https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98513
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
/* { dg-do run } */
__attribute__((noipa))
void __GIMPLE (ssa,startwith("evrp"))
foo (int x, int minus_1)
{
int tem;
unsigned int _1;
unsigned int _2;
__BB(2):
tem_4 = minus_1_3(D);
tem_5 = te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98552
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Tobias Schlüter from comment #1)
> There's a typo in the example, /= instead of !=. Fixed example below:
The disease of a Fortran programmer writing C, I guess :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98552
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Schlüter ---
Don't ask how long I'd been staring at the assembly in disbelief until I
figured out what had gone wrong :-)
In this particular case the problem can be addressed by passing &j into the
function instead of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98513
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
So the issue is we cannot decide between
[ (] ) and [ ( ) ]
and the check for [ (] ) elides the "redundant" check for the upper
bound relation. But the check isn't redundant in case the compare
cannot b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98527
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98532
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
_1 = BIT_FIELD_REF <*a_4(D), 64, 64>;
_2 = BIT_FIELD_REF <*a_4(D), 64, 0>;
tmp_5 = {_1, _2};
note this is another case where we'd like to improve forwprop to canonicalize
this to
_1 = *a_4(D);
tm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98535
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |11.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98540
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98540
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.0|8.5
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96892
John Dong changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98542
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
What do you mean with "twice"? We seem to do interleaving here (on x86_64)
but since 'v' and 'i' have different types they do not belong to the same
interleaving chain (but we have two that "interleave" - h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98544
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98546
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98550
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98556
Bug ID: 98556
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98555
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-06
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98556
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] ICE |[11 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98556
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
Created attachment 49895
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49895&action=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98557
Bug ID: 98557
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in insert_operand_rank, at
tree-ssa-reassoc.c:367 on arm-linux-gnueabihf
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98556
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98513
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a05cc70a6c1ae0e5b22e16f4d8d13995a38ea1f9
commit r11-6499-ga05cc70a6c1ae0e5b22e16f4d8d13995a38ea1f9
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95582
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c9ee9c1e3553247c776f33eb0fe0aadee094a192
commit r11-6500-gc9ee9c1e3553247c776f33eb0fe0aadee094a192
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98365
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
Created attachment 49897
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49897&action=edit
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu{-m32,}
Waiting for GCC12 stage1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98557
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98558
Bug ID: 98558
Summary: Scalar character parameter does not print warning if
actual length >1
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98556
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
The result of the subtraction is supposed to be an integer type, and is instead
an enum based on that underlying type? Maybe the verification code needs
tweaking to allow that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98513
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška ---
Thanks for the fix. I can confirm it fixed the 2 original (unreduced) yarpgen
tests.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
The divergence appears to stem from get_ref_base_and_extent:
case MEM_REF:
[...]
