https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119892
Bug ID: 119892
Summary: GCN: ROCm 6.4.0 compatibility
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118885
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78655
--- Comment #19 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #18)
> FWIW, that would be my take... NULL + anything would be UB. Assuming of
> course 0 is not an addressable value.
N3322 clarifies this (NULL + 0 becomes well-defi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118182
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:14fa625bcb91028cb97f3575d2e394401bbb4a3a
commit r16-59-g14fa625bcb91028cb97f3575d2e394401bbb4a3a
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119507
--- Comment #12 from chenglulu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> (In reply to chenglulu from comment #10)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> > > Fixed for GCC 16.
> >
> > Thank you very much.
> > Would it be pos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119507
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to chenglulu from comment #10)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> > Fixed for GCC 16.
>
> Thank you very much.
> Would it be possible to backport this patch to GCC 14 and GCC 15?
N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119889
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119507
--- Comment #10 from chenglulu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> Fixed for GCC 16.
Thank you very much.
Would it be possible to backport this patch to GCC 14 and GCC 15?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119891
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119891
Bug ID: 119891
Summary: Incorrect suggestion for sizeof and printf
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119508
--- Comment #25 from Owen A. ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #24)
> (In reply to Owen A. from comment #23)
> > (In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #22)
> > > (In reply to Owen A. from comment #12)
> > > > I can't replicate th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119737
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
The problem is in gcn_hsa_declare_function_name.
This seems to fix the issue:
```
diff --git a/gcc/config/gcn/gcn.cc b/gcc/config/gcn/gcn.cc
index d59e87bed46..2754f1feebd 100644
--- a/gcc/config/gcn/gcn.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119737
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |target
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
--- Comment #7 from Bruno Pitrus ---
This seems to work:
using ProjectedType =
std::indirectly_readable_traits,
Proj> >::value_type;
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119508
--- Comment #24 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to Owen A. from comment #23)
> (In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #22)
> > (In reply to Owen A. from comment #12)
> > > I can't replicate this on my end anymore -- is it still present on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
--- Comment #6 from Bruno Pitrus ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
How would you recommend fixing `ToVector` then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119889
--- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #1)
> Thankyou for this report. Can you tell us the version number of gfortran?
>
> gfortran -v will list the version.
It fails for sure with the two default compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119889
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-04-21
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119890
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119890
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90253
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov ---
clang-15 and newer warn for this, enabled by default:
warning: due to lvalue conversion of the controlling expression, association of
type 'const char' will never be selected because it is qualified
[-Wu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119890
Bug ID: 119890
Summary: Add `__builtin_structured_binding_size` (useful and
for compatibility with Clang)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118775
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e7523a40cb1787d52a638cf8a4f9eeb5212f770f
commit r16-56-ge7523a40cb1787d52a638cf8a4f9eeb5212f770f
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Sun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119889
Bug ID: 119889
Summary: Internal compiler error using bind(C) functionality
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99456
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e6ae0de72ef696c4016cc66c53a4aa49a1e900a6
commit r16-55-ge6ae0de72ef696c4016cc66c53a4aa49a1e900a6
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119873
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 61168
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61168&action=edit
gcc16-pr119873.patch
Untested patch. Perhaps for GCC 15 we could use the same thing with additional
&& CALL_E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
And r15-3091-g51761c50f843d5 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
And see r14-2104-g6eafdfc73c21d7 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC 15.x regression:|[15 Regression]
|std:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note clang using GCC's trunk libstdc++ has the same issue so it is NOT a
front-end bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119888
Bug ID: 119888
Summary: GCC 15.x regression: std::string_view as template
parameter incorrectly decays to char const*
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119887
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 119886 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119886
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119887
Bug ID: 119887
Summary: runtime-switches are not documented / implemented (and
don't pass NC211A and others)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
You need -x c++ for the first command, otherwise the preprocessor runs as C and
will not have any C++ macros (like --cplusplus) defined.
g++ -E does *not* imply C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119886
Bug ID: 119886
Summary: runtime-switches are not documented / implemented (and
don
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119885
Bug ID: 119885
Summary: libgcobol: SQRT wrong argument check
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119508
--- Comment #23 from Owen A. ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #22)
> (In reply to Owen A. from comment #12)
> > I can't replicate this on my end anymore -- is it still present on x86_64?
