https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #14 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
@Richard
I've uploaded the generated *.ii files (-save-temps), as discussed with
upstream:
* https://github.com/google/highway/issues/776#issuecomment-1177864014
I do not know the codebase very well
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #13 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Created attachment 53277
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53277&action=edit
gcc-12 -save-temps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53271|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #10 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
I did upload the bad (gcc-11) and the good (gcc-12) object files. Not sure if
this is what was expected. In any case let me know if you want to provide more
info.
% gdb -batch -ex "disassemble/rs _ZN3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #9 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Created attachment 53271
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53271&action=edit
object files compiled using gcc or gcc12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #8 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Jan Wassenberg from comment #7)
> The easiest way to reduce the amount of code in the binary is to comment out
> from mul_test.cc all the HWY_EXPORT_AND_TEST_P except the one with
> TestAllM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #6 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Does it work with -fstrict-aliasing ?
Yes with and without valgrind I can reproduce the assert.
> Does adding -fsanitize=address report anything?
When I u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
> I can trigger an assertion in highway unit test suite on armhf when using -O2
> (does not happen at -O0).
The above sentence is wrong, I can make the symptoms go away using:
CXXFLAGS=-fsanitize=unde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
g++-10 seems affected:
% g++-10 --version
g++-10 (Debian 10.4.0-1) 10.4.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Ok it seems to be working ok using:
% g++-12 --version
g++-12 (Debian 12.1.0-5) 12.1.0
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I can trigger an assertion in highway unit test suite on armhf when using -O2
(does not happen at -O0).
Symptoms:
% tests/mul_test
"--gtest_filter=HwyMulTest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102466
--- Comment #4 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
I can reproduce it using -Wall -fsanitize=undefined -O2
* https://github.com/malaterre/PublicRep/tree/master/gcc/libjxl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102466
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #9 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #2)
> > I've downgraded binutils to version from bullseye, and I am getting the
> > exact same symptoms:
>
> Did
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #8 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Dear John,
(In reply to John David Anglin from comment #6)
> For context, see:
> https://github.com/smuellerDD/libkcapi/issues/133#issuecomment-1024349323
>
> Note that the following commit fixes the s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Original description states:
> Steps using gcc-10 (Debian/buster):
This is a typo, it should states:
> Steps using gcc-10 (Debian/bullseye):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
I've downgraded binutils to version from bullseye, and I am getting the exact
same symptoms:
```
libtool: link: ( cd ".libs" && rm -f "libkcapi.la" && ln -s "../libkcapi.la"
"libkcapi.la" )
/bin/bash ./
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
It looks like there is a regression on gcc/11 branch on hppa.
Steps using gcc-10 (Debian/buster):
% sudo apt-get install g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104248
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
@Andreas the specific issue I am raising is the difference between the approach
of riscv vs armel. The riscv team is taking the responsability for putting the
missing `-latomic`, while armel expect the u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104248
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
In case that help, cmake instructions for the test case is:
```
project(p C)
set(CMAKE_C_STANDARD 11)
add_library(foo STATIC foo.c)
add_executable(prog prog.c)
target_link_libraries(prog foo)
```
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following c11 code (lib + executable):
```
::
foo.c
::
_Atomic(long long) ll;
int foo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #9 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Compiling the reduce test case without pthread lead to some kind of exception:
```
(gdb) bt full
#0 __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:49
set = {__val = {0 , 824
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #8 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
% more CMakeLists.txt main.cc Module.cc openvdb.cc Tree.h
::
CMakeLists.txt
::
cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 3.13)
project(p)
# only export limited set of symbols
set(CMAKE_C_V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #7 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> > > (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #3)
> > > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #5 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #3)
> > $ export CXXFLAGS=-fvisibility=hidden
>
> Yes you can't just use -fvisibility=hidden without the source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Steps to reproduce without a full Debian environement:
```
$ wget
http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/o/openvdb/openvdb_8.1.0.orig.tar.xz
$ tar xf openvdb_8.1.0.orig.tar.xz
$ cd openvdb-8.1.0
$ mkdir
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Executive summary:
---
```
% LD_LIBRARY_PATH=./openvdb/openvdb ./openvdb/openvdb/cmd/vdb_view
zsh: segmentation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 103159, which changed state.
