https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119376
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> I will look into others in a few minutes.
Another one (modified from Sam's testcase that he provided me):
```
struct s1 {
s1(){}
};
char *f1(s1);
char *f2(s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119376
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #14)
> Another one testcase:
> ```
> struct s1 {
> int t;
> };
> char *f1(int);
> char *f2(int a) {
> s1 t;
> asm("":"+m"(t));
> [[clang::musttail]] ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119433
Bug ID: 119433
Summary: [RISC-V] Reduce critical path with a 2->2 split
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118002
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-23
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118616
--- Comment #12 from Sam James ---
It still happens:
```
In member function ‘operator[]’,
inlined from ‘operator[]’ at
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-15.0./work/gcc-15.0./gcc/vec.h:1599:20,
inlined from ‘expand_vector_conversion’
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119376
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
`-O2 -fdisable-tree-tailr1 -fdisable-tree-tailc` still fails. I have not looked
into why though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119376
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
one more new reduced testcase with the C++ front-end:
```
struct f{
int t;
};
int g(int);
int h(int a)
{
struct f b = {a};
b.t+=1;
[[clang::musttail]] return g(a);
}
```
We don't optimized away the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119432
Bug ID: 119432
Summary: gimple front-end and round trip for fails for
__builtin_stdc_rotate_left
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>However, I believe that assigning `-1` to `size_t` is non-sensical.
NO it is not it is well defined and not non-sensical at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119431
--- Comment #3 from Kael Franco ---
Bug also reported to Clang: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/132578
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119431
--- Comment #2 from Kael Franco ---
Flags were -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119431
--- Comment #1 from Kael Franco ---
Created attachment 60855
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60855&action=edit
-fdump-tree-optimized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119431
Bug ID: 119431
Summary: Missed strlen when cmp to NUL forwards with increments
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
(For completeness, as I mentioned it on IRC: SQLite's testsuite also fails with
something simliar, see
https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/blob/62d9d70eddda991bd3dedb55c1beb5a23fb6cae8/src/bitvec.c#L337.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 60853
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60853&action=edit
build script
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
```
$ /tmp/gcc-bld/./gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/gcc-bld/./gcc/
-B/tmp/gcc-pfx/armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/bin/
-B/tmp/gcc-pfx/armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/lib/ -isystem
/tmp/gcc-pfx/armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
I tried bisecting before but it was challenging as it seems to require
--enable-host-pie and that option is relatively new. I may be able to bisect
further back if I hack in the equivalent via *FLAGS, but not su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
```
Thread 3.1 "gnat1" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0xf7a1a220 (LWP 3135218)]
0x0148a7a0 in elists__append_elmt (n=57415496, to=-327486975) at
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
Bug ID: 119430
Summary: profiledbootstrap fails on
armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build, wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116416
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #16 from Desmond Rhodes ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> Again there is no bug in libstdc++. The bug is you are enabling an
> questionable clang option that breaks well defined c++ code.
I'm sorry, I've done some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Desmond Rhodes from comment #17)
> Anyway, I've found a way to disable UBSan `-fsanitize=integer` for the
> libstd++.
Thanks, I've added that to Bug 97844 as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #17 from Desmond Rhodes ---
Anyway, I've found a way to disable UBSan `-fsanitize=integer` for the
libstd++.
If I make the file `ignorelist.txt`:
```
#!special-case-list-v1
[integer]
# src:.*gcc.*include.*c\+\+.*
```
And then co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #15 from Desmond Rhodes ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> Clang documents how to silence these diagnostics, which are NOT undefined
> behaviour.
>
> The conversion to size_t is 100% portable and well defined by t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118616
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
I did too, sorry...
Testing it now too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118616
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> I should be able to test my patch in comment #6 next week or maybe before
> hand.
I almost forgot about this. I will handle it later today or tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #20 from Desmond Rhodes ---
(In reply to Desmond Rhodes from comment #17)
> Anyway, I've found a way to disable UBSan `-fsanitize=integer` for the
> libstd++.
