https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112376
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-15
Summary|[14 Reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113920
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Similar thing happens with file ./Lower/derived-type-finalization.f90
from the same test suite:
test $ /home/dcb38/gcc/results.20240214.asan.ubsan/bin/gfortran -c -w
./Lower/derived-type-finalization.f90
./Lower/derived-type-finalization.f90:227:37:
227
15.0.1 test suite:
I can confirm that this is still happening on recent gfortran.
test $ /home/dcb38/gcc/results.20240214.asan.ubsan/bin/gfortran -c -w
./Lower/forall/array-pointer.f90
./Lower/forall/array-pointer.f90:486:13:
486 | subroutine s5(x,y,z,n1,n2)
| ^
Error: non-trivia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113926
Bug ID: 113926
Summary: `(vect128 int){1, 1, 0, 0}` could be generated via
`movi vN.2s, 1`
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113856
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note for:
```
#define vect128 __attribute__((vector_size(16) ))
vect128 float f1()
{
return (vect64 float){1.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f};
}
```
Should also be able to do:
```
fmov v0.2s, 1.0
```
The instruct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113856
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113896
--- Comment #9 from noobie-iv at mail dot ru ---
I confirm that the original bug in the scantailor-experimental project was also
fixed by commit 2f16c53558d01135f0f78cf78a2f722b774684d7.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102317
Fangrui Song changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||i at maskray dot me
--- Comment #13 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113916
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|gcc allows overrid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113925
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-15
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113508
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
part 1 which just fixes some style issue:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/645630.html
part 2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/645631.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105847
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jerry DeLisle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8221201cc59870579b9dc451b173f94b8d8b0993
commit r14-8992-g8221201cc59870579b9dc451b173f94b8d8b0993
Author: Steve Kargl
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105847
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle ---
This seems to work:
/* Build the namelist object name. */
-
- string = gfc_build_cstring_const (var_name);
+ if (sym && !sym->attr.use_only && sym->attr.use_rename)
+string = gfc_build_cstring_con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113925
Bug ID: 113925
Summary: static assert on requires clause with non-type bool
template instantiated with immediately invoked
consteval lambda is incorrectly rejected
Product:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113924
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|worse diagnostic for|[11/12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113924
Bug ID: 113924
Summary: worse diagnostic for invalid decltype since r10-5347
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113508
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
There are few other changes I am going to make too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105847
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
There is an assert just above the patch that implies that sym can be NULL if c
is not. With gdb I checked, and sure enough thats the failure point. I am
testing with sym included in the condition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
--- Comment #17 from Peter Kasting ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> (In reply to Peter Kasting from comment #14)
> > And you are right, it's possible to reimplement concepts around "is this
> > even legal to pass to to_addres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105847
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Steve, I am getting a boatload of regressions on this. I wonder if something
in the sym structure needs to be guarded here. They appear to be segfaults. Can
you take a look?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113923
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #2)
> are both non-NULL, which might catch the issue slightly early.
^
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113923
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
inlined_call_event's ctor should probably assert that params
tree apparent_callee_fndecl,
tree apparent_caller_fndecl,
are both non-NULL, which might catch the iss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113923
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Reproducing that is going to be a challenge.
FWIW you can probably work around it via -fno-analyzer-undo-inlining.
For an inlined_call_event's m_apparent_caller_fndecl to be NULL, then when it
was created
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |MOVED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 113922, which changed state.
Bug 113922 Summary: -Wstringop-overflow with FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 and O{1,2,3}
generates a false positive for 0-sized structs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
--- Comment #7 from Sergio Durigan Junior ---
Ah, OK, I'll let you file the bug, then. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
--- Comment #6 from Sergio Durigan Junior ---
Thanks for the quick analysis.
It seems that the following glibc commit dropped size hints from access when
FORTIFY_SOURCE=3:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=e938c02748402c50f60b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
extern ssize_t read (int __fd, void *__buf, size_t __nbytes) __wur
__fortified_attr_access (__write_only__, 2, 3);
...
/* For _FORTIFY_SOURCE == 3 we use __builtin_dynamic_object_size, which may
use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113923
Bug ID: 113923
Summary: Segfault in gcc/gcc/tree-diagnostic.cc:265
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
POSIX definition of read:
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009604599/functions/read.html
>Before any action described below is taken, and if nbyte is zero, the read()
>function may detect and return e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
From
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Common-Function-Attributes.html#index-access-function-attribute
:
>When no size-index argument is specified, the pointer argument must be either
>null or point to a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
--- Comment #2 from Sergio Durigan Junior ---
Created attachment 57431
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57431&action=edit
Preprocessed source
Sure thing. Here it is.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113877
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I came across -c in ACATS[1]. I do agree it’s an uncommon usage, and indeed I
can’t think of other reasons to do it; perhaps it’s to support porting from
other compilers? (if that’s something we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
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=113922
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you attach the preprocessed source since this depends on glibc's
FORTIFY_SOURCE for value of 3 which is only included in newer glibc's?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113922
Bug ID: 113922
Summary: -Wstringop-overflow with FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 and O{1,2,3}
generates a false positive for 0-sized structs
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113576
--- Comment #56 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The testcase is fixed with g:430c772be3382134886db33133ed466c02efc71c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113910
--- Comment #15 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
> The regression should be fixed, can you check we're now no longer slower on
> trunk? (either use a release checking build or use -fno-check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105847
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I obviously did not get to this last May. Will try now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> The reason to avoid &*ptr is because it's undefined behaviour on a
> past-the-end iterator, not because it might be ill-formed for some template
> argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99210
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109358
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113855
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113855
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:67ce5c97167a60cb845b9f3f55186c00fc5df078
commit r14-8990-g67ce5c97167a60cb845b9f3f55186c00fc5df078
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue Feb 13 08
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113871
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113871
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c2f57e4158924467afbf4c2fd3938e507287dab
commit r14-8989-g2c2f57e4158924467afbf4c2fd3938e507287dab
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Wed F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113336
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ea7675761226b42e2deb7b320e9cc680512f4090
commit r14-8988-gea7675761226b42e2deb7b320e9cc680512f4090
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Wed F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113708
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 113708, which changed state.
