https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
--- Comment #11 from Tamar Christina ---
> > Richi the configury bits you shared once upon a time had
> > -fno-unsafe-math-optimizations for 500.perlbench. Are there known issues
> > with
> > this test for -ffast-math that we had -fno-unsafe-m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103318
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Do you maybe have some simple example (of what we generate, and what you say
it should be)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102436
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0fc859f5efcb4624a8b4ffdbf34d63972af179a8
commit r12-5394-g0fc859f5efcb4624a8b4ffdbf34d63972af179a8
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fb15abdc9b61a0b7fa24a37f85d19dc449cfd5bf
commit r12-5395-gfb15abdc9b61a0b7fa24a37f85d19dc449cfd5bf
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103181
Bug 103181 depends on bug 103248, which changed state.
Bug 103248 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in operation_could_trap_helper_p, at
tree-eh.c:2479
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103249
Bug 103249 depends on bug 103248, which changed state.
Bug 103248 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in operation_could_trap_helper_p, at
tree-eh.c:2479
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102436
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.1, 12.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0e510ab53414430e93c6f5b64841e2f40031cda7
commit r12-5396-g0e510ab53414430e93c6f5b64841e2f40031cda7
Author: Tamar Christina
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
Fixed on master, is this something we'd want to backport to active branches?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, I think so, otherwise you can only use GCC trunk with the latest newlib.
Maybe give it a week to see if anybody notices problems with the new code, then
backport. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70796
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a84177aff7ca86f501d6aa5ef407fac5e71f56fb
commit r12-5397-ga84177aff7ca86f501d6aa5ef407fac5e71f56fb
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19808
--- Comment #52 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #51)
> At last, implemented.
Marvellous.
I will test it by compiling Fedora rawhide and report back
with any errors.
Nearly 17 years is quite a wait for a fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70796
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103326
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd85c42c36a5d4e00b41ed40bca98598a2fb57c5
commit r12-5398-gdd85c42c36a5d4e00b41ed40bca98598a2fb57c5
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103326
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102988
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Alexandr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
Bug ID: 103328
Summary: IC in remap_gimple_stmt, at tree-inline.c:1921
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
--- Comment #13 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #11)
> Historically it has always only been for the test dataset with the problem
> Aldy encountered before with the signed zeros. See
> https://www.spec.org/cpu2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103241
--- Comment #14 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Hi, Will, Jakub, Martin,
There's nothing particularly unusual about apparently empty ranges, especially
when views are enabled, since the very point of location views is to enable
multiple states to be d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103329
Bug ID: 103329
Summary: [11/12 Regression] Code divergence in debug info with
-fdump-tree-original since r11-291-g0f50f6daa140186a
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103329
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
1916 /* If STMT has a block defined, map it to the newly constructed
block. */
1917 if (tree block = gimple_block (copy))
1918{
1919 tree *n;
1920 n = id->decl_map->get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103312
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in gfc_find_component |[9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103313
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-19
CC|
llptr)) {}
| ^~~
$ /home/dcb/gcc/results/bin/gcc -v
gcc version 12.0.0 2029 (experimental) (0e510ab53414430e)
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103322
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103321
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
Summary|ICE in remap_gim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19808
--- Comment #54 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Looks like it's missing a check for m_alloc having vacuous initialization, i.e.
not actually needing any initialization before it's usable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102988
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 51837
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51837&action=edit
candidate patch under test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That is a bad bisection, just change it like:
--- pr103328.C~ 2021-11-19 06:20:59.0 -0500
+++ pr103328.C 2021-11-19 06:21:57.0 -0500
@@ -530,7 +530,7 @@ void server_impl::send_message(server
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103230
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:74a4ece02df1b1b6f396fd0e24dbbf8b0897858a
commit r12-5399-g74a4ece02df1b1b6f396fd0e24dbbf8b0897858a
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103230
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 103230, which changed state.
Bug 103230 Summary: ipa-modref-tree.h:550:33: runtime error: load of value 255,
which is not a valid value for type 'bool'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103230
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
> > Richi the configury bits you shared once upon a time had
> > -fno-unsafe-math-optimizations for 500.perlbench. Are there known issues
> > with
> > this test for -ffast-math that we had -fno-unsafe-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103282
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 103088, which changed state.
Bug 103088 Summary: [12 regression] 500.perlbench from spec 2017 fails since
r12-4698
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102217
--- Comment #1 from Max Kellermann ---
Tested again with "g++-11 (Debian 11.2.0-10) 11.2.0", and my demo program still
crashes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103321
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103317
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102217
--- Comment #2 from Max Kellermann ---
Also crashes with "gcc version 12.0.0 2027 (experimental) [master
r12-5346-gd3a9082d7ac] (Debian 12-2027-1)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #5 from Avi Kivity ---
Sure, I'll redo the reduction.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
--- Comment #16 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #14)
> > > Richi the configury bits you shared once upon a time had
> > > -fno-unsafe-math-optimizations for 500.perlbench. Are there known issues
> > > with
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89740
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #6 from Avi Kivity ---
Unfortunately, clang doesn't accept the preprocessed source, only the original.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103314
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ea2954df43d4162af23a20c84f4c5485463977ac
commit r12-5400-gea2954df43d4162af23a20c84f4c5485463977ac
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So can you perhaps check that g++ -O0 -std=gnu++20 -fno-checking -fno-inline
accepts it without errors while g++ -O2 -std=gnu++20 ICEs on it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103314
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #8 from Avi Kivity ---
Aha, I'll validate against g++ -O0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #9 from Avi Kivity ---
btw, I also noticed these warnings:
raft/server.cc: In member function ‘virtual seastar::future<>
raft::server_impl::abort()’:
raft/server.cc:932:1: warning:
‘raft::server_impl::abort()::_ZN4raft11server_impl5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102838
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103325
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103149
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #10 from Avi Kivity ---
It's reducing with the stricter test, expect something in around 24 hours.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
--- Comment #17 from Martin Liška ---
> I don't mind closing this as invalid, however this isn't a known limitation,
> it's a new limitation.
