[Bug modula2/110125] Variables are reported as uninitialized when only set inside WITH statement

2023-06-17 Thread gaius at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110125 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gaius at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug target/110264] internal compiler error: riscv_vector::vector_insn_info::get_avl_reg_rtx

2023-06-17 Thread law at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110264 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized and optimizations saying that the uninitialized has a nonzero bits of 1.

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[14 Regression] llvm-16 |[13/14 Regression] llvm-16

[Bug modula2/110284] [14 Regression] Bootstrap failures with m2

2023-06-17 Thread gaius at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110284 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-06-17 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug middle-end/110228] [14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized and optimizations saying that the uninitialized has a nonzero bits of 1.

2023-06-17 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug middle-end/110228] [14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized and optimizations saying that the uninitialized has a nonzero bits of 1.

2023-06-17 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #14 from Sergei Trofimovich --- > LookupFlags = LookupFlags | t; That makes `LookupFlags` to guarantee to contain uninitialized bits. Did you mean `LookupFlags = t;`?

[Bug middle-end/110228] [14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized and optimizations saying that the uninitialized has a nonzero bits of 1.

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski --- The big question is this code here: ``` unsigned a[4] = {1,1,1,1}; __attribute__((noipa)) void sink(int){} __attribute__((noipa)) static void bug(unsigned & p, unsigned *t, int n) { bool LookupFlags

[Bug fortran/92887] [F2008] Passing nullified/disassociated pointer or unalloc allocatable to OPTIONAL + VALUE dummy fails

2023-06-17 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92887 --- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- When using the tentative patch https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55333 and adding a hackish else if (e && fsym && fsym->attr.value && e->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE) {

[Bug fortran/92887] [F2008] Passing nullified/disassociated pointer or unalloc allocatable to OPTIONAL + VALUE dummy fails

2023-06-17 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92887 --- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 55356 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55356&action=edit Partial patch for the presence attribute The attached patch generates a test for the presence that d

[Bug c++/110295] [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_finish with local class with inherited operator delete in a templated function and -g

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110295 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|internal compiler error: in |[10/11/12/13/14 Regression]

[Bug c++/110295] internal compiler error: in dwarf2out_finish

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110295 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||14.0 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug tree-optimization/110298] [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu since r10-840

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110298 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- loop->nb_iterations still includes reference to a removed SSA name ...

[Bug tree-optimization/110298] [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu since r10-840

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110298 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.5 Keywords|

[Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns

2023-06-17 Thread klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 --- Comment #82 from Alexander Klepikov --- I have read the docs and other targets' code, and the puzzle finally came together. A struct with additional current function context is a really good idea! I'll implement it in a couple of days.

[Bug middle-end/110228] [14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized and optimizations saying that the uninitialized has a nonzero bits of 1.

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski --- I should note my reduced testcase does not even need the ranger to tell me that the range is [0,1] because it uses a bool which has a PRECISION of 1. If an expand solution is not implemented in a few months

[Bug fortran/110033] rejects-valid: associate name corresponding to coarray selector should be considered a coarray

2023-06-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110033 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org Bloc

[Bug fortran/110224] Rejects valid: function reference with data pointer result as lhs in assignment

2023-06-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||87477 --- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas --

[Bug middle-end/79173] add-with-carry and subtract-with-borrow support (x86_64 and others)

2023-06-17 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79173 --- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek --- Sorry, in that case nothing needs to be done for riscv. I'm sure aarch64, arm has one (e.g. adcs), I think powerpc has some, but e.g. PR43892 is still open, and I'm sure s390 has them too (alc*, slb*).

[Bug middle-end/79173] add-with-carry and subtract-with-borrow support (x86_64 and others)

2023-06-17 Thread law at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79173 --- Comment #23 from Jeffrey A. Law --- risc-v doesn't have any special instructions to implement add-with-carry or subtract-with-borrow. Depending on who you talk do, it's either a feature or a mis-design.