>
> If I make the file `ignorelist.txt`:
>
> ```
> #!special-case-list-v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119427
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97844
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
>From Bug 119429 comment 17:
If I make the file `ignorelist.txt`:
```
#!special-case-list-v1
[integer]
# src:.*gcc.*include.*c\+\+.*
```
And then compile with:
```
clang++ -std=c++23 -fsanitize=integer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #18 from Desmond Rhodes ---
My issue is solved. Please close this ticket. Also, please let others who might
encounter a similar problem in the future of this fix.
Thank you for being patient with me. It only took me 3 days, 2 nights
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.html#silencing-
> unsigned-integer-overflow
Of course those suppressions don't actually work - than
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Desmond Rhodes from comment #7)
> If the construct of `size_t __nargs = -1` isn't fixed, it will prevent
> people from using the standard library.
A bold claim!
std::string has been relying
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Clang documents how to silence these diagnostics, which are NOT undefined
behaviour.
The conversion to size_t is 100% portable and well defined by the standard. I
wrote it that way intentionally, and it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Desmond Rhodes from comment #0)
> And according to the standard, `size_t` or `unsigned` numerics
> overflow/underflow are well defined.
No, according to the standard they're is no such thing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #9 from Desmond Rhodes ---
Just as a side note, I've never encountered `UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer`
triggered by the standard library before. It's only recently with the C++20 and
C++23 standards new features that are turning on all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Again there is no bug in libstdc++. The bug is you are enabling an questionable
clang option that breaks well defined c++ code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Desmond Rhodes from comment #7)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> > See PR 91547 also.
> >
> > Basically clang's -fsanitize=integer is useless for well defined C/C++ code
> > and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119227
--- Comment #11 from Mark Wielaard ---
The online docs seem to be build again now, but I don't know if the new cobol
docs actually get generated (or where they end up).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #7 from Desmond Rhodes ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> See PR 91547 also.
>
> Basically clang's -fsanitize=integer is useless for well defined C/C++ code
> and should NOT be used unless you how to filter out the ba
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #6 from Desmond Rhodes ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> See PR 97844 also for other places where -fsanitize=integer produces bad
> results with libstdc++ and already declared as not going to be dealt with.
>
> *** T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #5 from Desmond Rhodes ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Since this is well defined this is not a bug. The bug is clang allows
> reporting of this and saying it is undefined. Basically -fsanitize=integer
> is broken a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97844
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||desmond.rhodes at outlook dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
Bug ID: 119429
Summary: size_t __nargs = -1 in std::format
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117806
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119227
--- Comment #10 from Mark Wielaard ---
And fche install groff-perl which should contain the tmac.pdf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119227
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119227
--- Comment #8 from Mark Wielaard ---
Installed groff from codeready-builder-for-rhel-8-x86_64-rpms
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119291
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
So before combine we have:
```
(insn 23 22 24 4 (set (reg/v:SI 117 [ eD.2775 ])
(reg/v:SI 116 [ eD.2775 ])) 85 {*movsi_internal}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/v:SI 116 [ eD.2775 ])
(nil)))
(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Guess on SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED targets one needs to avoid trying to extend a
shift or rotate to a wider mode because the masking of the shift count is
implicit.
