https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #20 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #19)
> Ah, so the issue is missing -mavx512bw which means we end up with a AVX2
> style
> mask for V32QImode. With -mavx512bw the code vectorizes fine.
Vectorization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104033
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |c++
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104035
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104050
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104033
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104058
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Yeah, it's likely missed epilogue vectorization because of that change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104059
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104060
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103364
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104035
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104061
Bug ID: 104061
Summary: ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed (error: invalid operands
in binary operation)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: open
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82980
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91618
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103312
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103650
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104005
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104005
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>The attached tarball includes preprocessed source
I think it was too big when you tried to create the bug report (it is known
issue that bugzilla does not report the attachment fails when creating the bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104005
--- Comment #3 from Gilles Gouaillardet
---
Created attachment 52210
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52210&action=edit
before/after (preprocessed sources + assembly)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104005
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Gilles Gouaillardet from comment #3)
> Created attachment 52210 [details]
> before/after (preprocessed sources + assembly)
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104062
Bug ID: 104062
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in get_or_create_cast, at
analyzer/region-model-manager.cc:482
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104028
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
Reduced test-case:
$ cat pr104028.c
# 1 "" 3
struct {
_Bool do_force;
int examine;
int vpd_pn
} svpd_decode_t10_op;
svpd_decode_t10_sg_fd, svpd_decode_t10_op_1, svpd_decode_t10_op_2;
svpd_decode_t10_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104028
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104062
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104035
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d4c02ec777943c88378c1357d9cd6cfb0433c1bc
commit r12-6626-gd4c02ec777943c88378c1357d9cd6cfb0433c1bc
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104035
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104000
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The error is:
: In constructor 'A::A(int)':
:5:16: error: 'this' is not a constant expression
5 | A(int) : A() {}
|^
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96256
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang nows accepts this code like GCC does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103949
--- Comment #17 from Jörn Heusipp ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> (In reply to Jörn Heusipp from comment #8)
> > > Note in newer versions of glibc, libpthread is all intergrated into libc
> > > and
> > > there is no issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104048
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102623
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104050
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] |'-fcompare-debug' failure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104054
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-17
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104058
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104055
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Because of the consteval build_over_call will do:
9920 if (obj_arg && is_dummy_object (obj_arg))
9921{
9922 call = build_cplus_new (DECL_CONTEXT (fndecl), call,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104061
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104062
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] ICE in |[12 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103789
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Mikael Morin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7a44809924297a2ff26b6b1d040c72c22f07346
commit r11-9471-gd7a44809924297a2ff26b6b1d040c72c22f07346
Author: Mikael Morin
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95968
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104063
Bug ID: 104063
Summary: gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:5831:20: runtime error: load
of value 215872256, which is not a valid value for
type 'ar_type'
Product: gcc
Vers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104054
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104064
Bug ID: 104064
Summary: gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c:3208:16: runtime error:
signed integer overflow: 17 - -9223372036854775806
cannot be represented in type 'long int'
Produc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96122
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104055
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Now, I think the initializer shouldn't be
> refering to the slot decl (e.g. take its address), because that wouldn't be
> a constant expression.
Note that sound
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103949
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jörn Heusipp from comment #17)
> All these issues are a tremendous user experience nightmare,
OK.
and it sadly
> looks like I absolutely have to point out every single one of them
> explic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104055
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103789
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-17
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80780
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can this be closed as fixed for GCC 11?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104063
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
>From the code, I wonder whether a 'ref->type == REF_ARRAY' is missing as ...
if (e->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE
&& e->ref
&& e->ref->u.ar.type == AR_FULL
... and whether more is n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104065
Bug ID: 104065
Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 20220117 fails to build modula2
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80780
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104066
Bug ID: 104066
Summary: "extern constinit long (* const syscall_reexported)
(long, ...);" doesn't compile: gcc thinks "constinit"
applies to return value, not to function pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103650
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fa092570fbaf3bb4202e518eb8beba146c464d9f
commit r12-6633-gfa092570fbaf3bb4202e518eb8beba146c464d9f
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104054
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The first difference is in rnreg pass, w/o -g:
28: L28:
29: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 4
30: [`i']=0
63: di:DI=r9:DI <--- here
64: dx:DI=r10:DI
9: r8:HI=0x5
REG_EQUAL 0x5
98: {cx:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104054
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104026
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103775
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
That change probably just made the latent issue trigger.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103769
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104054
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Could be a red herring, but in _.rnreg dump:
Register r9 (1): 75 [GENERAL_REGS] 18 [ALL_REGS] 97 [GENERAL_REGS]
Register r10 (1): 76 [GENERAL_REGS] 18 [ALL_REGS] 23 [GENERAL_REGS]
...
Register di (1): 55 [ALL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103973
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:463d9108766dcbb6a1051985e6c840a46897fe10
commit r12-6637-g463d9108766dcbb6a1051985e6c840a46897fe10
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103716
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103702
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103676
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103662
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
I'm inclined to make this P1 even though it is gfortran only. As a last resort
it should work to make the receiver side a ref-all pointer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103642
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103752
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.2.1
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103341
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104015
--- Comment #10 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #9)
> I totally agree this test case can be fragile when facing different
> vectorisation strategies, but I'm not sure if leaving the exact number
> checki
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103328
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103243
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103163
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103115
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103057
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102902
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103752
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The problem seems to be explicit(bool), and it fails for gcc-11 too.
// header.h
template
struct pair
{
constexpr
explicit(__is_same(_T1, _T2))
pair()
{ }
_T1 first;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102651
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102586
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102562
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102542
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102478
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102477
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Blocks|82738
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102430
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102419
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102330
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102300
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102214
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102211
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102154
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102211
Bug 102211 depends on bug 102154, which changed state.
Bug 102154 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 since
r12-3277-gd2874d905647a1d146dafa60199d440e837adc4d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102154
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102156
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102133
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102071
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101958
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101894
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101886
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
1 - 100 of 260 matches
Mail list logo
