https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90781
--- Comment #7 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #6)
> If you're still hitting this, please upload good+bad copies of a sample of
> differing files (usually just 1 is enough but let's do 2 to be safe).
I think this one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90781
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116241
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116244
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||s390x
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116247
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111821
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8f3d0c8c3dd02d94635517c68fd314cbceed8373
commit r15-2741-g8f3d0c8c3dd02d94635517c68fd314cbceed8373
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111821
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 Regression]|[12/13/14 Regression] OOM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102623
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 102623, which changed state.
Bug 102623 Summary: Failure to detect destructed scalar objects in consteval
function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102623
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 71093, which changed state.
Bug 71093 Summary: use of pseudo-destructor accepted in constant expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71093
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71093
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 102623 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71093
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116251
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-06
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
I think we do not want any of those fancy names to leak into debug info - those
are solely to make dumps easier to follow. Iff we were able to express
"this entity was created when vectorizing entity X" (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #13)
> Created attachment 58842 [details]
> add a param to limit BBs for dominator pass
>
> Maybe something like this patch. It adds a check to disable the dom passes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
DECL_NAMELESS VAR_DECL names don't leak into debug info. The -fcompare-debug
failures
I believe are solely because these fancy names appear in the
-fdump-final-insns=
dumps (e.g. inside of MEM_EXPRs or REG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, you're right, create_tmp_var_raw also just sets DECL_NAMELESS. So the only
problem is the
create_tmp_var_name -> clean_symbol_name cleaning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
--- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Thanks for the ping. The test is skipped for -m31 and fails for -m64. Maybe
this is some sort of endianness thingy?
typedef __attribute__((__vector_size__ (64))) unsigned __int128 VV;
__at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Eve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #12)
> (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #11)
> > You can add target-specific flags like this:
> >
> > $(INSNEMIT_SEQ_O): ALL_COMPILERFLAGS += -fno-tree-domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116224
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:69093fd8aa682a1b906e80b3c5f10956e692b7c4
commit r15-2752-g69093fd8aa682a1b906e80b3c5f10956e692b7c4
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115981
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
So with --param logical-op-non-short-circuit=1 (and my patch) the
insn-emit-96.cc testcase as attached compiles in 100s and
dominator optimization : 5.62 ( 6%) 0.05 ( 1%) 5.56 ( 5%)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3fe5720430a9ba61ed7562aac4d758cc77d49a28
commit r14-10566-g3fe5720430a9ba61ed7562aac4d758cc77d49a28
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116224
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f2b5ca6be855cede3f0d35d2a1aff08d3c342ac2
commit r14-10567-gf2b5ca6be855cede3f0d35d2a1aff08d3c342ac2
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> DECL_NAMELESS VAR_DECL names don't leak into debug info. The
> -fcompare-debug failures
> I believe are solely because these fancy names appear in the
> -fdu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105595
--- Comment #5 from dennis-hezel at gmx dot de ---
> naturally, if you never include this file twice, it should be okay
That is exactly the point. Whenever a file with your `namespace { struct X {};
}` example or the coroutine example is include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df4062c54b0b3c5f5c6a1f1a2454abf965100e3a
commit r15-2753-gdf4062c54b0b3c5f5c6a1f1a2454abf965100e3a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116037
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df4062c54b0b3c5f5c6a1f1a2454abf965100e3a
commit r15-2753-gdf4062c54b0b3c5f5c6a1f1a2454abf965100e3a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116142
--- Comment #11 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #10)
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2024, xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116142
> >
> > --- Comment #9 from Xi Ruoyao ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116142
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024, xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116142
>
> --- Comment #11 from Xi Ruoyao ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #16)
> So with --param logical-op-non-short-circuit=1 (and my patch) the
> insn-emit-96.cc testcase as attached compiles in 100s and
>
> dominator optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60846
--- Comment #11 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
Note that passing 128-bit types or larger is already supported on 32-bit arch:
a struct or a union is such a type, and there's also _Decimal128 for the
128-bit size. So, isn't the ABI already defined? (In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 58847
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58847&action=edit
reduced testcase
Reduced testcase that reproduces the issue on x86_64 with --param
logical-op-non-short-circ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105595
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
--- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
I gave it a quick try on s390 and test passes, now. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105595
--- Comment #7 from dennis-hezel at gmx dot de ---
I am perfectly happy with a fix just for coroutines!
I do not have any code that contains your reproducer. It would also be a code
smell: struct Y defined inside cpp file but not in anon namespa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116241
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31efd46ad8a16aa671f4502816b6b1f9946027ae
commit r15-2754-g31efd46ad8a16aa671f4502816b6b1f9946027ae
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116241
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116128
--- Comment #3 from mjr19 at cam dot ac.uk ---
It seems that most of these are in-line expanded by gfortran-14.1, at least in
some cases.
function foo(a,n)
real(kind(1d0))::a(*),foo
integer::n
foo=sum(a(1:n))
end function foo
and
funct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116230
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Right, when I saw the equality test of doubles I thought it must be the test. I
forgot about the discrepancy of representation in memory and in the FPU.
Thanks a lot for taking a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115278
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116252
Bug ID: 116252
Summary: variation in C++ filename extensions in testsuite ?
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116252
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105595
--- Comment #8 from Arsen Arsenović ---
indeed, but that's also true for the functions, no?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
So interestingly this is a case where we run into the irange::maybe_resize
re-allocation a lot (48 Million times), so a callgrind profile has
that and the corresponding DTOR at top in the 'Self' reporting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116152
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58848|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115278
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024, amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115278
>
> Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115866
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58804|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116152
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116253
Bug ID: 116253
Summary: RFE: support for nested diagnostics
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: SARIF
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116253
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116253
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 58852
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58852&action=edit
Output from attachment 58851 with -fconcepts-diagnostics-depth=3 -std=c++20
-fdiagnostics-format=sarif-file on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114064
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-06
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96780
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:180625ae72b3f733813a360fae4f0d6ce79eccdc
commit r15-2756-g180625ae72b3f733813a360fae4f0d6ce79eccdc
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116152
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick O'Neill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c3f476e55149f542de538e97dd9800ec9bd1011
commit r15-2757-g4c3f476e55149f542de538e97dd9800ec9bd1011
Author: Patrick O'Neill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108796
--- Comment #13 from Joseph S. Myers ---
Everything available with __attribute__ is also available with [[]];
__attribute__((foo)) is [[gnu::foo]]. You *do* need to ensure that the
[[gnu::foo]] is placed in the right syntactic position for the e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94568
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:352c21c8a22a48d34cbd2fbfe398ee12c0a1d681
commit r15-2759-g352c21c8a22a48d34cbd2fbfe398ee12c0a1d681
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116223
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4add6cd341a779e980e41ed6fb49175fca37496e
commit r15-2760-g4add6cd341a779e980e41ed6fb49175fca37496e
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116223
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2a8ee0e5d8cfa92bafd0db4b03626b26ac21948
commit r15-2761-gb2a8ee0e5d8cfa92bafd0db4b03626b26ac21948
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112632
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4add6cd341a779e980e41ed6fb49175fca37496e
commit r15-2760-g4add6cd341a779e980e41ed6fb49175fca37496e
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94568
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110090
--- Comment #2 from Gina Peter Banyard ---
Apologies for the late reply.
This is indeed reproducible on GCC 14.2.1, as the php_date.i file is to large
to post as an attachment I have put it on a gist:
https://gist.github.com/Girgias/c72c9b95356
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108796
--- Comment #14 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #13)
> Everything available with __attribute__ is also available with [[]];
> __attribute__((foo)) is [[gnu::foo]].
Indeed, according to
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #23 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> collected sofar. I've noticed with the backwards threader that path
> ranger isn't very good in the ability to preserve a cache when adding
> blocks. But
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108796
--- Comment #15 from Joseph S. Myers ---
The [[]] syntax is supported in C from GCC 10 onwards (in C++ in older versions
as well). What's new in GCC 14 is that you can use it with :: in pre-C23 modes
(with previous versions you needed -std=gnu2x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113384
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by John David Anglin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dc01f249db5c4d08b76dc2783b1539290a800f2d
commit r15-2765-gdc01f249db5c4d08b76dc2783b1539290a800f2d
Author: John David Anglin
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113384
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by John David Anglin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba26c471cf6ee760e53836fd4e9bc00250b8b882
commit r14-10568-gba26c471cf6ee760e53836fd4e9bc00250b8b882
Author: John Davi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113384
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by John David Anglin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f6624adc535a165ab667646c57b73e213d868cca
commit r13-8963-gf6624adc535a165ab667646c57b73e213d868cca
Author: John David
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113384
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by John David Anglin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:960e42bba8d276ea31cb0b37acfa8f3739d55f1d
commit r12-10661-g960e42bba8d276ea31cb0b37acfa8f3739d55f1d
Author: John Davi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113384
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100252
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58616
Bug 58616 depends on bug 100252, which changed state.
Bug 100252 Summary: [12 Regression] Internal compiler error during template
instantiation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100252
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109105
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 58853
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58853&action=edit
Proposed patch to clean this up.
Attached patch uses a simple helper macro, CHECK_INTERFACES, to avoid the use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116208
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I have a fix for the ranger code; this is not a fix for the diagnostic
issue mentioned here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116209
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I have a few other cleanups here too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116254
Bug ID: 116254
Summary: new test case gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90
from r15-2739-g4cb07a38233aad fails
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116255
Bug ID: 116255
Summary: [15 only] RISC-V: STOP 12 execution error on
gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116255
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116254
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ewlu at rivosinc dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116254
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116254
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Note on x86_64, with `-O3 -m32`, this testcase ICEs:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/659528.html
rather class_transformational_1.f90 ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116148
--- Comment #9 from John David Anglin ---
These two are reversed:
Breakpoint 2 at 0x105a8: file
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c,
line 49.
(gdb) p/x with_fam_3_v.a[0]
$13 = 0x1f
(gdb) p/x with_fa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116254
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
>That stop value is computed so I am not sure which line is generating it.
Well the failure is in check_spread as the stop value is 10+2. and the failure
itself is in:
if (any (a%i .ne. ii)) stop st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116256
Bug ID: 116256
Summary: [15 Regression] RISC-V: testsuite failures since
late-combine-pass
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116256
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115060
--- Comment #6 from Thiago Jung Bauermann
---
(In reply to Feng Xue from comment #5)
> Fixed.
I confirmed that I don't see the failure anymore.
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116015
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Matrix A1{{n}};
ICEs too, but not
Matrix A0{{}};
Matrix A2{{n, n}};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109105
--- Comment #6 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #5)
> Roland, please let me know if this resolves the isseue. Regression tested on
> linux-x86_64. No new test cases.
Yes, from a translator's perspective, this patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116256
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/cm_mv_rv32.c -Os check-function-bodies sum
This looks like an ra issue. it spills to the stack a1 rather than to a
volatile register. There was an extra psedu-register before la
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116015
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
As in bug 100252, we have:
D.2872 = {.rows=(&)->n,
.outer_stride=(&)->rows}
that is, two PLACEHOLDER_EXPRs for different types on the same level in one {
}.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116155
--- Comment #13 from Dimitar Dimitrov ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #12)
> (In reply to Dimitar Dimitrov from comment #11)
> >
> > With that change, the test passes for both x86 and pru.
> thank you for the testing. could you please pre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116257
Bug ID: 116257
Summary: [12/13/14/15 Regression] vmlaq_lane_f32 no longer uses
fmla
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo