[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #13 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #11) > TBH. I would rather see the library does the optimization instead of the > compiler. I do not trust the compiler can always optimize this stuff. If we have both, that

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #14 from fdlbxtqi --- I think It is worth the effort to rewrite these functions since they are so fundamental to the performance of entire C++. What I am worry about is that whether revamping these functions would be a new ABI breakin

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #15 from fdlbxtqi --- (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #14) > I think It is worth the effort to rewrite these functions since they are so > fundamental to the performance of entire C++. What I am worry about is that > whether revamp

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #16 from fdlbxtqi --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #13) > (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #11) > > TBH. I would rather see the library does the optimization instead of the > > compiler. I do not trust the compiler can alwa

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #17 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #15) > What I am worried about is that whether revamping these functions would be a > new wave of ABI breaking. I don't foresee any ABI issue here. Do make sure your code d

[Bug target/93078] Missing fma and round functions auto-vectorization with x86-64 (sse2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93078 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sun Dec 29 11:03:25 2019 New Revision: 279754 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279754&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/93078 * config/i386/i386-builtins.c (ix86_builti

[Bug fortran/91310] Read overflow generated by character array assignment to self

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91310 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug fortran/91310] Read overflow generated by character array assignment to self

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91310 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig --- Comment on attachment 46648 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46648 test case 1 Oops, correction. If len is small enough, the test case can be valid (well, it could be if str was ever assi

[Bug fortran/91310] Read overflow generated by character array assignment to self

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91310 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #18 from fdlbxtqi --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #17) > (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #15) > > What I am worried about is that whether revamping these functions would be > > a new wave of ABI breaking. > > I don't fo

[Bug rtl-optimization/93094] New: [10 Regression] ICE in maybe_gen_insn, at optabs.c:7433

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93094 Bug ID: 93094 Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in maybe_gen_insn, at optabs.c:7433 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #19 from fdlbxtqi --- Created attachment 47559 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47559&action=edit An untested patch From 1dfd714e1f29e229d69a0c7f6f84bf05dd4ee85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: expnkx Date: Sun, 2

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #20 from fdlbxtqi --- Comment on attachment 47559 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47559 An untested patch >From 1dfd714e1f29e229d69a0c7f6f84bf05dd4ee85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >From: expnkx >Date: Sun, 29 Dec

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #23 from fdlbxtqi --- Comment on attachment 47559 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47559 An untested patch >From 1dfd714e1f29e229d69a0c7f6f84bf05dd4ee85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >From: expnkx >Date: Sun, 29 Dec

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #22 from fdlbxtqi --- Comment on attachment 47559 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47559 An untested patch >From 1dfd714e1f29e229d69a0c7f6f84bf05dd4ee85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >From: expnkx >Date: Sun, 29 Dec

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #21 from fdlbxtqi --- Comment on attachment 47559 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47559 An untested patch >From 1dfd714e1f29e229d69a0c7f6f84bf05dd4ee85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >From: expnkx >Date: Sun, 29 Dec

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #24 from fdlbxtqi --- Comment on attachment 47559 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47559 An untested patch >From 1dfd714e1f29e229d69a0c7f6f84bf05dd4ee85d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >From: expnkx >Date: Sun, 29 Dec

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #25 from fdlbxtqi --- Created attachment 47560 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47560&action=edit forgot to_address 2nd patch I am going to run testsuites

[Bug c++/93095] New: Build Latest GCC fail ../../gcc/gcc/gimple-fold.c:4146:8: error: expected unqualified-id before ‘throws’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93095 Bug ID: 93095 Summary: Build Latest GCC fail ../../gcc/gcc/gimple-fold.c:4146:8: error: expected unqualified-id before ‘throws’ Product: gcc Version: 10.0

[Bug libgcc/92988] crtstuff.c:387:21: error: '__dso_handle' undeclared (first use in this function)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92988 --- Comment #1 from John David Anglin --- Created attachment 47561 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47561&action=edit Patch

[Bug c++/88337] Implement P1002R1, P1327R1, P1330R0, C++20 relaxations of constexpr restrictions.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88337 --- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Sun Dec 29 16:44:41 2019 New Revision: 279755 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279755&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/88337 - Implement P1327R1: Allow dynamic_cast in conste

[Bug c++/88337] Implement P1002R1, P1327R1, P1330R0, C++20 relaxations of constexpr restrictions.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88337 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 88337, which changed state. Bug 88337 Summary: Implement P1002R1, P1327R1, P1330R0, C++20 relaxations of constexpr restrictions. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88337 What|Removed

[Bug libgomp/93066] libgomp/target.c:525:46: error: expected expression before ')' token

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93066 --- Comment #4 from John David Anglin --- Created attachment 47562 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47562&action=edit Patch I'm fine with the proposed changes to target.c but I think we need the include fix as it's needed for

[Bug c++/88323] implement C++20 language features.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323 Bug 88323 depends on bug 88337, which changed state. Bug 88337 Summary: Implement P1002R1, P1327R1, P1330R0, C++20 relaxations of constexpr restrictions. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88337 What|Removed

[Bug c++/93096] New: detect [class.cdtor]/6 UB in constexpr dynamic_cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93096 Bug ID: 93096 Summary: detect [class.cdtor]/6 UB in constexpr dynamic_cast Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug tree-optimization/61502] == comparison on "one-past" pointer gives wrong result

Wall -Wextra -O3 test.c && ./a.out val1: 0 repr: 1 val2: 1 -- gcc x86-64 version: gcc (GCC) 10.0.0 20191229 (experimental) -- C11, 6.2.6.1p4: "T

[Bug libgomp/93097] New: Wrong OpenMP version reported

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93097 Bug ID: 93097 Summary: Wrong OpenMP version reported Product: gcc Version: 9.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgomp A

[Bug libstdc++/68350] std::uninitialized_copy overly restrictive for trivially_copyable types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68350 Arthur O'Dwyer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot com --- C

[Bug c++/93095] Build Latest GCC fail ../../gcc/gcc/gimple-fold.c:4146:8: error: expected unqualified-id before ‘throws’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93095 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/93094] [10 Regression] ICE in maybe_gen_insn, at optabs.c:7433

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93094 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 Bernd Edlinger changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de --- C

[Bug target/93094] [10 Regression] ICE in maybe_gen_insn, at optabs.c:7433

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93094 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Scalar MASK_STORE really shouldn't appear in the IL except in the copy of the loop intended for vectorization only (when it is transformed into vectorized MASK_STORE). So I'm afraid the above change leaks th

[Bug tree-optimization/93098] [10 Regression] ICE with negative shifter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93098 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0

[Bug tree-optimization/93098] New: [10 Regression] ICE with negative shifter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93098 Bug ID: 93098 Summary: [10 Regression] ICE with negative shifter Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Pri

[Bug tree-optimization/93098] [10 Regression] ICE with negative shifter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93098 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- This was introduced with r276721 .

[Bug tree-optimization/93055] accumulation loops in stepanov_vector benchmark use more instruction level parpallelism

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93055 --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka --- Created attachment 47563 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47563&action=edit fixed testcase I have verified that building with g++ -O3 -march=bdver1 -fno-prefetch-loop-arrays ~/stepanov_ve

[Bug c++/92745] [8/9 Regression] Initializing array with vec4 results in compile error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sun Dec 29 23:47:55 2019 New Revision: 279758 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279758&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/92745 * g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist118.C: Add -Wno-psabi

[Bug libgomp/93097] Wrong OpenMP version reported

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93097 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- That would be incorrect, as OpenMP 5 is only partially supported, there are various OpenMP 5 features missing, some of them on the compiler side only, but others (e.g. the allocators) on the library side too.

[Bug c++/67834] Local references inside comdat groups

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67834 --- Comment #10 from John David Anglin --- Created attachment 47564 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47564&action=edit Patch Untested fix.

[Bug c++/93095] Build Latest GCC fail ../../gcc/gcc/gimple-fold.c:4146:8: error: expected unqualified-id before ‘throws’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93095 --- Comment #2 from fdlbxtqi --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > Can't reproduce and don't see anything problematic on that code. > Unless e.g. the system headers are defining throws as a macro, can you e.g. > attach preprocessed gi

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #27 from fdlbxtqi --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #26) > (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #2) > > Also find a bug of __memmove > > > > /* > >* A constexpr wrapper for __builtin_memmove. > >* @param __num The

[Bug c++/93095] Build Latest GCC fail ../../gcc/gcc/gimple-fold.c:4146:8: error: expected unqualified-id before ‘throws’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93095 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #2) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > > Can't reproduce and don't see anything problematic on that code. > > Unless e.g. the system headers are defining throws

[Bug tree-optimization/93084] [10 regression] Infinite loop in ipa-cp when building clang with LTO+PGO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93084 fxue at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fxue at gcc dot gnu.org --- Com

[Bug tree-optimization/93084] [10 regression] Infinite loop in ipa-cp when building clang with LTO+PGO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93084 --- Comment #6 from fxue at gcc dot gnu.org --- Could you share how you build clang with PGO, and train workload?

[Bug target/93082] macOS Authorization.h needs fixinclude

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93082 --- Comment #2 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Reported on the "other side" https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44406 Changing it to enum works too, my only doubt is that it has a different width and sign (but better than not compiling) Updated

[Bug tree-optimization/61502] == comparison on "one-past" pointer gives wrong result

--- >$ gcc -std=c11 -pedantic -Wall -Wextra -O3 test.c && ./a.out >val1: 0 >repr: 1 >val2: 1 >-- >gcc x86-64 version: gcc (GCC) 10.0.0 20191229 (experimental) >---