Except that x86 is not a SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
So the not-shift pattern was added for PR 96226 and then the BTR pattern was
added for PR 96938 . And there is an odd iteration for them for QI mode. Since
BTR does not have a 8bit version, only 16, 32 and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117806
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Martin Uecker
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3989d8158705975ab72c9167469905cbe7d11cf
commit r14-11437-ga3989d8158705975ab72c9167469905cbe7d11cf
Author: Martin Uecker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
So this version still works:
```
void f(unsigned char *ADDR, unsigned int nr)
{
unsigned char mask = ~1;
mask = __builtin_stdc_rotate_left (mask, nr);
ADDR += nr >> 3;
*ADDR &= (unsigned char) mask
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119421
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
In GCC 13 combine produced:
```
Trying 12, 13 -> 14:
12: r101:QI=0xfffe
13: {r98:QI=r101:QI<-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-22
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117245
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Martin Uecker
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d9dc4be6796966ee934f4929db94b250956201a
commit r14-11435-g9d9dc4be6796966ee934f4929db94b250956201a
Author: Martin Uecker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Before we would reject this combine:
```
Trying 12, 13 -> 14:
12: r117:QI=0xfffe
13: {r114:QI=r117:QI<- 14:
12: r117:QI=0xfffe
13: {r114:QI=r117:QI<-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119421
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:94355acc2debe03eb3b0a85229e340675a1ff6bd
commit r15-8674-g94355acc2debe03eb3b0a85229e340675a1ff6bd
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Self-contained reproducer:
// $ cat bug.c
__attribute__((noipa, optimize(1)))
void bug_o1(unsigned int nr, void * addr)
{
unsigned char *ADDR = (unsigned char *) addr;
ADDR += nr >>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
Bug ID: 119428
Summary: [15 Regression] wrong code on e2fsprogs-1.47.2 since
r15-8478-ge8a5f747cfa9c7
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
```
Trying 11, 10, 12 -> 13:
11: r113:SI=0x1
10: {r111:SI=r107:SI&0x7;clobber flags:CC;}
REG_DEAD r107:SI
REG_UNUSED flags:CC
12: {r112:SI=r113:SI<
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70930
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uecker at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116284
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12/13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116284
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Martin Uecker
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:432f918f111498e0c3bfee5f9b2ddd8205370163
commit r14-11436-g432f918f111498e0c3bfee5f9b2ddd8205370163
Author: Martin Uecker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117391
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Martin Uecker
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:432f918f111498e0c3bfee5f9b2ddd8205370163
commit r14-11436-g432f918f111498e0c3bfee5f9b2ddd8205370163
Author: Martin Uecker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119427
Bug ID: 119427
Summary: std::erase_if(std::flat_map) does not work
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117245
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] ICE: |[13 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117145
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100420
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Martin Uecker
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d9dc4be6796966ee934f4929db94b250956201a
commit r14-11435-g9d9dc4be6796966ee934f4929db94b250956201a
Author: Martin Uecker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117145
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Martin Uecker
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d9dc4be6796966ee934f4929db94b250956201a
commit r14-11435-g9d9dc4be6796966ee934f4929db94b250956201a
Author: Martin Uecker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119427
--- Comment #2 from 康桓瑋 ---
Also, erase_if should not use ranges::remove_if, since that would support
member pointers via std::invoke, which the standard currently disallows.
This seems like an enhancement, though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119426
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Similar to Bug 111242 but here the pointer has already been deallocated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119427
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
flat_set has the same issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119426
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
https://godbolt.org/z/f1jxvMvdz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107528
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-22
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119426
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|constexpr alloc |undefined increment of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119426
Bug ID: 119426
Summary: constexpr alloc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119383
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119378
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12/13 Regression] Nested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119379
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119378
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d025b6880cde2cb2063b4d34546cdd70e5526e74
commit r14-11434-gd025b6880cde2cb2063b4d34546cdd70e5526e74
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119379
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df5fa3a3d0d7f2413c832548c88f76dfe67802fd
commit r15-8671-gdf5fa3a3d0d7f2413c832548c88f76dfe67802fd
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119383
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction,|
|needs-source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119383
Kacper Słomiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kacper.slominski72 at gmail
dot co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119419
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118939
--- Comment #9 from Adrian Bunk ---
(In reply to Adrian Bunk from comment #6)
>"ada: GNAT Calendar Support for
> 64-bit Unix Time" reverted (which is on the gcc 14 branch).
Sorry, I was looking at the wrong branch.
This is not in gcc 14.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119425
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] ICE: in |[15 Regression] ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119425
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107981
Fedor Chelnokov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fchelnokov at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119425
Bug ID: 119425
Summary: [15 Regression] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn, at
recog.cc:2783 insn does not satisfy its constraints:
{avx2_pblenddv8si}
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119408
--- Comment #7 from chenglulu ---
Add “q/Q” suffix support.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-March/678874.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118765
--- Comment #19 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hime Haieto from comment #17)
> I'm not entirely sure what I should be doing/commenting on at the moment
> considering that the current patches are clearly marked as being
> temporar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118765
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #60628|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119386
--- Comment #41 from Ard Biesheuvel ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #40)
> > In Linux, we don't even bother with PIC codegen, even though we link with
> > -pie.
>
> Earlier you said that building with -fPIC may be desirable, an
99 matches
Mail list logo
