https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92038
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Store-merging says
Starting active chain number 1 with statement:
MEM[(struct __as_base &)&D.14275] ={v} {CLOBBER};
The base object is:
&D.14275
Recording immediate store from stmt:
MEM[(struct _Uninitial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67768
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40942
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70544
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-23
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78825
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101949
--- Comment #18 from Martin Liška ---
I can confirm that failure. The test-case still crashes after Honza's patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79334
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
So this should now be correctly checked after
g:fedcf3c476aff7533741a1c61071200f0a38cf83 which fixes prune_clobbered_mems.
That uses vn_reference_may_trap which only does
case ARRAY_RANGE_REF:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101930
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Can we close it as fixed, please?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102016
Bug ID: 102016
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769
since r12-2919-gfaf2b6bc527dff31
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83130
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89381
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nadult at fastmail dot fm
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102016
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89978
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55588
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent.lextrait at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96321
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55588
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||language.lawyer at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45975
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55588
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mschulze at ivs dot cs.ovgu.de
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101915
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71679
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43694
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42018
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Fixed by r7-4488
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42018
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Simon.Richter at hogyros dot de
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102017
Bug ID: 102017
Summary: libgcc ieee754-df.S for arm does not support
exceptions
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102018
Bug ID: 102018
Summary: gcc.dg/torture/pr82692.c execution fails on arm
cortex-m7
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96138
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87841
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404
Bug 94404 depends on bug 96138, which changed state.
Bug 96138 Summary: DR 458: Hiding of member template parameters by other members
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96138
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78924
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87841
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||litteras at ukr dot net
--- Comment #7 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102019
Bug ID: 102019
Summary: [12 Regression] UBSAN error: hwint.h:293:61: runtime
error: shift exponent 64 is too large for 64-bit type
'long unsigned int' since
r12-29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102020
Bug ID: 102020
Summary: [12 regression] analyzer/malloc-callbacks.c fails
since r12-3052
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102019
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87841
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-23
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101997
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102020
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90787
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
It sounds like the usual upcasting of a link-only node which is strictly
non-conforming and can also result in TBAA issues but it's wide-spread. Note I
didn't look into the source at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89961
--- Comment #27 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Martin Liska
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7134a12cd633e8ffdcee1af7e294e9ab60647c0
commit r11-8892-gf7134a12cd633e8ffdcee1af7e294e9ab60647c0
Author: Martin Liska
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89961
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to fail|11.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83542
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2018-02-17 00:00:00 |2021-8-23
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102016
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
Confirmed, *avx512f_pshufb_truncv8hiv8qi_1 should be under condition
TARGET_AVX512BW.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67332
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||83542
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101936
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
> https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=32.507.0
>
Looking at LNT, the benchmark score is not back after the reversion of the
patch.
Maybe we face now PR101935?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102008
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-23
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102009
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66670
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102013
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100856
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:63f68535550f77998ad907ba3d3be05a4324fbe8
commit r12-3067-g63f68535550f77998ad907ba3d3be05a4324fbe8
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102016
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84403
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84186
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Seems fixed in GCC 10+.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101995
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
For reference, it's find_call_crossed_cheap_reg finding (or not) such
candidate.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102020
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101947
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
@Erik: Can you please take a look?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102018
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99074
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> --- a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/dyncast.cc
> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/dyncast.cc
> @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ __dynamic_cast (const void *src_ptr,// object started
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85743
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Seems fixed in GCC 9+.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102018
--- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon ---
Yes probably. I noticed it when upgrading newlib from 3.3.0 to 4.1.0, which
enabled new GCC tests.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86191
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note clang started to accept it in clang 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102021
Bug ID: 102021
Summary: Redudant mov instruction for broadcast.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101947
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
Not before next week, but there is nothing wrong in the patch itself.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101964
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Mateus Morais Dias de Souza from comment #4)
> I figured it out. My build script was something like this:
> ```bash
> set -e
> gcc main.c -o main
> ./main
> ```
> for some reason gcc was not w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86233
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Now the reduced testcases are rejected for always.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101930
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> Can we close it as fixed, please?
Yes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16191
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
CWG 1710 was approved as a defect report in Kona 2016:
> Move to accept as Defect Reports the issues in P0575R1 (Core Language "ready"
> issues) and apply their proposed resolutions to the C++ working pape
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102015
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99074
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It certainly shouldn't hurt. I think the middle-end predicts ptr == NULL
comparisons as unlikely, but __builtin_expect is stronger probability than that
and makes it clearer that it is extremely unlikely.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101936
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #5)
> > https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=32.507.0
> >
>
> Looking at LNT, the benchmark score is not back after the reversion of the
> patch.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
--- Comment #7 from Dmitriano ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> It sounds like the usual upcasting of a link-only node which is strictly
> non-conforming and can also result in TBAA issues but it's wide-spread.
> Note I didn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88417
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced self contained testcase:
extern "C" int printf(const char*,...);
extern "C" void abort();
template < typename T>
struct X
{
int i;
constexpr X(int _i): i{_i}{}
};
template < typename T2 >
str
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101905
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b284053bb75661fc1bf13c275f3ba5364bb17608
commit r12-3069-gb284053bb75661fc1bf13c275f3ba5364bb17608
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102016
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:70c7ab5c487f392e04907ce8f22eb454b8d3c4ff
commit r12-3070-g70c7ab5c487f392e04907ce8f22eb454b8d3c4ff
Author: liuhongt
Date: Mon Aug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77312
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed by r251433 "Reimplement handling of lambdas in templates."
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102016
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
Fixed in GCC12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
--- Comment #8 from Dmitriano ---
(In reply to Dmitriano from comment #7)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> > It sounds like the usual upcasting of a link-only node which is strictly
> > non-conforming and can also result in TBAA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79334
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ad665deeafd31238b537139385e1e80b40c10e0c
commit r12-3071-gad665deeafd31238b537139385e1e80b40c10e0c
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79334
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86723
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b320edc0c29c838b0090c3c9be14187d132f73f2
commit r12-3072-gb320edc0c29c838b0090c3c9be14187d132f73f2
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102000
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña from comment #1)
> Can https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51560 be fixed as part of this?
That is:
struct X{
int i;
consteval X() = default;
// consteval
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86723
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90493
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101905
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:513c543bb5d97cc59ba393f2f0612324a789c50e
commit r11-8893-g513c543bb5d97cc59ba393f2f0612324a789c50e
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92806
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 92806, which changed state.
Bug 92806 Summary: Suboptimal diagnostic for concept that depends on non-bool
value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92806
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101905
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10 Regression] Missed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102012
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88595
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This part of the error is no longer produced in GCC 10+:
b.cc: In constructor ‘constexpr Container::Container(int)’:
b.cc:12:44: error: member ‘Container::car’ must be initialized by
mem-initializer in ‘const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-23
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86501
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
GCC, ICC and MSVC all accept this code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
--- Comment #31 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #30)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #29)
> > I really want a fix to the script. Thank you !!!
>
> This is too vague to do anything about.
>
> Be precise.
compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91247
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.1.0, 9.4.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
--- Comment #32 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #31)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #30)
> > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #29)
> > > I really want a fix to the script. Thank you !!!
> >
> > This is too va
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91344
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Works for const or volatile.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102022
Bug ID: 102022
Summary: incorrect code with -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102022
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84403
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102022
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This part of the code looks like there could be a huge alias violation waiting
to happen
*(char**)&head
1 - 100 of 242 matches
Mail list logo