[Bug c/110298] [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu since r10-840

2023-06-17 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110298 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Summary|ICE at -Os on

[Bug c/110298] New: ICE at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu

2023-06-17 Thread shaohua.li at inf dot ethz.ch via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110298 Bug ID: 110298 Summary: ICE at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assig

[Bug libstdc++/110287] _M_check_len is expensive

2023-06-17 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110287 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > @@ -946,7 +945,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER >else > { > const size_type __len = > - _M_check_len(size_type(1),

[Bug libstdc++/110287] _M_check_len is expensive

2023-06-17 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110287 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Do you mean something like this? diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_vector.h b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_vector.h index 70ced3d101f..a4dbfeb8b5b 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_vect

Incorrect type when using std::conditional_t with an empty lambda

2023-06-17 Thread Тимофей Довгаль via Gcc-bugs
When using std::conditional_t inside a class/struct with one of the conditional types being `decltype([]{})`, the type is wrong. https://godbolt.org/z/3jhfcKav4 ``` #include #include #include template using test_alias = std::conditional_t; template using test_alias3 = std::conditional_t;

[Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns

2023-06-17 Thread klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 --- Comment #81 from Alexander Klepikov --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #78) > The compiler processes one function at a time, all passes at once. It > doesn't mix passes of different functions. So I think using global variable > in sh.

[Bug fortran/88688] Incorrect association in SELECT TYPE

2023-06-17 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88688 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC|

[Bug go/110297] New: [13/14 Regression] all libgo tests fail on arm-linux-gnueabi and arm-linxu-gnueabihf

2023-06-17 Thread doko at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110297 Bug ID: 110297 Summary: [13/14 Regression] all libgo tests fail on arm-linux-gnueabi and arm-linxu-gnueabihf Product: gcc Version: 13.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns

2023-06-17 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 --- Comment #80 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #79) > > I mean that if a user run GCC with -O1 and we don't do SH specific loop move > invariants pass at -O1, a user could look at binary (or at .S file) and find

[Bug c++/110296] ICE in gsi_replace, at gimple-iterator.cc:437 during GIMPLE pass: widening_mul

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110296 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug tree-optimization/110271] [14 Regression] UICE on pycryptodome-3.17.0 during GIMPLE pass: widening_mul: in gsi_replace, at gimple-iterator.cc:437

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110271 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manuel.lauss at googlemail dot com ---

[Bug c++/110296] New: ICE in gsi_replace, at gimple-iterator.cc:437 during GIMPLE pass: widening_mul

2023-06-17 Thread manuel.lauss at googlemail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110296 Bug ID: 110296 Summary: ICE in gsi_replace, at gimple-iterator.cc:437 during GIMPLE pass: widening_mul Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severi

[Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns

2023-06-17 Thread klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 --- Comment #79 from Alexander Klepikov --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #78) > (In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #77) > > > It'd be good if the newly added passes are ran only with -O2 or higher. > > > > This can be confusing

[Bug c++/110295] New: internal compiler error: in dwarf2out_finish

2023-06-17 Thread duz--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110295 Bug ID: 110295 Summary: internal compiler error: in dwarf2out_finish Product: gcc Version: 11.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug tree-optimization/110280] internal compiler error: in const_unop, at fold-const.cc:1884

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110280 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug tree-optimization/110280] internal compiler error: in const_unop, at fold-const.cc:1884

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110280 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- In the original case FRE is trying to do the same thing as the reduced testcase: ``` Successfully combined 4 partial definitions Setting value number of _39 to { 0, 0, 0, 0 } (changed) Value numbering stmt =

[Bug tree-optimization/110280] internal compiler error: in const_unop, at fold-const.cc:1884

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110280 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- I think this part of match is incorrect: (if (sel.series_p (0, 1, 0, 1)) { op0; } (if (sel.series_p (0, 1, nelts, 1)) { op1; } This is only true if type == TREE_TYPE (op0) (well compatib

[Bug tree-optimization/110280] internal compiler error: in const_unop, at fold-const.cc:1884

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110280 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Match-and-simplified VEC_PERM_EXPR <_10, _10, { 0, 1, 2, 3, ... }> to { 0, 0, 0, 0 } Ok, that is wrong ...

[Bug tree-optimization/110280] internal compiler error: in const_unop, at fold-const.cc:1884

2023-06-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110280 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.2 Known to fail|

[Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns

2023-06-17 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 --- Comment #78 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #77) > > It'd be good if the newly added passes are ran only with -O2 or higher. > > This can be confusing to users when they discover that not all invariants > are