>
> That's a surprising statement, given tha
zstd
gcc version 16.0.0 20250421 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcccs at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0907a810f586b07636cc5b83dba6025eb5240655
commit r16-54-g0907a810f586b07636cc5b83dba6025eb5240655
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Mon Apr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119883
Bug ID: 119883
Summary: codegen: recursive user-defined functions don't run
recursive
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 61166
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61166&action=edit
Fix I am testing
The fix I am testing. When VEC_PACK_TRUNC_EXPR is used, add_hook is called with
vec_promote_dem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99642
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alex at zrythm dot org
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119507
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:49926c2c657dd867f7329df6e250913fd1425475
commit r16-49-g49926c2c657dd867f7329df6e250913fd1425475
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119507
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119872
--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Please make sure to not "fix" something where the input is already wrong -
> see the various issues where SCEV produces an invalid CHREC - forming a chrec
> i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119882
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118320
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d508d24282c6a8172be2abcb2223232f452b667f
commit r16-48-gd508d24282c6a8172be2abcb2223232f452b667f
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119859
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> This seems to be kind-of SUSPENDED if the standard is ambiguous. It might
> be reasonable to go back to the previous behavior for the ambiguous case.
I didn'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 21 Apr 2025, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
>
> --- Comment #18 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > So WITH_SIZE_EXPR isn't applicable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119882
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||GC, ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119876
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |16.0
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119881
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |16.0
Summary|support alias
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.2|16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[r16-39 Regression] FAIL: |[16 Regression] FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119872
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118008
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcccs at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119864
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119592
--- Comment #6 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Created attachment 61165
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61165&action=edit
reduced.cpp
Thanks for the pointer Sam, here's the C-vise reduction.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685
--- Comment #26 from Sam James ---
(In reply to jb from comment #25)
> And related work by Richard Sandiford who wrote RFC for rewriting -Og:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2019-06/msg01394.html
Arsen brought this up the other day
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119880
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It looks like libc++ uses codecvt to convert wide strings to narrow and then
always uses byte-oriented I/O on the standard streams.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119880
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And the C++ standard does not say anything about doing that, implying that the
libstdc++ behaviour is expected. Using std::cout makes stdout byte-oriented,
and using std::wcout makes it wide-oriented, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119880
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The C standard says that in a footnote for fwide:
"If the orientation of the stream has already been determined, fwide does not
change it."
We would need to use freopen to reopen stdout so that it becomes
Dear GCC Maintainers who have previously worked on bug 78685:
Kindly note the bug below is still relevant for Emacs developers.
(from the point of view of the C language compiler):
Bug ID: 78685
Summary: -Og generates too many ""s
Product: gcc
Original report with sample code from Paul Eggert:
h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685
--- Comment #25 from jb at jeremybryant dot net ---
Dear GCC Maintainers who have previously worked on bug 78685:
Kindly note the bug below is still relevant for Emacs developers.
(from the point of view of the C language compiler):
Bug ID: 7868
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119880
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think using fwide that way leads to undefined behaviour though. The C
standard says:
"Byte input/output functions shall not be applied to a wide-oriented stream and
wide character input/output functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
--- Comment #18 from Eric Botcazou ---
> So WITH_SIZE_EXPR isn't applicable here? OK, that's a thing
> only introduced by gimplification at the moment, IIRC. So in case
> the VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR is "just" to make the gimplifier emit the
> approp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But note that the existing "mostly works" behaviour doesn't help solve the
general problem, it would need entirely new code in the front end to be written
from scratch for this specific call.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119864
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119863
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
The problem is in:
/* VEC_PACK_TRUNC_EXPR: If inner size is greater than outer size we will end
up doing two conversions and packing them. */
if (!scalar_p && inner_size > outer_size)
{
i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119866
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It _could_ be, see jakub's description in the dup of how it could be done
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119872
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 21 Apr 2025, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
>
> --- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > Eric, can you try to read through
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |16.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
--- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Eric, can you try to read through
> https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/document-middle-end-type-system and amend
> it with comments about Ada?
I added a minimal comment about TYPE_CANONICAL a couple of days ago.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119882
--- Comment #1 from alex at zrythm dot org ---
Couldn't attach the file as it's 1.2MB compressed. I've uploaded it to my
server: https://www.zrythm.org/downloads/ccJ8cv0S.out.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119792
>
> --- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > FWIW, when I restore my patch on G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119859
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.2.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119882
Bug ID: 119882
Summary: internal compiler error in diag_mismatched_tags when
compiling a C++23 source file with
-Werror=mismatched-tags
Product: gcc
Version: 14.
86 matches
Mail list logo
