[Bug c/121369] Error instead of warning for -Wincompatible-pointer-types?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121369 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/84476] [[nodiscard]] ignored on virtual functions accessed through pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84476 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vladimir.krivopalov at gmail dot c

[Bug c++/95773] [[nodiscard]] attribute is ignored for calls to overridden functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95773 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/121367] Clang and GCC diverge on acceptance of function declaration inside constructor body

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121367 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC thinks this: `S2(S2());` is a function declaration and S2 is the name of the constructor taking a S2 type. Because S2 is injected as the name of the constructor at this point ...

[Bug tree-optimization/54565] pass_update_address_taken before forwprop1 for vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54565 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||internal-improvement Target Milestone|

[Bug c/121365] atand64(small) gets a NAN

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121365 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/36327] SCCVN should look through struct copies

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36327 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dann at ics dot uci.edu --- Comment #5 f

[Bug tree-optimization/13952] [tree-ssa] SRA does not work for structs containing arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13952 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pin

[Bug tree-optimization/121364] [meta-bug] copy prop for aggregates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121364 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-08-01 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug tree-optimization/121364] New: [meta-bug] copy prop for aggregates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121364 Bug ID: 121364 Summary: [meta-bug] copy prop for aggregates Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/121362] SCCVN (FRE) sometimes does not read through aggregate copies

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121362 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >This shows up in C++ code and in highway (with turning off SRA). Note in highway, Early sra is able to optimize it but there might be others which is not able to catch.

[Bug sanitizer/121363] Support C23 printf specifiers H, D, DD of DFP (decimal floating point)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121363 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- So libsanitizer is imported from the upstream of llvm. So this should be fixed there first.

[Bug tree-optimization/121362] Fre sometimes does not read through aggregate copies

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121362 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Version|14.2.0

[Bug tree-optimization/121362] New: Fre sometimes does not read through aggregate copies

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121362 Bug ID: 121362 Summary: Fre sometimes does not read through aggregate copies Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: nor

[Bug target/121358] [15/16 Regression] SVE ICE compiling highway since r15-4235

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121358 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/121358] [15/16 Regression] SVE ICE compiling highway since r15-4235

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121358 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 62032 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62032&action=edit Reduced to

[Bug tree-optimization/121357] memset could be optimized better for structs that don't need to be in memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121357 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 62031 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62031&action=edit self contained testcase

[Bug tree-optimization/121357] memset could be optimized better for structs that don't need to be in memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121357 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/121357] memset could be optimized better for structs that don't need to be in memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121357 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Summary|Bad code

[Bug tree-optimization/121356] [13/14/15/16 Regression] missing VRP though the loop with shifts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121356 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Note solving this missed optimization will also solve PR 121345.

[Bug tree-optimization/121356] [13/14/15/16 Regression] missing VRP though the loop with shifts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121356 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- This function should be empty which is what it does for GCC 12.5.0.

[Bug tree-optimization/121356] [13/14/15/16 Regression] missing VRP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121356 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||13.1.0 Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/121356] New: [13/14/15/16 Regression] missing VRP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121356 Bug ID: 121356 Summary: [13/14/15/16 Regression] missing VRP Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Pr

[Bug tree-optimization/121345] [16 Regression] obvious incorrect array-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121345 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 62028 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62028&action=edit Reduced but not cleaned up

[Bug tree-optimization/121345] [16 Regression] obvious incorrect array-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121345 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- # RANGE [irange] int [-536870912, -8][1, 16] # lane_size_6 = PHI <1(2), lane_size_12(8)> # RANGE [irange] unsigned int [1, 5] # ivtmp_20 = PHI <5(2), ivtmp_21(8)> # RANGE [irange] unsigned int [0,

[Bug tree-optimization/121345] [16 Regression] obvious incorrect array-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121345 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- ` -fmath-errno -fno-exceptions -O3 -W -Wall`

[Bug tree-optimization/121345] [16 Regression] obvious incorrect array-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121345 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 62027 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62027&action=edit non-reduced testcase

[Bug tree-optimization/121345] [16 Regression] obvious incorrect array-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121345 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||56456 Version|14.2.0

[Bug tree-optimization/121345] New: [16 Regression] obvious incorrect array-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121345 Bug ID: 121345 Summary: [16 Regression] obvious incorrect array-bounds warning Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs-bisection, needs-reduction, needs-s

[Bug tree-optimization/121344] New __builtin_clz(0) when compiling with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121344 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Krister Walfridsson from comment #4) > Hmm. The discussion in 111280 says it cannot create new basic blocks, but > the compiler is correctly creating a new basic block for the function in > this

[Bug tree-optimization/121344] New __builtin_clz(0) when compiling with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121344 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > The problem is the same issue as PR 111280. In both cases > number_of_iterations_cltz_complement produces the condition. > > *** This bug has been marked as a d

[Bug tree-optimization/121344] New __builtin_clz(0) when compiling with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121344 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug tree-optimization/111280] CLZ(0) generated when CLZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO is false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111280 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 121344 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug tree-optimization/121344] New __builtin_clz(0) when compiling with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121344 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I thought I had saw this before.