Bug 113708 Summary: [modules] ICE in import_export_decl with non-trivially
initialized inline variable in header module
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113708
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113708
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd9d14f7d53de07beff06004922a2bff20ece671
commit r14-8987-gdd9d14f7d53de07beff06004922a2bff20ece671
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107071
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #5 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Linus Torvalds from comment #2)
>
> So we could make our workaround option be something like
>
>config GCC_ASM_GOTO_WORKAROUND
> def_bool y
> depends on CC_IS_GCC && GCC_VERSION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Bisection in the other direction doesn't make much sense, since asm goto with
output operands is only supported in GCC 11 and later.
Anyway, with gcc 11, I can see something fishy already during expansion:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #3 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Linus Torvalds from comment #2)
>
> So we could make our workaround option be something like
>
>config GCC_ASM_GOTO_WORKAROUND
> def_bool y
> depends on CC_IS_GCC && GCC_VERSION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #2 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Bisection points to r12-5301-g045206450386bcd774db3bde0c696828402361c6
> making the problem go away,
Well, that certainly explains why I can't see the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113861
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113861
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2b5e0c11a40865b33bc4424b3c344176eaecf104
commit r14-8986-g2b5e0c11a40865b33bc4424b3c344176eaecf104
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113781
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113862
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113862
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113893
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ebotcazou at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113567
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=113415
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
--- Comment #14 from Peter Kasting ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #13)
> As I said in comment 7, LWG considered this case and it was pointed out that
> the problem described can only occur if a type defines iterator_concept =
> co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103908
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|12.0|10.3.0, 11.2.0, 9.4.0
Known to wor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
Bug ID: 113921
Summary: Output register of an "asm volatile goto" is
incorrectly clobbered/discarded
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113291
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 57427
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57427&action=edit
patch
The patch makes compilation to finish in reasonable time.
I ended up in need to dropping DISREGARD_INLINE_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113450
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or convince Oracle to change it (again, an ABI break).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113450
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's technically an ABI break, since void f(int8_t) would mangle differently.
It probably wouldn't affect much in practice, but would still be a break.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113450
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113450
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> I assume that int8_t is char on Solaris, rather than signed char?
This actually violates the C and C++ standards, which require that intN_t is a
signed inte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113920
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113920
Bug ID: 113920
Summary: Make -std=gnu++20 default for GCC 15
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111054
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111054
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8d51bfe0f97a27c749c36003867901338833340a
commit r14-8985-g8d51bfe0f97a27c749c36003867901338833340a
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Wed F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72751
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
We should also make sure that __extension__ suppresses the -Wnested-anon-types
diagnostic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72751
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113919
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72751
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tsqurt at outlook dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113291
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
There is a cap in want_inline_self_recursive_call_p which gives up on inlining
after reaching max recursive inlining depth of 8. Problem is that the tree here
is too wide. After early inlining f0 contains 4 ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113893
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113291
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
There is a cap in want_inline_self_recursive_call_p which gives up on inlining
after reaching max recursive inlining depth of 8. Problem is that the tree here
is too wide. After early inlining f0 contains 4 ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113919
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
clang++ has -Wnested-anon-types so I think we need that too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99210
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jerry DeLisle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b79d3e6a9284703b70688122f7d4955e7c50804a
commit r14-8983-gb79d3e6a9284703b70688122f7d4955e7c50804a
Author: Jerry DeLisle
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 57426
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57426&action=edit
gcc14-pr113907.patch
I've managed to come up with a small runtime testcase.
Now with a patch which does the r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113893
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #2 from Eric Botc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113893
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113576
--- Comment #55 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #53)
> Comment on attachment 57424 [details]
> Proposed testsuite patch
>
> As skylake-avx512 is -mavx512{f,cd,bw,dq,vl}, requiring just avx512f
> effective target and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113919
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I suppose this should fix it but there are testsuite FAILs.
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.cc
@@ -5522,6 +5522,12 @@ fixup_anonymous_aggr (tree t)
}
}
}
+ /* [class.union.an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113332
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113908
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113908
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9bc6b23d11697545e8a951ccd60691b1e58b98c2
commit r14-8981-g9bc6b23d11697545e8a951ccd60691b1e58b98c2
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo
