https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57292
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53266
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101070
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-2388-20210719001624-gbdea84c4b57-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.0 20210719 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #3 from Jens Maurer ---
"We treat the global operator new as not reading from global memory"
If I implement my own global "operator new" afresh, certainly it'll need to
access global memory, e.g. to read a global pointer to the heap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98621
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.5.3
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98621
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505
Bug ID: 101505
Summary: [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed
(error: incompatible types in 'PHI' argument 0)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100202
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100204
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
(define_constraint "J"
"A constant that can be used with a SUB operation (once negated)."
(and (match_code "const_int")
(match_test "aarch64_uimm12_shift (-ival)")))
So this should be:
- (unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100204
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-19
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101504
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100211
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101172
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101171
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] ICE: |[10 Regression] ICE: tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101210
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11 regression]|[9/10 regression] spurious
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11 Regression]|[9/10 Regression] internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101484
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9f2bc5077debef2b046b6c10d38591ac324ad8b5
commit r12-2392-g9f2bc5077debef2b046b6c10d38591ac324ad8b5
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101506
Bug ID: 101506
Summary: [12 Regression]
gcc.target/aarch64/vect-fmaxv-fminv-compile.c fail
after gcc-12-2292-g1dd3f2109585
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101506
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101507
Bug ID: 101507
Summary: ice for gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-69.c with
-march=iwmmxt
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
Volker Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||volker.schmidt at factset dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82833
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Looks like the ICE was fixed by the concepts rewrite in r10-3735 "Update the
concepts implementation to conform to C++20."
Valid C++20 testcase:
#include
#include
template
concept CallYieldsType = re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90033
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It was fixed by the r10-3735 rewrite "Update the concepts implementation to
conform to C++20." That definitely isn't going to be backported.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
As Jakub said the behavior is the same for malloc() since years.
When you split the testcase like
> cat t.C
#include
#include
bool flag = false;
class C
{
bool prev;
public:
C() : prev(flag)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101508
Bug ID: 101508
Summary: Possible undefined behaviour in cpp program using
"unsigned" type starting from GCC 9
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101500
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.3.0, 11.1.0, 12.0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101508
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101506
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |testsuite
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101508
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||100740
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
vectorizable_lc_phi get's the vectorized stmts of _4 = xb_17 <= 0; but sees
the mask rather than the pattern stmt used to produce the desired result.
The def_stmt is vect_used_in_outer, and otherwise the us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> As Jakub said the behavior is the same for malloc() since years.
>
...
> So it might work to disable the new/delete/malloc/free optimization when
> we see a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101506
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100863
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101442
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101500
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99121
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
But easily fixed with sth like
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-array-bounds.cc b/gcc/gimple-array-bounds.cc
index 199d9f5d216..b1179518651 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-array-bounds.cc
+++ b/gcc/gimple-array-bounds.cc
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100106
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
What about backporting this fix?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100692
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Component|lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101142
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] Backport |[10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99121
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah. And it changes only behavior for the cases where we'd ICE, so it
shouldn't affect anything where we'd report some useful warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101506
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-19
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8df3ee8f7d85d0708f3c3ca96b55c9230c2ae9f0
commit r12-2393-g8df3ee8f7d85d0708f3c3ca96b55c9230c2ae9f0
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.0
Summary|[10/11/12 Regr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101509
Bug ID: 101509
Summary: Rejects valid construction call with type inference
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101510
Bug ID: 101510
Summary: std::filesystem::create_directory on an existing
symlink to a directory
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101460
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6dc150d9a036cbbed3c4dac6df1ce895b899d423
commit r11-8777-g6dc150d9a036cbbed3c4dac6df1ce895b899d423
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101427
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6dc150d9a036cbbed3c4dac6df1ce895b899d423
commit r11-8777-g6dc150d9a036cbbed3c4dac6df1ce895b899d423
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101509
--- Comment #1 from Gareth Lloyd ---
This was originally discovered where `S` was `std::vector` and was constructed
with an initializer_list
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But operator new is not defined in the runtime here, it's a replaceable global
allocation function. The assumption seems unsafe for replaceable functions that
users can define in their own code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101509
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89062
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gar...@ignition-web.co.uk
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101488
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Different patch:
--- libcpp/macro.c.jj 2021-07-16 11:10:08.512925510 +0200
+++ libcpp/macro.c 2021-07-19 14:19:48.217122675 +0200
@@ -236,10 +236,20 @@ class vaopt_state {
return m_state == 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #10 from Jens Maurer ---
I agree with Jonathan here: The difference is that "malloc" comes with the
compiler/library and cannot be replaced (within the scope of the C or C++
standards), but "operator new" is expressly specified to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100182
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101427
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43073
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Much more importantly, gcc-core doesn't exist anymore (so WORKSFORME is a
strange resolution).
