https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117906
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||riscv
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117243
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|14.2.1, 15.0|14.2.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117243
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7c69cc072ef0da36439ebc55c513b48e68391b7
commit r15-5916-gb7c69cc072ef0da36439ebc55c513b48e68391b7
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116749
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7c69cc072ef0da36439ebc55c513b48e68391b7
commit r15-5916-gb7c69cc072ef0da36439ebc55c513b48e68391b7
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jerry DeLisle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a92ba766815c9a6b73593967a26fdfbebfc7e69
commit r15-5915-g7a92ba766815c9a6b73593967a26fdfbebfc7e69
Author: Jerry DeLisle
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117243
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pinski ---
Updated patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-December/670772.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48274
Bug 48274 depends on bug 117907, which changed state.
Bug 117907 Summary: Inconsistent usages of TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117907
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112877
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117907
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112877
Bug 112877 depends on bug 117907, which changed state.
Bug 117907 Summary: Inconsistent usages of TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117907
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117907
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||48274, 112877
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117907
Bug ID: 117907
Summary: Inconsistent usages of TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117770
--- Comment #8 from John David Anglin ---
The change breaks bootstrap. See PR 117248.
When the instructions to setup the argument registers for millicode
calls are split out before reload, they sometimes are deleted. This
affects SImode modsi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117890
--- Comment #8 from Hu Lin ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #7)
> (In reply to Hu Lin from comment #5)
> > Seems that commit (d2f9159cfe7ea904e6476cabefea0c6ac9532e29) fixed this
> > issue. The wrong pattern is no longer generated,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117906
Bug ID: 117906
Summary: [15 regression] RISC-V: gfortran.dg/sizeof_6.f90 -O1
timeout since r15-5897-g31250baf814
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117371
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c1409e1955110fcf3641cec6e8381fbf03f0a510
commit r14-11057-gc1409e1955110fcf3641cec6e8381fbf03f0a510
Author: Gaius Mulley
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116463
--- Comment #30 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 59779
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59779&action=edit
pattern.dot
digraph of resulting pattern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116463
--- Comment #29 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #27)
> > >
> > > We DO already impose any order on them, but the other operand is oddodd,
> > > so
> > > the overall order ends up being oddodd because any know
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116463
--- Comment #28 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #27)
> > >
> > > We DO already impose any order on them, but the other operand is oddodd,
> > > so
> > > the overall order ends up being oddodd because any know
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117904
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
It appears that cc1gm2 doesn't like the ZType being used as the step type
block.
If the declaration of block is changed to a CARDINAL constant the ICE
disappears.
For example:
CONST block = CARDINAL (4);
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117904
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117905
Bug ID: 117905
Summary: PSTL algos in require copy-constructible
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117887
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117905
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-12-03
Summary|PSTL al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117904
Bug ID: 117904
Summary: cc1gm2 ICE when compiling a const built from VAL and
SIZE
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Looks like this bug was already fixed long ago in upstream's upstream:
https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneDPL/blame/b132b83cddec63df5b3794aba8c154cb186d568e/include/oneapi/dpl/pstl/numeric_impl.h#L176
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91069
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
commit r15-5913-g846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114661
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
commit r15-5913-g846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109123
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
commit r15-5913-g846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
commit r15-5913-g846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117828
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
commit r15-5913-g846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52641
--- Comment #31 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
commit r15-5913-g846c0b397b5c1b4ff6c68d83af99aff2aa80a162
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116743
--- Comment #20 from Rama Malladi ---
> I propose the patch below. Rama, can you please check if this resolves your
> perf regression?
Hi Eugene,
Thanks for this investigation and proposed fix. I can give it a try and update
in a day or two.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57272
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f29d1b5836790ec795cb51bcfe25f7270b3e9f30
commit r15-5909-gf29d1b5836790ec795cb51bcfe25f7270b3e9f30
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110952
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed for std::list now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110952
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f29d1b5836790ec795cb51bcfe25f7270b3e9f30
commit r15-5909-gf29d1b5836790ec795cb51bcfe25f7270b3e9f30
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cd107a6343c96c4ef26096e250d43a4a4211eced
commit r15-5912-gcd107a6343c96c4ef26096e250d43a4a4211eced
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57272
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:84b40a1c1b2c9e3feb546838fa988d653eed0755
commit r15-5910-g84b40a1c1b2c9e3feb546838fa988d653eed0755
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116743
--- Comment #19 from Eugene Rozenfeld ---
I investigated what happens in the compiler.
In afdo_annotate_cfg we have these lines:
cgraph_node::get (current_function_decl)->count
= profile_count::from_gcov_type (s->head_count ()).afdo ();
ENT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117883
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117901
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117890
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Hu Lin from comment #5)
> Seems that commit (d2f9159cfe7ea904e6476cabefea0c6ac9532e29) fixed this
> issue. The wrong pattern is no longer generated, although I don't understand
> why for the m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's wrong in *all* the parallel algos, and a couple of the serial
ones. I think this needs to be done as separate patches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114022
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Last rec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117890
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Wrong code with |[15 Regression] Wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96340
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117898
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117579
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3b0fca5835b92ca7b139ef9f06d16b65510568ef
commit r15-5903-g3b0fca5835b92ca7b139ef9f06d16b65510568ef
Author: Nina Ranns
Date: Tue D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117897
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117897
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||13.3.0, 14.2.0, 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117883
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e6e4cb34e30f25adfb57e998663a8a1796b8573c
commit r15-5902-ge6e4cb34e30f25adfb57e998663a8a1796b8573c
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117895
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Looks like another mode problem, probably more than one left in this code.