Bug 103159 Summary: Some -Wuninitialized warnings still depend on optimization
level -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Please note that the documentation currently does not detail the need/impact of
optimization for this flag:
* https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wuninitialized
Maybe just upd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Just to be sure, here is the actual command I had been starring at for a while:
```
% g++ -o undef -fsanitize=undefined -Wuninitialized undef.cxx && ./undef
21845
```
Maybe I got confused with `-fsanit
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following:
```
% cat undef.cxx
#include
class C
{
int I;
public:
int getI() { return I; }
};
int main
Priority: P3
Component: web
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The online documentation for `-ftree-vectorize` is a bit misleading. Reading it
today:
* https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68891
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Here is the output from clang++:
error: cannot specify any part of a return type in the declaration of a
conversion function; use a typedef to declare a conversion to 'double (&)[3]'
% clang++ --versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71617
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88273
--- Comment #8 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
For reference:
$ cat ptrace2.c
#include
#define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
#include
void a(int b, int c, void *d) {
void *e = 0;
int g = user_regset_copyout(&b, &c, d, e, g, 0, sizeof(vector128));
union
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88273
--- Comment #7 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Here is the new creduced test case:
$ cat bug.c
#include
typedef struct {
int b[4]
} c;
void* d;
unsigned e;
inline int h(void *i, int p2, int j) {
if (j < 0 || e < j) {
int copy = ({
typ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88273
--- Comment #5 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Created attachment 45128
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45128&action=edit
save-temps
ounds]
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #20 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #19)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #18)
> > The first diff seems to be here:
> >
> > +Use of uninitialised value of size 8
> > + at 0x98CBD7: spa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #18 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
The first diff seems to be here:
+Use of uninitialised value of size 8
+ at 0x98CBD7: sparseset_bit_p (sparseset.h:147)
+ by 0x98CBD7: process_bb_node_lives(ira_loop_tree_node*) (ira-lives.c:1226)
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #17 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Here is what I did over here:
# debootstrap --arch amd64 sid /srv/chroot/sid-amd64
http://httpredir.debian.org/debian
# mount -t proc proc /srv/chroot/sid-amd64/proc
# chroot /srv/chroot/sid-amd64 apt i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #15 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Created attachment 43773
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43773&action=edit
valgrind output (not ok)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71777
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
onent: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 38839
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38839&action=edit
demo code
I've been trying to test __builtin_cpu_su
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following code should be cleaned up:
powerpc64-linux-gnu-g++-5 -std=gnu++98 -fno-PIE -c
verity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Per my understanding of C++ standard section §12.3.2, the following piece of
code should not compile:
$ cat c.cxx
#i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63368
--- Comment #7 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
For anyone reading this. the comment "-latomic is there already." means:
replace __sync_val_compare_and_swap(ptr, oldval, newval) in your code with
__atomic_compare_exchange(ptr, &oldval, &newval, false,
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
Created attachment 34464
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34464&action=edit
demo
I cannot compile the following pseudo code (see attachment) it fails wit
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
You'll find a small c++ project I gather to demonstrate how a class A `foo`
function can be called using class B `foo` function.
I believe gcc confuse the two separate implementations inste
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63368
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63368
--- Comment #4 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
As stated in my original report I am running a PowerPC/32bits machine (not an
ARM based one).
AFAIK gcc 4.9.1 does not provide such implementation [*]. Could you please
clarify what you mean by 'libatomi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63368
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVAL
y: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
If I am reading the online documentation properly:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.1/gcc/_005f_005fsync-Builtins.html#_005f_005fsync-Builtins
__sync_val_compare_and_sw
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
I am trying to compile a project that is written in portable C++. It does
compile fine with Visual Studio 2010 on Windows 7 and makes uses of
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com
It would be nice to remove the following warning about UB when compiling in
C++11 mode:
$ cat t.cxx
int main()
{
int b = 1;
int m = (b++) + (++b);
(void)m;
return 0;
}
$ g++ -std=c++11 -Wsequence
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56497
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56497
Bug #: 56497
Summary: comparison is always true due to limited range of data
type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52617
Bug #: 52617
Summary: -Wconversion does not work for strlen
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50990
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50990
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Malaterre
2011-11-04 10:50:30 UTC ---
Once I get the -save-temps output, I'll post them ASAP here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2011/11/msg8.html
I do not have direct access to this box.
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50990
Bug #: 50990
Summary: vector.tcc:373:5: internal compiler error:
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49759
Summary: std::streampos == int should be ambiguous
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745
Summary: error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of
symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49387
--- Comment #4 from Mathieu Malaterre
2011-06-13 09:49:41 UTC ---
Test was done a on a debian/squeeze system:
$ g++ --version
g++ (Debian 4.4.5-8) 4.4.5
$ apt-cache policy libboost1.42-dev
libboost1.42-dev:
Installed: 1.42.0-4
Candidate: 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49387
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Malaterre
2011-06-13 09:09:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 24505
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24505
Test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49387
Summary: t.cxx:140: error: too many initializers for ‘const
__class_type_info_pseudo’
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
69 matches
Mail list logo
