https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120475
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
|a/show_bug.cgi?id=1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120475
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Maybe fixed by r15-7218-g13d97160117554 .
>
> Can you test GCC 15.1.0?
Or 14.3.0 since that patch was backported; r14-11253-g946c17e456d3a3
It might be alrea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120475
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-30
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27436
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120475
Bug ID: 120475
Summary: vector is 60x slower with ASan
detect_stack_use_after_return=1
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119856
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111901
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Compiling the testcase for aarch64-linux-gnu (-O2 -funroll-all-loops) still
performs CSE, despite the patch:
_.c.325r.reload:
6: {x0:SI=asm_operands;clobber [scratch];}
8: {x2:SI=asm_operands;clobber
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111901
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27436
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Currently.
! From PR27436
write(*,'(abc)') n ! We throw a compile time error here.
write(10,"(i7,(' abcd'))") n, n ! We throw a run time error here.
10 print *, "Hello World!"
end
Comment the first
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120457
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119856
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Walter Spector from comment #12)
> > Definately not right.
> >
> > This is some different Issue.
>
> If it would help, I'd be happy to submit another PR.
No need. I do have an idea why this i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120476
Bug ID: 120476
Summary: LoongArch: -mtune=la664 is pessimizing even on LA664
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118074
--- Comment #9 from Weibo He ---
Thank you for your work. I noticed the heap-use-after-free issue might still be
present?
https://godbolt.org/z/79bvTfWe5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119856
--- Comment #12 from Walter Spector ---
> Definately not right.
>
> This is some different Issue.
If it would help, I'd be happy to submit another PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120470
Christopher Albert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119928
Christopher Albert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||albert at tugraz dot at
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108859
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2023-02-20 00:00:00 |2025-5-29
--- Comment #1 from Jonatha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120470
Bug ID: 120470
Summary: gfortran -Wexternal-argument-mismatch produces compile
error on valid code
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117785
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61540|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107527
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111901
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119864
--- Comment #9 from Pilar Latiesa ---
(In reply to Nathaniel Shead from comment #4)
> The assertion is thrown when streaming the generated function "omp declare
> reduction Op" because this is a DECL_LOCAL_DECL_P function but isn't on the
> BLO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120469
Bug ID: 120469
Summary: [SH] Delay slot optimization opportunity missed with
atomic writes
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120453
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.5|16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120458
--- Comment #2 from Pilar Latiesa ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Clang compiles this, and I think MSVC does, but EDG doesn't (but EDG also
> doesn't accept that identifier for a variable name, at least with the
> default opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120457
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao Liu ---
double __attribute__((noinline,noclone))
compute_integral (double w_1[18])
{
double A = 0;
double t33[2][6] = {{0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0},
{0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0}};
double t43[2] = {0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120457
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #1)
> double __attribute__((noinline,noclone))
> compute_integral (double w_1[18])
> {
> double A = 0;
> double t33[2][6] = {{0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0},
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120458
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120464
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dc887145c0e9ae44e939dab3e0198346fe660793
commit r16-950-gdc887145c0e9ae44e939dab3e0198346fe660793
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120464
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116815
Dhruv Chawla changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dhruvc at nvidia dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120467
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-29
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120295
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0b004c92f5ea239936a403a2a757e12ca82ce6d8
commit r16-960-g0b004c92f5ea239936a403a2a757e12ca82ce6d8
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120453
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #14)
> * If we add the non-coroutine simulation of the ramp, then clang-20 also
> complains - but with a different diagnostic:
>
> ":97:10: error: call to implicitly-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117785
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61546|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120381
--- Comment #4 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61548
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61548&action=edit
patch for trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120474
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-29
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99832
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I suppose another way to resolve this would be to just mark that function
[[__gnu__::__always_inline__]].
That would require no config changes at all, we could do it unconditionally.
Or we could do:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119856
--- Comment #10 from Walter Spector ---
My bad. Didn't have LD_LIBRARY_PATH set right...
$ ls -l $LD_LIBRARY_PATH/*gf*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 21336066 May 29 07:59 /usr/local/lib64/libgfortran.a
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 977 May 29 07:59 /us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120458
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
value = 42
ioerr = 0
value = 43
$
$ gfortran --std=f95 badfmt2.f90
$ ./a.out
value = 42
ioerr = 0
value = 43
$
$ gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 16.0.0 20250529 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2025 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the sou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113563
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119856
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Walter Spector from comment #7)
> Confirmed that the compiler now diagnoses the missing commas. Thanks!
>
After taking out the iostat so I could see the error message I am getting the
followin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120453
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118074
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99015
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Vladimir Makarov
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:af73c8bf5168848275bf909ee44fbb8f4973438f
commit r13-9726-gaf73c8bf5168848275bf909ee44fbb8f4973438f
Author: Vladimir N.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99015
--- Comment #16 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I've remembered that the patch for PR112918 triggered a hidden bug on mips. So
I added code fixing this bug too to this PR patch.
The new patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on amd64, arm64,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120474
Bug ID: 120474
Summary: InOut buffering should flush the WriteLn before the
Read
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99858
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is a dup of bug 23257.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113563
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2047aa4ce2ed9976fb36e984b43864fcd6f3a65d
commit r16-970-g2047aa4ce2ed9976fb36e984b43864fcd6f3a65d
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113563
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
Fixed for 16 so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
--- Comment #1 from xiaohuba2021 ---
sorry, there is a blank line on the top of the source code. so line 5 should
actually be `volatile int v = (ll % 2 ? b : ib)[c % 3];`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120465
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:589b27ec5769410e036df57645ff1eb7c765f692
commit r16-957-g589b27ec5769410e036df57645ff1eb7c765f692
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #2)
> I cannot reproduce it locally, nor on godbolt:
> https://godbolt.org/z/rxf8Es1n5.
Try the C++ FE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
--- Comment #4 from xiaohuba2021 ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #2)
> I cannot reproduce it locally, nor on godbolt:
> https://godbolt.org/z/rxf8Es1n5.
switch the language to c++ successfully reproduce it:
https://godbolt.org/z/z6WhKKa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119864
--- Comment #10 from Nathaniel Shead ---
(In reply to Pilar Latiesa from comment #9)
> (In reply to Nathaniel Shead from comment #4)
>
> > The assertion is thrown when streaming the generated function "omp declare
> > reduction Op" because this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120453
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:217b7f655227a52e5fe26729baa09dc6083ed577
commit r16-961-g217b7f655227a52e5fe26729baa09dc6083ed577
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93226
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f4aa6b5a8d63050f5d61fcec222ed87be4c0a266
commit r16-971-gf4aa6b5a8d63050f5d61fcec222ed87be4c0a266
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120469
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
In general, I wouldn't recommend it.
While I no longer work on delay slot architectures, the basic guidance I would
give would be anything that is not single cycle doesn't belong in a delay slot.
If I wer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93226
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119864
--- Comment #11 from Pilar Latiesa ---
Thanks Nathaniel
I had a look at semantics.cc but I'm definitely not clever enough to
understand. I observe, however, that there are no BLOCK_VARS (...) = ...;
statements in finish_omp_reduction_clause.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68612
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uecker at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120380
--- Comment #4 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
PATCH: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-May/685120.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120381
--- Comment #5 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Turns out one can trigger this also using statement expressions:
https://godbolt.org/z/3M8en31zd
PATCH: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-May/685119.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.1.0, 15.1.0
Summary|-fsanitiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120469
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is by design, relaxed atomic stores on the rtl level are modeled
like volatile stores. And volatile stores are NOT put in delay slots either.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120472
Bug ID: 120472
Summary: Wtype-limits warning in semaphore_base.h on Cygwin
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
--- Comment #6 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #5)
> (In reply to xiaohuba2021 from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #2)
> > > I cannot reproduce it locally, nor on godbolt:
> > > https://godbolt.org/z/r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120380
--- Comment #3 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61547
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61547&action=edit
patch for trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120180
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:65e0ed2310a1b0d1a3255583bbfb8a8d86c5aea5
commit r16-963-g65e0ed2310a1b0d1a3255583bbfb8a8d86c5aea5
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111901
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109283
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:977fadd69776e2a8a6daca43e1c898bc4f87154d
commit r16-969-g977fadd69776e2a8a6daca43e1c898bc4f87154d
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, wrong-code
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120473
Bug ID: 120473
Summary: Pointers caught with pointer &var handler not
modificable
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120469
--- Comment #2 from Paul Cercueil ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I think this is by design, relaxed atomic stores on the rtl level are
> modeled like volatile stores. And volatile stores are NOT put in delay slots
> either.
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120473
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Seems __cxa_begin_catch for all the pointers returns them by value rather than
pointer to the pointer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120049
--- Comment #38 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jerry DeLisle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c69afa2f1bd7455457ab4e028a6bc51211b2dd20
commit r16-967-gc69afa2f1bd7455457ab4e028a6bc51211b2dd20
Author: Jerry DeLisle
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
Bug ID: 120471
Summary: -fsanitize=undefined causes read of uninitialized
variable when accessing element in an array at -O0
level
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120471
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120473
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think clang has a hack here to workaround Itanium ABI, see
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/55340#issuecomment-1152755112
Also see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23257#c5 .
I thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119856
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #8)
> At line 7 of file newby.f90 (unit = 6, file = 'stdout')
> Fortran runtime error: Missing comma between descriptors
> (AI5)
> ^
Oops, I copied the wrong o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566
--- Comment #9 from Halalaluyafail3 ---
A recent paper N3457
(https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3547.pdf) if accepted would
clearly allow this.
85 matches
Mail list logo