[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6e74122f0de6748b3fd0ed9183090cd7c61fb53e commit r12-7256-g6e74122f0de6748b3fd0ed9183090cd7c61fb53e Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: W

[Bug c/104531] [12 Regression] ICE in prepare_cmp_insn, at optabs.cc:4547

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104531 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:023327643969d5469902a9ecfa6738a315f9e362 commit r12-7257-g023327643969d5469902a9ecfa6738a315f9e362 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: W

[Bug c/104531] [12 Regression] ICE in prepare_cmp_insn, at optabs.cc:4547

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104531 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression] ICE:

[Bug libstdc++/104559] vector v; v.insert(v.begin()); compiles, but it shouldn't

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104559 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug debug/104557] [12 Regression] ICE: in simplify_subreg, at simplify-rtx.cc:7324 with -O -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104557 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug analyzer/97240] Analyzer runs out of memory building C++ source

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97240 --- Comment #2 from Andris Pavenis --- Tried with gcc-12.0.1-20220216 (revision 875e493bf5eb04c11bc3846a6bfee47a6f183e3f). gcc configured without additional configure parameters (Configured with: ../gcc-12.0.1-20220216/configure) 1) /opt/gcc

[Bug libstdc++/104559] vector v; v.insert(v.begin()); compiles, but it shouldn't

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104559 Jiang An changed: What|Removed |Added CC||de34 at live dot cn --- Comment #3 from Jian

[Bug middle-end/104563] New: [OpenMP] ICE in install_var_field, at omp-low.cc:810 (multi map of same var)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104563 Bug ID: 104563 Summary: [OpenMP] ICE in install_var_field, at omp-low.cc:810 (multi map of same var) Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: i

[Bug ipa/104533] [12 Regression] ICE in update_vtable_references, at ipa-visibility.cc:383

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104533 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/100056] [9/10 Regression] orr + lsl vs. [us]bfiz

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100056 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:25332d2325c720f58c3858efdb85b8a3c06a commit r12-7259-g25332d2325c720f58c3858efdb85b8a3c06a Author: Richard Sandiford D

[Bug middle-end/104550] bogus warning from -Wuninitialized + -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- > Am 15.02.2022 um 22:38 schrieb pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org > : > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550 > > Andrew Pinski changed: > > What|Removed

[Bug debug/104557] [12 Regression] ICE: in simplify_subreg, at simplify-rtx.cc:7324 with -O -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104557 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug debug/104564] New: '-fcompare-debug' failure w/ -std=c++20 -O1 -fharden-conditional-branches -fopenacc -gno-statement-frontiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104564 Bug ID: 104564 Summary: '-fcompare-debug' failure w/ -std=c++20 -O1 -fharden-conditional-branches -fopenacc -gno-statement-frontiers Product: gcc Version: 12.0

[Bug debug/104564] '-fcompare-debug' failure w/ -std=c++20 -O1 -fharden-conditional-branches -fopenacc -gno-statement-frontiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104564 --- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha --- #include is from -Ilibstdc++-v3/testsuite/util, if invoking g++ from the top of the source tree.

[Bug tree-optimization/104558] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in expand_call, at calls.cc:3601 with -fabi-version=9 on pr83487.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104558 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/104558] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in expand_call, at calls.cc:3601 with -fabi-version=9 on pr83487.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104558 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- It is the - emit_push_insn (arg->value, arg->mode, TREE_TYPE (pval), size_rtx, - parm_align, partial, reg, excess, argblock, - ARGS_SIZE_RTX (arg->locate.offset),

[Bug c++/104565] New: One too many `this`es in parsing?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104565 Bug ID: 104565 Summary: One too many `this`es in parsing? Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/104558] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in expand_call, at calls.cc:3601 with -fabi-version=9 on pr83487.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104558 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/104526] [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 (trunk vs. 11.2.0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104526 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- + tree type = TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 0)); + if (type != TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 1))) +return false; looks unnecessarily restrictive. What tree-cfg.cc verification guarantees (and no need

[Bug debug/104549] Missing variable at O2/O3 likely caused by -fearly-inlining

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104549 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug driver/104566] New: Internal compiler error while building from source

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104566 Bug ID: 104566 Summary: Internal compiler error while building from source Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug testsuite/104562] [12 regression] gfortran.dg/gomp/depend-5.f90 fails after r12-7242-g3939c1b11279dc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104562 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNC

[Bug c/104532] ICE in lvalue_p, at c/c-typeck.cc:4987

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104532 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 52454 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52454&action=edit gcc12-pr104532.patch Untested patch I wrote in the meantime (passes make check-gcc for gomp.exp/goacc.exp/goac

[Bug rtl-optimization/104541] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: maximum number of LRA assignment passes is achieved (30) with -O -fno-tree-ter -fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104541 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-02-16 CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/104544] [10/11/12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure (length) w/ -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104544 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f997eef5654f782bedb985c9285862c4d76b3209 commit r12-7262-gf997eef5654f782bedb985c9285862c4d76b3209 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: W

[Bug rtl-optimization/104544] [10/11 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure (length) w/ -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104544 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression] |'

[Bug c++/99936] [modules] FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header* on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #8 from Domin

[Bug c++/99936] [modules] FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header* on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936 --- Comment #9 from Francois-Xavier Coudert --- Most likely this: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=db84f382ae3dc238b1c3e3a18b786bca5bd38a14

[Bug target/103307] Unused "%!" before return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103307 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c604b03126722b419073a97e97ed844677058714 commit r11-9574-gc604b03126722b419073a97e97ed844677058714 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed

[Bug target/102952] New code-gen options for retpolines and straight line speculation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102952 --- Comment #41 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:39d944c4237e5d35e28a2668d3b9a2e0f6f7bd01 commit r11-9575-g39d944c4237e5d35e28a2668d3b9a2e0f6f7bd01 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed

[Bug target/102952] New code-gen options for retpolines and straight line speculation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102952 --- Comment #42 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5d928740a533cd9e78673fad7ea86d20b2142277 commit r11-9576-g5d928740a533cd9e78673fad7ea86d20b2142277 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed

[Bug target/102952] New code-gen options for retpolines and straight line speculation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102952 --- Comment #43 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:58a4e292e8507a2968bfd2b10631ba95d5440c97 commit r11-9577-g58a4e292e8507a2968bfd2b10631ba95d5440c97 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed

[Bug target/103925] Missing int3 in ix86_output_indirect_function_return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103925 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:978956485a663493130b02f787095095d163290e commit r11-9578-g978956485a663493130b02f787095095d163290e Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed

[Bug tree-optimization/104526] [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 (trunk vs. 11.2.0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104526 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod --- On 2/16/22 07:39, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104526 > > --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- > + tree type = TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 0)); > + i

[Bug tree-optimization/104526] [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 (trunk vs. 11.2.0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104526 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- LGTM, thanks.

[Bug c++/104567] New: SFINAE check failure starting gcc 4.7.1 and up with -std=c++11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104567 Bug ID: 104567 Summary: SFINAE check failure starting gcc 4.7.1 and up with -std=c++11 Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/104475] [12 Regression] Wstringop-overflow + atomics incorrect warning on dynamic object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104475 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/104550] bogus warning from -Wuninitialized + -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550 --- Comment #7 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6) > > --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- > > Maybe __builtin_clear_padding lowering should mark the load "MEM[(struct > > vx_audio_level *)&info]

[Bug middle-end/104550] bogus warning from -Wuninitialized + -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug target/104353] ppc64le: Apparent reliance on undefined behavior of xvcvdpsxws

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104353 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/104448] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in initialize, at function-abi.cc:108 with -mavx5124vnniw / -mavx5124fmaps -mno-xsave -mabi=ms

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104448 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/104448] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in initialize, at function-abi.cc:108 with -mavx5124vnniw / -mavx5124fmaps -mno-xsave -mabi=ms

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104448 --- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > r12-7147-g2f9ab267e725ddf2b6b44113e4fc4fb8b2a6adfb fixed this. > So, shall we just add the testcase into the testsuite and be done with it? I think so. -mno-xsave

[Bug c++/104568] New: ICE [regression c++20] caused by option "-std=c++20 -Wall" when operand of operator new has size equal to 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568 Bug ID: 104568 Summary: ICE [regression c++20] caused by option "-std=c++20 -Wall" when operand of operator new has size equal to 0 Product: gcc Version: 12.0

[Bug target/104448] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in initialize, at function-abi.cc:108 with -mavx5124vnniw / -mavx5124fmaps -mno-xsave -mabi=ms

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104448 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9c4917f01692a10f122f5ad56e559ba27751ace commit r12-7263-gf9c4917f01692a10f122f5ad56e559ba27751ace Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: W

[Bug target/104448] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in initialize, at function-abi.cc:108 with -mavx5124vnniw / -mavx5124fmaps -mno-xsave -mabi=ms

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104448 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/104462] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.cc:2682 with -mavx512fp16 -mno-xsave

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104462 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- *** Bug 104448 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/104550] bogus warning from -Wuninitialized + -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550 --- Comment #9 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > Well, for the .DEFERRED_INIT case if the var ends up in memory, I really > don't see the point in any clear_padding, .DEFERRED_INIT expansion should

[Bug middle-end/104550] bogus warning from -Wuninitialized + -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Even in that case, filling the memory with pattern & mask instead of filling the memory with pattern + __builtin_clear_padding afterwards seems like a win. Sure, in some cases combine etc. will be able to m

[Bug middle-end/104550] bogus warning from -Wuninitialized + -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550 --- Comment #11 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > Even in that case, filling the memory with pattern & mask instead of filling > the memory with pattern + __builtin_clear_padding afterwards seems l

[Bug c++/104565] [10/11/12 Regression] One too many `this`es in parsing?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104565 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||55004 Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/102006] A false warning "Array subscript -N is outside array bounds warning"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 102006, which changed state. Bug 102006 Summary: A false warning "Array subscript -N is outside array bounds warning" https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006 What|Removed |A

[Bug c++/104565] [10/11/12 Regression] constexpr template goes wrong with class and call to constexpr method

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104565 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] One |[10/11/12 Regression]

[Bug fortran/104569] New: ICE in generate_coarray_sym_init, at fortran/trans-decl.cc:5537

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104569 Bug ID: 104569 Summary: ICE in generate_coarray_sym_init, at fortran/trans-decl.cc:5537 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/104570] New: [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.cc:3681

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104570 Bug ID: 104570 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.cc:3681 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug fortran/104570] [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.cc:3681

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104570 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code --- Comment #1 from G.

[Bug fortran/104571] New: ICE in resolve_elemental_actual, at fortran/resolve.cc:2383

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104571 Bug ID: 104571 Summary: ICE in resolve_elemental_actual, at fortran/resolve.cc:2383 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug fortran/104572] New: ICE in gfc_resolve_finalizers, at fortran/resolve.cc:13646

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104572 Bug ID: 104572 Summary: ICE in gfc_resolve_finalizers, at fortran/resolve.cc:13646 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug fortran/104573] New: ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 Bug ID: 104573 Summary: ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug tree-optimization/104200] [12 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/atomic-inst-cas.c (test for excess errors) fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104200 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Maybe waccess should do a similar thing to uninitialized warnings does now: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-February/589983.html

[Bug c++/104507] [10/11/12 Regression] internal compiler error: unexpected expression ‘(int)(__ret)’ of kind cast_expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104507 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c19f317a78c0e4c1b51d0e5a8e4c0a3b985b7a8e commit r12-7264-gc19f317a78c0e4c1b51d0e5a8e4c0a3b985b7a8e Author: Patrick Palka Date: W

[Bug c++/104507] [10/11 Regression] internal compiler error: unexpected expression ‘(int)(__ret)’ of kind cast_expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104507 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression] internal

[Bug c++/104568] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE [c++20] caused by option "-std=c++20 -Wall" when operand of operator new has size equal to 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection, |

[Bug c++/104568] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE [c++20] caused by option "-std=c++20 -Wall" when operand of operator new has size equal to 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/104568] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE [c++20] caused by option "-std=c++20 -Wall" when operand of operator new has size equal to 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/104574] New: GCC misses basic optimization for restricted pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104574 Bug ID: 104574 Summary: GCC misses basic optimization for restricted pointers Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug c++/104568] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE [c++20] caused by option "-std=c++20 -Wall" when operand of operator new has size equal to 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- The code tries to compute how many elements an array with such element type should have, and obviously when the element size is zero, that doesn't work. Will need to figure out if the size can be derived fro

[Bug fortran/104571] ICE in resolve_elemental_actual, at fortran/resolve.cc:2383

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104571 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-02-16 Status

[Bug fortran/104572] ICE in gfc_resolve_finalizers, at fortran/resolve.cc:13646

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104572 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/104353] ppc64le: Apparent reliance on undefined behavior of xvcvdpsxws

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104353 --- Comment #2 from Christian Kastner --- Thank you for resolving this. Commenting just to link to to the QEMU issue in GitLab (which I do here, as "See Also" doesn't seem to support GitLab). https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/852

[Bug fortran/104573] ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/104565] [10/11/12 Regression] constexpr template goes wrong with class and call to constexpr method

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104565 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/104573] ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug fortran/104573] ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 --- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 08:10:34PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > I was wondering if we also need to allow BT_CLASS. I'm not sure. I don't use CLASSes, so only know a bit about them. If I chec

[Bug fortran/104573] ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #3) > I'm not sure. I don't use CLASSes, so only know a bit > about them. If I check F18:7.5.6, I find > > C786 (R753) A final-subroutine-name shall be th

[Bug fortran/104573] ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 --- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 08:32:25PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 > > --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to Steve Karg

[Bug fortran/104573] ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 --- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- The patch in comment#2 regtests ok. I've been thinking a little to find cases where there should be a difference to the patch in comment#1, but did not succeed so far. At least not with minor va

[Bug c++/104575] New: noexcept operator rejects call to templated base class member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104575 Bug ID: 104575 Summary: noexcept operator rejects call to templated base class member function Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug c++/104575] noexcept operator rejects call to templated base class member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104575 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug c++/94944] compile error accessing member function of dependent base class template in noexcept specification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94944 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||oliver.rosten at googlemail dot co

[Bug fortran/104573] ICE in resolve_structure_cons, at fortran/resolve.cc:1299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104573 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot gnu

[Bug tree-optimization/104574] GCC misses basic optimization for restricted pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104574 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug fortran/104211] ICE in find_array_section, at fortran/expr.cc:1720

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104211 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3982a308e669cc5537322c83e8c2d49b0144297e commit r11-9579-g3982a308e669cc5537322c83e8c2d49b0144297e Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/104211] ICE in find_array_section, at fortran/expr.cc:1720

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104211 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/104574] GCC misses basic optimization for restricted pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104574 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug tree-optimization/89479] __restrict on a pointer ignored when disambiguating against a call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89479 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@nieper-wisskirchen.de --- Comment #

[Bug libstdc++/102358] niter_base and miter_base overloaded for move_iterator missing constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358 Artur Bać changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc at ebasoft dot com.pl --- Comment #2 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/89479] __restrict on a pointer ignored when disambiguating against a call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89479 --- Comment #11 from Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1 of bug 94416) > I think there's a duplicate somewhere. We currently cannot encode "restrict" > into the "accesses" implied by a call. > > Note there's s

[Bug target/103628] ICE: Segmentation fault (in gfc_conv_tree_to_mpfr)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103628 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug analyzer/104576] New: False positive from -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value from PR 63311

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104576 Bug ID: 104576 Summary: False positive from -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value from PR 63311 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/63311] [9/10/11/12 Regression] -O1 optimization introduces valgrind warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63311 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug analyzer/104576] False positive from -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value from PR 63311

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104576 --- Comment #1 from David Malcolm --- Potentially just a dup of PR analyzer/104434, but there might be additional issues with the reproducer.

[Bug c++/104567] SFINAE check failure starting gcc 4.7.1 and up with -std=c++11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104567 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added URL|https://godbolt.org/z/eGc9s | |n6GM

[Bug c++/104567] SFINAE check failure with trying to access member field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104567 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/104567] SFINAE check failure with trying to access member field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104567 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail|4.1.2 |4.4.7 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug bootstrap/104566] Internal compiler error in fail_formatted while building gcc from source while building GCC 11.2.0 with ubuntu's 7.5.0-3ubuntu1~18.04

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104566 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Internal compiler error in |Internal compiler error in

[Bug analyzer/104560] False positive from -Wanalyzer-free-of-non-heap seen with rdma-core

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104560 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a61aaee63848d422e8443e17bbec3257ee59d5d8 commit r12-7268-ga61aaee63848d422e8443e17bbec3257ee59d5d8 Author: David Malcolm Date: W

[Bug analyzer/104560] False positive from -Wanalyzer-free-of-non-heap seen with rdma-core

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104560 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/103353] Indefinite recursion when compiling -mmma requiring testcase w/ -maltivec

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103353 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

  1   2   >