Using the documented build procedures is recommended, and is what is
supported here (not any cross tool wha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
--- Comment #3 from tonyb at cybernetics dot com ---
The output is reproducible for me with that test program too. Try this program
instead:
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
if (freopen("/dev/null", "w", stdout) == NULL)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
--- Comment #4 from tonyb at cybernetics dot com ---
By "reproducible" I meant that with your test program, the binary output was
the same regardless of the toolchain path as in
https://reproducible-builds.org/, so the "problem" was not reproduce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
>
> Jonathan Wakely changed:
>
>What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
--- Comment #6 from tonyb at cybernetics dot com ---
The only thing I know is that roughly similar issues were handled with the
-fdebug-prefix-map=old=new switch, but I am not the expert.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
That was because of PR98130 it seems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
In PR98130 I suggested "..o " for delete and it would be "m " for new (does
a C++ new expression really set/clobber errno?).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101511
Bug ID: 101511
Summary: ice in query_relation, at value-relation.cc:879
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100976
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940
Bug 98940 depends on bug 100976, which changed state.
Bug 100976 Summary: [C++23] Make constexpr reference temp constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100976
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101511
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Reduced C++ code seems to be:
void __assert_fail(char *, char *, int, const char *)
__attribute__((__noreturn__));
template void test_uint() {
long __trans_tmp_3, __trans_tmp_1;
int Error;
for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100427
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
is this bug fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|LTO makes debug info depend |debug_line info depends on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to tonyb from comment #6)
> The only thing I know is that roughly similar issues were handled with the
> -fdebug-prefix-map=old=new switch, but I am not the expert.
Yes, that works to strip the i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> (In reply to tonyb from comment #6)
> > The only thing I know is that roughly similar issues were handled with the
> > -fdebug-prefix-map=old=new switch, but I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101466
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #12)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> > With some hand-waving we could generate
> >
> > void square(unsigned t, int *tt)
> > {
> > if (t<=4) __buil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> > (In reply to tonyb from comment #6)
> > > The only thing I know is that roughly similar issues were handled w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101055
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this also affects the Intel compiler, as the latest release doesn't
handle [[__no_unique_address__]].
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ice in query_relation, at |[12 Regression] ice in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101480
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
diff --git a/gcc/gimple.c b/gcc/gimple.c
index 863bc0d17f1..e085d9de49a 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple.c
@@ -1516,12 +1516,12 @@ gimple_call_fnspec (const gcall *stmt)
&& DECL_IS_OPERATO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101488
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 51172
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51172&action=edit
gcc12-pr101488.patch
Another version of the patch, this one passes the clang macro_vaopt_* tests and
preproces
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100182
--- Comment #29 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #28)
> 29_atomics/atomic_ref/wait_notify.c has the same issue on Linux/x86-64 with
> -m32:
Are you sure? The mentioned peephole2 patterns now emit only x87 or SSE DFmode
loa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91602
--- Comment #14 from Jim Wilson ---
I posted a patch but didn't get a review, and then got distracted by other
stuff and failed to follow up.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-January/539461.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101473
--- Comment #11 from tonyb at cybernetics dot com ---
That change fixed the simple test program. Next I will try a more complex
program, but it will take a while for everything to compile.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101503
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-19
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93734
--- Comment #8 from Mikael Pettersson ---
I can't reproduce the wrong code using either the fortran test case in #c2 or
the C one in #c3 with gcc-9.4.0 on Kaby Lake R. If I revert the PR92420 fix
both test cases do reproduce the wrong code. Thus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101511
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
I've had a go at a git bisect, but couldn't produce any sensible answers ;-<
Richard seems to think Andrew MacLeod may be helpful, so I am happy
to go with that.
For the git range I suggested, commits
4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101205
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:db95ac7745b284d1fd667ee6262b4afc778fe074
commit r12-2395-gdb95ac7745b284d1fd667ee6262b4afc778fe074
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101205
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56223
Bug 56223 depends on bug 101205, which changed state.
Bug 101205 Summary: csinv does not have an zero_extend version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101205
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100181
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-19
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94278
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100181
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus ---
*** Bug 94278 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98619
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98961
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94295
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Richard S., is there any reason to use the built-ins for the constant
evaluation case? I assume not. Currently std::allocator does:
[[nodiscard,__gnu__::__always_inline__]]
constexpr _Tp*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Summary|Wrong code since
1 - 100 of 212 matches
Mail list logo