[Bug tree-optimization/119876] suboptimal code for avx512 conditional move

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119876 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |16.0

[Bug middle-end/121159] musttail gives bogus volatile function error message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121159 --- Comment #24 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Lukas Grätz from comment #23) > (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #22) > > > I must say I'm not sure how musttail calls work at all on SPARC at -O0. > > > The thing is sparc_function_ok_f

[Bug middle-end/121341] New: function_ok_for_sibcall should return return a string on why the target does not allow the sibcall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121341 Bug ID: 121341 Summary: function_ok_for_sibcall should return return a string on why the target does not allow the sibcall Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug tree-optimization/121338] UBSAN error in ivopts (signed integer overflow: 9223372036854775805 + 26 cannot be represented in type 'long int')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121338 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- int64_t niters = (int64_t) avg_loop_niter (data->current_loop); return (cost + (round_up_p ? niters - 1 : 0)) / niters;

[Bug c++/118374] diagnostic for unknown type of the underlaying type of an enum should be improved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118374 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Missing fixit for |diagnostic for unknown type

[Bug c++/121328] [13/14/15/16 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault on local lambda constraints with pack expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121328 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.5.0 Summary|ICE: Segmenta

[Bug c++/121328] ICE: Segmentation fault on local lambda constraints with pack expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121328 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug testsuite/121337] c-c++-common/musttail32.c fail starting with r16-2195-g89b9372d61ccd4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121337 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug other/63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 Bug 63426 depends on bug 100213, which changed state. Bug 100213 Summary: Signed integer overflow in poly-int.h via alias.c:memrefs_conflict_p https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100213 What|Removed |A

[Bug middle-end/118819] [15 Regression] runtime error: signed integer overflow during bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118819 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/100213] Signed integer overflow in poly-int.h via alias.c:memrefs_conflict_p

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100213 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/121331] New dialect flag: -farray-parameters-are-arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121331 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug c++/121333] g++ and clang++ diverge on parsing new (std::nothrow_t())

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121333 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-07-31 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/121333] g++ and clang++ diverge on parsing new (std::nothrow_t())

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121333 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- EDG also rejects it.

[Bug c++/121335] Vulkan module ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121335 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/115742] MacOS Monterey : /usr/include not found

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115742 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/121329] [15/16 Regression] ICE with trailing decltype(auto) and two different return types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121329 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.2 Summary|There are some

[Bug c++/121329] There are some errors about std::nullopt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121329 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Semi reduced testcase for the ICE: ``` struct nullopt{}; struct vector { bool empty()const; struct iterator { int &operator*(); }; }; template auto findLargest(const Container& container)

[Bug c++/121329] There are some errors about std::nullopt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121329 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery, |

[Bug tree-optimization/121301] [14/15 Regression] maybe uninitialized in includes with -O3 -fkeep-inline-functions -Wmaybe-uninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121301 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.4 Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/121301] maybe uninitialized in includes with -O3 -fkeep-inline-functions -Wmaybe-uninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121301 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Alessandro Vergani from comment #3) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > > Works for me with the trunk. > > I tested with trunk on compiler explorer and it doesn't even finish the >

[Bug c++/121325] ICE on pack index in noexcept specifier of generic lambda in requires clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121325 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-07-31 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 --- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 121324 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/121324] [16 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr82524.c caused by r16-2649-g0340177d54d08b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121324 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/121323] UBSAN error in ao_ref_init_from_ptr_and_range (signed integer overflow: -9223372036854775808 * 8 cannot be represented in type 'long int')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121323 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/121322] UBSAN error in find_bswap_or_nop (shift exponent 64 is too large for 64-bit type 'long unsigned int')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121322 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- tmp_n = tmp_n >> count | tmp_n << (range - count);

[Bug middle-end/121321] UBSAN error in get_object_alignment_2 (signed integer overflow: 2305843009213694039 * 8 cannot be represented in type 'long int')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121321 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |middle-end --- Comment #2 from Andrew P

[Bug tree-optimization/121320] UBSAN error in tree-ssa-sccvn (signed integer overflow: 2305843009213693952 * 8 cannot be represented in type 'long int')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121320 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- The fix in r14-9353-ge1bd0f293d8407d4e8149fbafd470612323dc938 was an improvement over the code after r14-8929-g938a419182f8c4 but it should have used it in poly_offset_int .

[Bug tree-optimization/121320] UBSAN error in tree-ssa-sccvn (signed integer overflow: 2305843009213693952 * 8 cannot be represented in type 'long int')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121320 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-07-30 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug target/121319] Why is global_options.x_flag_pcc_struct_return cleared?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121319 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- See https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/557652.html

[Bug target/121319] Why is global_options.x_flag_pcc_struct_return cleared?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121319 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/121318] handle_tls_model_attribute failed to consider compiler options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121318 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #3) > When necessary to upgrade global-dynamic to initial-exec (in libraries) > without downgrading local-exec to initial-exec (in executables), the code > can att

[Bug middle-end/121318] handle_tls_model_attribute failed to consider compiler options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121318 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I am not so sure, the documentation of attribute say it should override the default.

[Bug middle-end/121318] handle_tls_model_attribute failed to consider compiler options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121318 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-15.1.0/gcc/Common-Variable-Attributes.html#index-tls_005fmodel-variable-attribute The tls_model attribute sets thread-local storage model (see Thread-Local Storage) of a p

[Bug middle-end/121317] Incorrect info about variables possibly modified by longjmp/vfork

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121317 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- See https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-October/530992.html also.

[Bug target/121315] Missed LDP/STP fusion opportunity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121315 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/121315] Missed LDP/STP fusion opportunity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121315 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed. At .optimization GCC produces: ``` vect__5.13_42 = MEM [(int *)src_3(D) + ivtmp.34_19 * 1]; _4 = src_3(D) + 16; vect__5.14_44 = MEM [(int *)_4 + ivtmp.34_19 * 1]; ``` Which I think is a

[Bug target/121315] Missed LDP/STP fusion opportunity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121315 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org Se

[Bug tree-optimization/121295] [16 regression] ICE on valid code at -O{2,3} with "-fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-pre -fno-code-hoisting": Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121295 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Patch submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-July/691109.html

[Bug target/111231] [13/14/15/16 regression] armhf: Miscompilation with -O2/-fno-exceptions level (-fno-tree-vectorize is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111231 --- Comment #38 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 121310 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/121310] [16 regression] highway miscompiled on arm32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121310 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 62001 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62001&action=edit Patch which I am testing

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- The reason why this didn't show up For Richard; is on word_mode==DImode targets is because the self tests does NOT test DImode and TImode as TImode requires wide_const_int. Anyways I have a fix.

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-07-30 Keywords|

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz --- Comment #1

[Bug target/121309] [16 Regression] ICE: in assert_rtx_eq_at, at selftest-rtl.cc:57: test_scalar_int_ext_ops: FAIL: ASSERT_RTX_EQ (lowpart_subreg ( ... ), ... ) during armv7a-hardfloat build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121309 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Sorry wrong bug #. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 121308 ***

[Bug target/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz --- Comment #8

[Bug target/121309] [16 Regression] ICE: in assert_rtx_eq_at, at selftest-rtl.cc:57: test_scalar_int_ext_ops: FAIL: ASSERT_RTX_EQ (lowpart_subreg ( ... ), ... ) during armv7a-hardfloat build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121309 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6) > I am going to file the selftest issue with -m32 seperately. PR 121308.

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org Target Mi

[Bug rtl-optimization/121308] New: [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121308 Bug ID: 121308 Summary: [16 Regression] self tests fail with -m32 on x86_64 after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Key

[Bug target/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4) > On x86-64, I also saw > > Running target unix/-m32 > Using /usr/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description file for > target. > Using /usr/share/dejagnu/c

[Bug target/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr115102.c scan-assembler bswaphisi2_lowpart > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/xchg-4.c scan-assembler rolw > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/xchg-4.c scan-assembler

[Bug c/121305] -Wunused-parameter shouldn't warn about naked functions not using their params

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121305 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug target/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/49774] [meta-bug] restrict qualification aliasing issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49774 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- LLVM discussion around restrict: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-yet-another-llvm-restrict-support/87612

[Bug tree-optimization/121279] [14/15/16 Regression] wrong code due to load of a bool from an union being pulled out of loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121279 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- I should mention that LLVM has been having some discussions in the area of bool not being 0/1 too: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/defining-what-happens-when-a-bool-isn-t-0-or-1/86778/17

[Bug tree-optimization/121295] [16 regression] ICE on valid code at -O{2,3} with "-fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-pre -fno-code-hoisting": Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121295 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-July/691079.html

[Bug rtl-optimization/121302] [16 Regression] Bootstrap failed with ada

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121302 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug rtl-optimization/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Note the backend had to changed before in r14-2065-g8f6c747c8638d4 due to r14-2047-gd0e891406b16dc

[Bug c/121305] -Wunused-parameter shouldn't warn about naked functions not using their params

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121305 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic --- Comment #1 from Andrew P

[Bug rtl-optimization/121306] [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 61999 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61999&action=edit Reduced testcase

[Bug rtl-optimization/121306] New: [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121306 Bug ID: 121306 Summary: [16 Regression] testcase failures after r16-2614-g965564eafb721f on x86_64 Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: m

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >