https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119971
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||riscv
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119973
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15/16 Regression] Wrong|[15/16 Regression] Wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119973
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
And the issue is:
[local count: 1073741824]:
# idx_4 = PHI <0(2), idx_6(10)>
# PT = null
_3 = testtbl[idx_4].name;
we are missing constraints for the 'testtbl' initialization.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119973
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=119973
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104930
--- Comment #6 from Kishan Parmar ---
Yess @peter, solution will fix this issue!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119493
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b0120fa9838f8fbeb13301d03b01cad282941569
commit r16-180-gb0120fa9838f8fbeb13301d03b01cad282941569
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119954
--- Comment #2 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Created attachment 61219
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61219&action=edit
testcase that should be run with -std=c++20 or above.cpp
Uploaded testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119973
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119577
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025, rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119577
>
> --- Comment #3 from Robin Dapp ---
> I manage to have a quick look at the code now
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685
--- Comment #29 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025, Hi-Angel at yandex dot ru wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685
>
> Konstantin Kharlamov changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119979
Bug ID: 119979
Summary: [16 Regression] Recent change breaks multiple ports
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119962
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119948
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Occam's razor suggests we go with Paul's patch. Paul, do you want to handle the
commit-ish work or I can do it for you. Just let me know.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119979
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||iq2000 mcore
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119976
--- Comment #3 from Maximilian Reininghaus ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #2)
> Works for me. What operating system and what is the gfortran --version
> ouput?
on Fedora 42:
GNU Fortran (GCC) 15.0.1 20250329 (Red Hat 15.0.1-0)
Copyright
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119916
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119976
Maximilian Reininghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119960
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Kapoulkine ---
Thanks for the analysis! Just a note to make sure I didn't misunderstand this,
are you saying you see gcc 15 vectorizing the stores when using znver4 tuning?
I tried this and it did not do that; using ei
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119960
--- Comment #5 from Arseny Kapoulkine ---
Thanks for the analysis! Just a note to make sure I didn't misunderstand this,
are you saying you see gcc 15 vectorizing the stores when using znver4 tuning?
I tried this and it did not do that; using ei
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119978
Bug ID: 119978
Summary: False positive Wdangling-pointer on intrusive list
implementatino
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109605
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Wojciech Mula from comment #3)
> This is somehow related. I needed to generate the particular procedure
> without any vector instruction (the surrounding code is free to RVV
> instructions).
No
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119903
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c40e3d7b9152f40e5a3d35060b6822ddc743624
commit r16-241-g4c40e3d7b9152f40e5a3d35060b6822ddc743624
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100038
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:07a14a490b8f57dfe2a5b853fb4b88e9e124a92b
commit r16-238-g07a14a490b8f57dfe2a5b853fb4b88e9e124a92b
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119432
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bfc3154375710a37969b2002dc87219dc2102a13
commit r16-240-gbfc3154375710a37969b2002dc87219dc2102a13
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119432
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100038
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101057
Bug 101057 depends on bug 119432, which changed state.
Bug 119432 Summary: gimple front-end and round trip for fails for
__builtin_stdc_rotate_left
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119432
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 100038, which changed state.
Bug 100038 Summary: -Warray-bound triggers false positives with
__builtin_unreachable after a loop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100038
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117783
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 61223
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61223&action=edit
gcc16-pr117783-wip.patch
My current WIP.
It can already handle something like
struct S { int a, b; long long c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117207
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119970
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1be88e43f3e93e85bef9499de905fa72d8596e7d
commit r16-183-g1be88e43f3e93e85bef9499de905fa72d8596e7d
Author: Tomasz KamiÅski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119970
--- Comment #4 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
I would be grateful, if you could confirm that above fixed the build for you.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119960
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2025-04-27 00:00:00 |2025-04-28
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119970
--- Comment #5 from LIU Hao ---
Is there a reason why `__write_to_terminal` takes a `span` instead of a
`span`?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119606
--- Comment #9 from Jennifer Schmitz ---
>From our side, performance in the reported tests is back to normal with the
current trunk and we can close the ticket.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119970
--- Comment #6 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
Yes, this allows us to avoid a separate allocation when transcoding to valid
Unicode. For reference in libstdc++-v3/src/c++23/print.cc, to_valid_unicode
will edit sequence in-situ:
```
// If sizeof(_Char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60779
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e543eaa671d40868575385360d13ef37d87fb2a0
commit r16-188-ge543eaa671d40868575385360d13ef37d87fb2a0
Author: Richard Biener
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116083
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b30424f43522171e8ffe587e0df0ce3627c88f6c
commit r16-187-gb30424f43522171e8ffe587e0df0ce3627c88f6c
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119606
Jennifer Schmitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119973
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a16ef443b13fff9537baa533597836c57131262
commit r16-193-g7a16ef443b13fff9537baa533597836c57131262
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119973
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15/16 Regression] Wrong|[15 Regression] Wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109780
--- Comment #44 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b9ea3b2ef98048f93b02fcd6ff51777bce1676c2
commit r16-194-gb9ea3b2ef98048f93b02fcd6ff51777bce1676c2
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue Mar 14 11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109093
--- Comment #44 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b9ea3b2ef98048f93b02fcd6ff51777bce1676c2
commit r16-194-gb9ea3b2ef98048f93b02fcd6ff51777bce1676c2
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue Mar 14 11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119977
Bug ID: 119977
Summary: [16 regression] Bootstrap comparison failure with
-march=znver4 -ggdb3 and bootstrap-lto since
r16-152-g4f7b3c24112016
Product: gcc
Versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119977
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117783
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119977
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
> It also goes away if I apply -fchecking=1 to stage2.
Hmm, this could point to someone missing an update_stmt. Or something similar
as the verifiers cause updates when the pass didn't.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119501
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119970
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119974
Bug ID: 119974
Summary: Missing combination of SVE RDFFRS
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: aarch64-sve, missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119975
Bug ID: 119975
Summary: clock_gettime in genapi.cc is unportable
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119975
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119900
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
aha, I mistakely added analysis to PR105275. One problem I noticed was wrong
costing of FP scalar min/max which is fixed now but does not affect imgick.
Interesting is that we now vectorized same loops and BBs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82991
Bug 82991 depends on bug 67797, which changed state.
Bug 67797 Summary: builtin functions should be able to know when their first
argument is returned for tail calls
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67797
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
Bug ID: 119984
Summary: Incorrect code with -O2 and above
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95801
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9a467c2ceaa680a3b54a7bc20e6bb6c3f8a47004
commit r16-245-g9a467c2ceaa680a3b54a7bc20e6bb6c3f8a47004
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119985
Bug ID: 119985
Summary: TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_RETURN is still referenced in
target.def
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note -fsanitize=undefined does catch this:
/app/example.c:5:4: runtime error: signed integer overflow: 2139095040 +
1065353216 cannot be represented in type 'int'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Please also read https://blog.regehr.org/archives/213 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119986
Bug ID: 119986
Summary: Complex array part references are being passed
incorrectly to a procedure
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85752
H. Peter Anvin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119697
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a39e0ca0652ff84a31efa3c7d4c7a78d9bb95ae
commit r16-264-g7a39e0ca0652ff84a31efa3c7d4c7a78d9bb95ae
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97111
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a39e0ca0652ff84a31efa3c7d4c7a78d9bb95ae
commit r16-264-g7a39e0ca0652ff84a31efa3c7d4c7a78d9bb95ae
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109366
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2a63dc8c65d469e1d7ac3d764179653bf0ec843f
commit r16-265-g2a63dc8c65d469e1d7ac3d764179653bf0ec843f
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111536
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a1922f0252b3b09016df76bd5b10119206935e37
commit r16-266-ga1922f0252b3b09016df76bd5b10119206935e37
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59660
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Pinski ---
Current failures with updated patch:
+XPASS: gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-11.c missing range info for short (test for
warnings, line 51)
+XPASS: gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-11.c missing range info for signed char (test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119977
--- Comment #13 from Sam James ---
https://dev.gentoo.org/~sam/bugs/gcc/119977/gimple-match.tar.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80006
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail, xfail
--- Comment #7 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119987
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119979
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|iq2000 mcore|iq2000 mcore sh4eb
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119988
Bug ID: 119988
Summary: Takes 2 reassociation pass to optimize range if
sometimes
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119979
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-04-28
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119979
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 61231
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61231&action=edit
A patch
Please try this. I suspect that all targets using
default_promote_function_mode_always_promote are broken.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111536
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109366
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97110
Bug 97110 depends on bug 109366, which changed state.
Bug 109366 Summary: No -Wanalyzer-null-dereference for unique_ptr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109366
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97110
Bug 97110 depends on bug 111536, which changed state.
Bug 111536 Summary: -fanalyzer false positive with NRVO return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111536
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97111
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119979
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #3)
> sh4eb is showing similar failures
Is this the same issue:
static machine_mode
sh_promote_function_mode (const_tree type, machine_mode mode,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97113
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119979
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
We need to make sure that incoming argument isn't promoted by
TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #23 from Zeb Figura ---
(In reply to LIU Hao from comment #22)
> (In reply to Zeb Figura from comment #0)
> > Minimal example:
> >
> > typedef int myint[4] __attribute__((aligned(16)));
> >
> > extern void g(void *);
> >
> > void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
--- Comment #6 from saul.x.robinson at durham dot ac.uk ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> (In reply to saul.x.robinson from comment #4)
> > I know the integer overflows.
> > Does that sort of undefined behavior cause issues with t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119712
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ce489c870bf28e5e3ffd5fe6730727d1ea942b3f
commit r16-244-gce489c870bf28e5e3ffd5fe6730727d1ea942b3f
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to saul.x.robinson from comment #4)
> I know the integer overflows.
> Does that sort of undefined behavior cause issues with the final machine
> code the compiler generates?
Yes. In this case if y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
--- Comment #4 from saul.x.robinson at durham dot ac.uk ---
(In reply to saul.x.robinson from comment #0)
> I have confirmed is bug occurs on 15.1.0 and 12.2.0. Don't know how to find
> more recent versions.
> Those GCC versions were compiling fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
--- Comment #8 from saul.x.robinson at durham dot ac.uk ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> (In reply to saul.x.robinson from comment #6)
> >
> > Oh.
> > Just encase it exist, is there a setting to make GCC assume overflows are
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119984
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to saul.x.robinson from comment #6)
>
> Oh.
> Just encase it exist, is there a setting to make GCC assume overflows are
> possible as I have found them to be useful quite often?
I mentioned alrea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119987
Bug ID: 119987
Summary: RFE: promote -fms-extensions for structures to
-std=gnu*
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119977
--- Comment #12 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 61230
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61230&action=edit
build.log (after, r16-152-g4f7b3c24112016)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119977
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61222|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59660
--- Comment #21 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #20)
> Current failures with updated patch:
> +XPASS: gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-11.c missing range info for short (test for
> warnings, line 51)
> +XPASS: gcc.dg/attr-all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119986
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119989
Bug ID: 119989
Summary: [AVR] Incorrect code generation with __memx pointers
when optimization is enabled (-O1 and above) on AVR
(ATmega328P)
Product: gcc
Versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115408
gagan sidhu (broly) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119807
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d3cb17bed3a61a2d45ff6142bbabc633a334dc2f
commit r14-11694-gd3cb17bed3a61a2d45ff6142bbabc633a334dc2f
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118083
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d4f5243c6f5c387d9c96783d36fa6eb103a8d9ee
commit r14-11695-gd4f5243c6f5c387d9c96783d36fa6eb103a8d9ee
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112288
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d3cb17bed3a61a2d45ff6142bbabc633a334dc2f
commit r14-11694-gd3cb17bed3a61a2d45ff6142bbabc633a334dc2f
Author: Patrick Palka
1 - 100 of 208 matches
Mail list logo