Yes, it may be a new limitation or we may be affected by the same issue by now
for ref size.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
The first stmt we complain on remains in the same function. The functions
scope tree at the point of complaint is
{ Scope block #0
{ Scope block #0 (unused)
struct coroutine_handle _Coro_actor_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
--- Comment #18 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #17)
> > I don't mind closing this as invalid, however this isn't a known limitation,
> > it's a new limitation.
>
> Yes, it may be a new limitation or we may be af
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Basically with lower_gimple_bind we re-wire the BLOCK tree to match the
GIMPLE_BLOCK IL nesting. Whatever gets "unreachable" in that process is
"lost".
The following shows this, but it seems it is expecte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103052
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka ---
There is wrong order of conditionals in code merging previously known info with
current info. IPA propagation gets state NEITHER by walking around the
non-trivial cycle while function was earlier detected as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
The checking patch also trigers on coroutines.exp testing (as expected).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103097
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103330
Bug ID: 103330
Summary: [12 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.target/i386/avx512fp16-vector-complex-float.c by
r12-5378
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103330
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-19
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103330
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103329
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
In the -fdump-tree-original=/dev/null case we have extra
<1><107>: Abbrev Number: 3 (DW_TAG_structure_type)
<108> DW_AT_name: (indirect string, offset: 0xb8):
__is_integer
<10c> DW_AT_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100843
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100518
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103331
Bug ID: 103331
Summary: There should be a rule to make build.log in the
top-level Makefile
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Note the BLOCK is lost somewhere between CFG build (still OK as by
verify_gimple_in_cfg) and free_lang_data where it is lost.
Oh, so the BLOCK in question is used in two different functions BIND_EXPRs
and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Sure. Consider:
#include
vector bool __int128
foo (vector signed __int128 a, vector signed __int128 b)
{
return vec_cmpgt (a, b);
}
With gimple folding we emulate in 64-bit mode:
mfvsrd 9,34
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
Above was compiled with -O2 -mcpu=power10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94376
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd740165e54151ea794fca34904f5c2e2ea1dcda
commit r12-5403-gfd740165e54151ea794fca34904f5c2e2ea1dcda
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94376
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe ---
OK. I need to see where I slipped up - we are supposed to extract the outlined
portion of the function and then wrap that in the various machinery specified
in the std.
However, blocks associated with parms
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
And
static void
verify_scope_blocks (tree block, tree supercontext)
{
gcc_assert (BLOCK_SUPERCONTEXT (block) == supercontext);
for (tree t = BLOCK_SUBBLOCKS (block); t; t = BLOCK_CHAIN (t))
verify
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
At first glance, this is probably because vector.md's definition of
vec_cmp isn't defined for V1TImode. Probably needs to be changed
to use VEC_IP rather than VEC_I and implement all the cases for 128-bit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ah, now I see. Thanks!
Power10 has some new 128-bit insns (and p9 and p8 did before, too).
I still think it would be best if Gimple did *never* split data. It
simply does not know enough about the m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #6)
> Ah, now I see. Thanks!
>
> Power10 has some new 128-bit insns (and p9 and p8 did before, too).
>
> I still think it would be best if Gimple did *never*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Btw:
> mfvsrd 9,34
> mfvsrld 8,34
> mfvsrd 11,35
> mfvsrld 10,35
> li 7,1
> cmpd 0,9,11
> bgt 0,.L2
> cmpld 0,9,11
> beq 0,.L5
> .L3:
> li 7,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Value numbering for PRE of |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> > I still think it would be best if Gimple did *never* split data. It
> > simply does not know enough about the machine and what the eventual
> > machine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101731
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103311
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:487d604b6fa0f0a981eadc216d9e481d08ed7e7b
commit r12-5407-g487d604b6fa0f0a981eadc216d9e481d08ed7e7b
Author: Tamar Christina
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103330
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:487d604b6fa0f0a981eadc216d9e481d08ed7e7b
commit r12-5407-g487d604b6fa0f0a981eadc216d9e481d08ed7e7b
Author: Tamar Christina
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103330
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103311
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102436
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Sounds reasonable (not backporting, but holding bug open for now). I'll
probably do some testing with it internally, so if you end up wanting to
revisit the backporting question, reach out I may have usefu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102838
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, but clearly not in libgomp, but in the testcase, so IMNSHO we shouldn't
reuse this PR for that. On x86_64-linux I see movaps into and out from the
thr.1 TLS variable and in two spots to/from stack, th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103332
Bug ID: 103332
Summary: Spurious -Wstringop-overflow warnings in libstdc++
tests
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103332
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103088
--- Comment #19 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Ughh, I was nerd sniped. Couldn't let it go ;-).
The problem is this construct in Perl_do_ncmp:
if (lnv < rnv)
return -1;
if (lnv > rnv)
return 1;
if (lnv == rnv)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Bug ID: 10
Summary: [accepts-invalid] function template argument deduction
for incompatible 'transformed A' / 'deduced A' pair
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103282
--- Comment #7 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looks like it is 32 bit only.
1 - 100 of 170 matches
Mail list logo