While I've got a change that fixes this particular failure, I'll need to do
some wider testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117903
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-12-03
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117903
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||FIXME
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117903
Bug ID: 117903
Summary: [15 Regression] gcc_jit_block_add_assignment_op
GCC_JIT_BINARY_OP_BITWISE_XOR rejects vector types
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117895
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117895
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-12-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117883
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117886
--- Comment #5 from Antoni ---
Andrew: what would be a better way to write this function?
I do have the code in my fork to fix this specific error. I'm preparing a patch
that will also fix other issues with this code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117901
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
usually some missing DECL_EXPR and a SSA name leaking into TYPE/DECL_SIZE this
way.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117813
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117902
Bug ID: 117902
Summary: -Wc++-compat can trigger a false-positive about tokens
not yet expanded from macro
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117901
Bug ID: 117901
Summary: class_transformational_1.f90 with -O3 and
-fcheck=bounds gives ICE in make_ssa_name_fn
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's not quite right because the type of __init is only required to be move
constructible, not copy constructible. That's wrong in the serial
std::exclusive_scan too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117900
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1521
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117469
--- Comment #5 from Luke Shumaker ---
Indeed. My mistake.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/numeric_impl.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/pstl/numeric_impl.h
@@ -160,9 +160,10 @@ __brick_transform_scan(_ForwardIterator __first,
_ForwardIterator __last, _Outpu
{
f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116463
--- Comment #27 from Tamar Christina ---
> >
> > We DO already impose any order on them, but the other operand is oddodd, so
> > the overall order ends up being oddodd because any known permute overrides
> > unknown ones.
>
> So what's the des
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116463
--- Comment #26 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Tamar Christina
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f01f01f0ebf8f5207096cb9650354210d890fe0d
commit r14-11053-gf01f01f0ebf8f5207096cb9650354210d890fe0d
Author: Tamar Chris
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117813
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yup, my bisection found the same two commits.
Do we want to backport r15-521-g6ad7ca1bb90573 then? Or a simpler change to
undo the unwanted effects of r14-5979-g99d114c15523e0? (could the bug even
still
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102689
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31250baf81446aa4fc1b729e2fc5165a36005ebc
commit r15-5897-g31250baf81446aa4fc1b729e2fc5165a36005ebc
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Tue D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117900
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
GCC doesn't just require an accessible copy constructor, it uses it:
struct S {
S() {}
S(const S &) { throw; }
};
using Sref = const S&;
int main()
{
S s;
(void)Sref{s};
}
terminate cal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117900
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117900
Bug ID: 117900
Summary: Spurious call to copy constructor when
list-initializing a const reference
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117726
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4114b7fb1cb4cb90b9fafc22213d7d9579bc19e0
commit r15-5896-g4114b7fb1cb4cb90b9fafc22213d7d9579bc19e0
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117088
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> > void digits_2.isra (integer(kind=4) ISRA.6607)
> > {
> > integer(kind=4) ISRA.6607_927(D) = ISRA.6607;
> > ...
> > # RANGE [irange] integer(kind=4) [-2147
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117899
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-12-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117899
Bug ID: 117899
Summary: C++17 parallel execution policies with OpenMP backend
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117895
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
> Ugh. libgo + sparc + solaris 2. Hopefully I can find a way to reproduce
> this.
Shouldn't be too hard these days: the cfarm has a Solaris
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117895
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Ugh. libgo + sparc + solaris 2. Hopefully I can find a way to reproduce
this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117883
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116799
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115328
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e8acf6816cf360d5db0ebfaf995415961f455274
commit r14-11050-ge8acf6816cf360d5db0ebfaf995415961f455274
Author: Gaius Mulley
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117615
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117896
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117162
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Joseph Myers :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f3b5de944ad6d1f6a10f819b816c2ba234ecd8c0
commit r15-5895-gf3b5de944ad6d1f6a10f819b816c2ba234ecd8c0
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117162
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117088
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
> void digits_2.isra (integer(kind=4) ISRA.6607)
> {
> integer(kind=4) ISRA.6607_927(D) = ISRA.6607;
> ...
> # RANGE [irange] integer(kind=4) [-2147483647, 8][10, +INF]
> _494 = ISRA.6607_927(D) + 1;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117875
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117892
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
This is mine. The loop first checks that basic block is empty (consits only of
debug statements, predicts, clobbers and nops) and then it asserts that there
is only one edge out, which ought to be the case. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116799
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually, seems loop-doloop.cc doesn't look at REG_DEAD notes, but at live out.
/* Ensure that the new sequence doesn't clobber a register that
is live at the end of the block. */
{
bitmap modi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117861
--- Comment #4 from Saada Mehdi <00120260a at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2)
> No, that's a C-like reasoning, idiomatic loops in Ada never overflow their
> index and, therefore, people should never fiddle with over
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117898
Bug ID: 117898
Summary: ICE: tree check: accessed elt 1 of 'tree_vec' with 0
elts in make_pack_index, at cp/pt.cc:4290
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96340
--- Comment #2 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> was this also fixed by r14-6416-gf5fc001a84a7db ?
No, it's still unfixed due to:
/* We currently do not support generating simdclones where vector argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96342
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|11.0|15.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117897
Bug ID: 117897
Summary: Bug in gfortran compiled windows run time with the
latest release (14.2.0)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116799
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116799
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
