https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
--- Comment #16 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 58717
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58717&action=edit
Fix for the regression
The mechanism in the original fix was OK but the use of the locus location was
not. I wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115949
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116020
Bug ID: 116020
Summary: Incorrect treatment of (this void) parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at harmstone dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115949
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 58716
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58716&action=edit
another reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105361
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 58715
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58715&action=edit
Proposed patch, still testing
The attached patch fixes this bug and passes regression testing. I want to try
a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113357
--- Comment #16 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #11)
Jeff, could you show me your tester's configuration so I can compare the two?
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113357
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.gentoo.org/sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116019
Bug ID: 116019
Summary: Incorrect cannot-tail messages on targets
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116017
--- Comment #5 from keithp at keithp dot com ---
You're quite correct; conversion from double to float also loses the sign bit.
It never occurred to me that RISC-V would be different from every other GCC
target in this regard. I'll go stick a wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89270
--- Comment #16 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> Fixed on trunk sofar. Joseph correctly mentioned that iff AVR would define
> __int24 using INT_N in avr-modes.def the issue would have been mitigated as
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115618
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Petazzoni ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> That commit made --without-long-double-128 the default on
> powerpc*-*-linux-musl*.
> ELFv2 is one thing, but whether long double is IEEE double, IBM double
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116012
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100383
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #10 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> (In reply to Hubert Tong from comment #8)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> > > Those are all unevulated context.that is sizeof and decltype are b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The patches to support CodeView is being added (and improved) for GCC 15. I am
not sure how much will be finished by the release of GCC 15.
BUT it might be the case there is enough for at least minidump alre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-07-20
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #8 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Those are all unevulated context.that is sizeof and decltype are both
> considered unevulated context. In them, gcc does not think &(T::x) and &T::x
> act differen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116017
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116017
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116017
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you test also:
```
#include
#include
int main(void)
{
volatile doubled;
volatile float f;
d = (double) NAN;
d = -d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116018
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note it is bad form to use `#pragma GCC poison` from a library's public header.
If there is any from a library's public header then those libraries should be
fixed.
GCC's plugin situtation is different and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116017
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note on riscv float conversion are not sign preserving for nans.
That is conversions from 32bit to 64bit floats will lose the sign bit for nans.
So having 128bit to/from 64bit conversions also lose the sign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116018
Bug ID: 116018
Summary: Feature request: #pragma GCC unpoison
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: enhancement
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Hubert Tong from comment #5)
> I updated the summary title again to reflect that the issue is specific to
> declaration matching.
>
> GCC does differentiate between &(T::x) and &T::x (except th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
It is not just templates though.
It is unevulated context where the issue comes into play.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
Hubert Tong changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|accepting &(T::x) as a |Template declaration
|p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116017
Bug ID: 116017
Summary: libgcc/riscv/softfp: Fix loss of sign when truncating
NaN values
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016
--- Comment #1 from Kees Cook ---
Matching Clang feature request:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/99774
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
--- Comment #15 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #14)
> Seems to affect only dummies, not local arrays.
Comparing the dump tree between working and failing, the order of the
generation of the descriptors seems r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016
Bug ID: 116016
Summary: enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM,
COUNT) or equivalent
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6906
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116015
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
(Not a regression; previously we rejected the code.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116015
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97367
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97367
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:319b57fb02b52ba9036c00dda36ff28d8274e13d
commit r12-10628-g319b57fb02b52ba9036c00dda36ff28d8274e13d
Author: René Rebe
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116015
Bug ID: 116015
Summary: ICE in replace_placeholders_r for simple default
member initializer
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100383
--- Comment #5 from Hannes Domani ---
This could be closed since gcc-13.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58416
--- Comment #11 from Paul Eggert ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> The remaining issue is analyzed to be caused by SRA so you can check whether
> -fno-tree-sra fixes it for you.
Thanks, it does, and I modified the Emacs 'config
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116013
--- Comment #1 from Joel Yliluoma ---
Should be noted that this is not x86_64 specific; andn exists for other
platforms too, and even for platforms that don’t have it, changing
`~(expr|const)` into `~expr & ~const` is unlikely to be a pessimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
--- Comment #14 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Further reduced:
program p
implicit none
integer, parameter :: nx = 64
real, dimension(nx) :: x, s, d, f
print *, shape (x), shape (s), shape (d), shape (f)
call sub (x,s,d,f)
contains
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113174
--- Comment #9 from q66 ---
tested with clang 18.x build and tip-of-tree 14.1 branch, still applies
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116014
Bug ID: 116014
Summary: Missed optimization opportunity: inverted shift count
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116013
Bug ID: 116013
Summary: Missed optimization opportunity with andn involving
consts
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107941
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||SARIF
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116012
Bug ID: 116012
Summary: gcc allows calling to implicitly-deleted default
constructor in virtual inheritance with inherited
constructor by using-declaration
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Wrong result with SIZE |15 Regression - Wrong
|s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That commit made --without-long-double-128 the default on
powerpc*-*-linux-musl*.
ELFv2 is one thing, but whether long double is IEEE double, IBM double double
or IEEE quad is a separate thing. You need to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Petazzoni ---
Thanks for all the feedback! However, I'm still a bit confused. In one comment
you say:
> From thbis, it seems powerpc musl likely doesn't have neither double double
> nor IEEE quad support and so in tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLV
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32834
Bug 32834 depends on bug 59104, which changed state.
Bug 59104 Summary: Wrong result with SIZE specification expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
55 matches
Mail list logo
