtl, which is maybe why you
couldn't hit it before.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97720
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2415024e0f81f8c09bf08f947c790b43de9d0bbc
commit r14-1527-g2415024e0f81f8c09bf08f947c790b43de9d0bbc
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110109
Bug ID: 110109
Summary: RISC-V: ICE when build the Intrinsic code
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58517
--- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #18)
> Created attachment 55250 [details]
> This patch also fixes the issue by looking back
>
> Here is a patch which does the lookback if the reg is a hard register
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102974
--- Comment #11 from Mason ---
Here's umul_least_64() rewritten as mul_64x64_128() in C
typedef unsigned int u32;
typedef unsigned long long u64;
/* u32 acc[3], a[1], b[1] */
static void mul_add_32x32(u32 *acc, const u32 *a, const u32 *b)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58517
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 55250
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55250&action=edit
This patch also fixes the issue by looking back
Here is a patch which does the lookback if the reg is a hard r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58517
--- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #16)
> Now I am curious if T_REG should be BImode rather than SImode ... Then
> ifcvt.cc would not have to be modified. I Know BImode is newer than when sh
> target was ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58517
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
Now I am curious if T_REG should be BImode rather than SImode ... Then ifcvt.cc
would not have to be modified. I Know BImode is newer than when sh target was
added but maybe if someone cares about the sh tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58517
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
I was thinking of improving this is modify noce_get_condition here (we still
need the previous patch just in case we still get the T register).
Right now noce_get_condition will stop at:
(eq (reg:SI 147 t)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Carlos Galvez from comment #10)
> So the library was compiled with GCC 7 and has a dependency on
> libstdc++.so.6. Via LD_LIBRARY_PATH, I run my executable using GCC trunk
> (14)'s libstdc++.so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712
--- Comment #10 from Carlos Galvez ---
Hi!
I've continued to look into this and am having a slightly different but
essentially same error with yet another Nvidia library, but this time is with a
pure shared library, "libnvinfer.so", which was c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110108
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
No, there is code which ABS on a signed integer does not overflow (that
includes on vector of signed integers) so `ABS<0` is always considered true.
This is where ABSU_EXPR comes into play which does not cau
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110108
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110106
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The full backtrace of the seg fault:
t0.cc:3:36: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
3 | void y(j<0> z) noexcept(noexcept(g{z}));
|^
0x128f4af crash_sign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110106
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
```
template struct j{ };
struct g {g(j<0>);};
void y(j<0> z) noexcept(noexcept(g{z}));
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110108
Bug ID: 110108
Summary: [14 Regression] Wrong code from combining
VPABSB/VPBLENDVB since 1ede03e2d0437ea9c2f7
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110107
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
lambda inside decltype has many known issues so it might be a dup of one of
those ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110107
Bug ID: 110107
Summary: ICE on invalid code with lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110106
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100607
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bedb3eb53308f0bbfacb55b608f23b009504d892
commit r13-7412-gbedb3eb53308f0bbfacb55b608f23b009504d892
Author: Steve Kargl
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110106
Bug ID: 110106
Summary: ICE on noexcept(noexcept(...)) with optional
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109973
--- Comment #8 from Benji Smith ---
Yes, just pulled latest trunk and confirmed that the issue no longer repros.
Thanks for the fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110105
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
float mul(float x, float y, float z)
{
return ((double)x) * y + z;
}
Also produces the conversion ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110105
--- Comment #1 from Pavel M ---
Demo: https://godbolt.org/z/9s7eb9b1K.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110105
Bug ID: 110105
Summary: ARM GCC: underoptimization: expected vfma.f16, actual
vcvtb-vfma.f32-vcvtb
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #57 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #56)
>
> > In that test you can see the unnecessary push/pop of PR. This is because
> > initially it wanted to expand as a library call, but then your patterns
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #56 from Alexander Klepikov
---
> > Regarding testsuite. There's execute fails, but this is due to lack of
> > multilib. I'll rebuild and retest.
> >
> > There's also fail in pr64345-1.c, in this function:
> > [...]
> >
> > But it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109924
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110003
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110003
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7c0e2159afb3235950d3d8f61ef085cd1ccf0dfc
commit r14-1520-g7c0e2159afb3235950d3d8f61ef085cd1ccf0dfc
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109924
--- Comment #3 from g.peterh...@t-online.de ---
But in your documentation
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html it is stated that the
__builtin's would be available for all FP types.
For upcoming standards https://en.cppreferenc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110003
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gaius at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110104
Bug ID: 110104
Summary: gcc produces sub-optimal code for _addcarry_u64 chain
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110102
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109923
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109923
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:38af81df6aac11d49f9378d1c628ccc3c815c3ff
commit r14-1519-g38af81df6aac11d49f9378d1c628ccc3c815c3ff
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70790
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:999e617d3121b82921c8031ee695fd036f553f04
commit r14-1516-g999e617d3121b82921c8031ee695fd036f553f04
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110003
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110103
Bug ID: 110103
Summary: the pointers return from two malloc is not equal
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58517
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #13)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)
> > Created attachment 55239 [details]
> > Patch which does work on this
> >
> > Though, I need to double to make sure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58517
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)
> Created attachment 55239 [details]
> Patch which does work on this
>
> Though, I need to double to make sure it works for other cases still.
> sh is the case where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #55 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #54)
> Regarding testsuite. There's execute fails, but this is due to lack of
> multilib. I'll rebuild and retest.
>
> There's also fail in pr64345-1.c, in this func
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109670
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Thomas Neumann
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7b21a74b41b30cd070f69523edf9583d1e287249
commit r13-7411-g7b21a74b41b30cd070f69523edf9583d1e287249
Author: Thomas Neuman
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109685
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Thomas Neumann
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd68f60c4ca5d23e4f42c447a2fd1d33030301bf
commit r13-7410-gfd68f60c4ca5d23e4f42c447a2fd1d33030301bf
Author: Thomas Neumann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109670
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Neumann :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:38e88d41f50d844f1404172657ef7e8372014ef6
commit r14-1515-g38e88d41f50d844f1404172657ef7e8372014ef6
Author: Thomas Neumann
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109685
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Neumann :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5cf60b6ba111f4169305c7832b063b000e9ec36a
commit r14-1514-g5cf60b6ba111f4169305c7832b063b000e9ec36a
Author: Thomas Neumann
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110067
--- Comment #10 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Thank you! I confirm the fix also fixed complete pixman-0.42.2 test suite.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #54 from Alexander Klepikov
---
Regarding testsuite. There's execute fails, but this is due to lack of
multilib. I'll rebuild and retest.
There's also fail in pr64345-1.c, in this function:
typedef signed char int8_t;
int test_int
65 matches
Mail list logo