/* Hand back the decl for MEM[&decl, off]. */
if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (exp, 0)) == ADDR_EXPR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98063
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ebc8606a9408623e2fa2a02a5526b882ffd0e7a8
commit r10-9211-gebc8606a9408623e2fa2a02a5526b882ffd0e7a8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98072
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d62daad11b21a2ee9c39a43c5e94e7b966793dbd
commit r10-9212-gd62daad11b21a2ee9c39a43c5e94e7b966793dbd
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98059
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:45a5aa80240d2033fb490f974756b947f8d0db40
commit r10-9213-g45a5aa80240d2033fb490f974756b947f8d0db40
Author: Scott Snyder
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98100
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c18faa4dd4dffdb76bc879b774ce3f4da01
commit r10-9215-g4c18faa4dd4dffdb76bc879b774ce3f4da01
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98122
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0c3467bd82d8df0294bbe2f141404d2a588bcbd9
commit r10-9216-g0c3467bd82d8df0294bbe2f141404d2a588bcbd9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98187
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e315ba968d2a47643a9487ea48d62e6399a07d49
commit r10-9217-ge315ba968d2a47643a9487ea48d62e6399a07d49
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94440
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a9a0d654006df98dd2c29b907c83571819c49727
commit r10-9218-ga9a0d654006df98dd2c29b907c83571819c49727
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98205
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c925d4cebf817905c237aa2d93887f254b4a74f4
commit r10-9219-gc925d4cebf817905c237aa2d93887f254b4a74f4
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98183
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c1ed7223ad1bc19ed9c936ba496220c8ef673bc
commit r10-9220-g8c1ed7223ad1bc19ed9c936ba496220c8ef673bc
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98383
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:03fd9caa6a2515aafe9edda3c5325b5e4e039bde
commit r10-9222-g03fd9caa6a2515aafe9edda3c5325b5e4e039bde
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98353
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f3113a85f098df8165624321cc85d20219fb2ada
commit r10-9223-gf3113a85f098df8165624321cc85d20219fb2ada
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98474
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a4d191d08c6acb24034af4182b3524e6ef97546c
commit r10-9224-ga4d191d08c6acb24034af4182b3524e6ef97546c
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98514
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8d2e64c4a2892ca8889002b1a3dd713471ef9fab
commit r10-9225-g8d2e64c4a2892ca8889002b1a3dd713471ef9fab
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98557
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98557
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Can't reproduce with a cross compiler :/
If it is a dup, you wouldn't reproduce that with a cross, unless it was a cross
from 32-bit host.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98557
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose ---
I'll recheck with an updated build from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98072
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] ICE in|[9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98559
Bug ID: 98559
Summary: test PR
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: web
Assignee: unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98122
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94440
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in |[8/9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98183
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in |[8/9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98383
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98353
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in |[8/9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98474
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] |[8/9 Regression] incorrect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98521
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98559
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e8ae6c6b87fdfafde512bc915b447bbe9ed93cdf
commit r10-5879-ge8ae6c6b87fdfafde512bc915b447bbe9ed93cdf
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Tue J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98522
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98138
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Starting from the loads is not how SLP discovery works so there will be
zero re-use of code. Sure - the only important thing is you end up
with a valid SLP graph.
But going back to the original testcase an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98559
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2e3447cfccc6fe685eef6cc380d4b880610d1a0
commit r10-5880-gb2e3447cfccc6fe685eef6cc380d4b880610d1a0
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ---
The fast path in wi::lshift looks suspicious to me:
/* For fixed-precision integers like offset_int and widest_int,
handle the case where the shift value is constant and the
result i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #13)
> The divergence appears to stem from get_ref_base_and_extent:
>
> case MEM_REF:
> [...]
> /* Hand back the decl for MEM[&decl, off]. */
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
--- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
Richard, any objection to me backporting Marc's fixlet?
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-July/525651.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 6 Jan 2021, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
>
> --- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Richard, any objection to me backportin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98518
--- Comment #2 from Arnaud Desitter ---
It is indeed fixed. Fantastic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30475
--- Comment #66 from Daniel Marjamäki ---
Thanks! I can appreciate that it's not very simple. Well using a flag is
totally acceptable. I don't trust the sanitizer completely but those that do
can use the optimisation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> The arguments are in a response-file: @outputs.ld1_args
>> maybe that looks different for you?
>
> It ce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98560
Bug ID: 98560
Summary: [11 Regression] gimple-isel ICE with folded condition
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98560
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98335
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
> We expand the first case from
>
> MEM [(struct Data *)&D.2365 + 1B] = {};
> c.0_1 = c;
> D.2365.a = c.0_1;
> return D.2365;
But why generate a 7-byte zeroing instead of a 8-byte one? I gather th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c7a3bf73df4581c8ea9a4db507c290524e91cd5
commit r9-9154-g9c7a3bf73df4581c8ea9a4db507c290524e91cd5
Author: Eric Botcazou
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98561
Bug ID: 98561
Summary: -Wstringop-overflow triggered when memcpy to single
char and writing to differently sized array members
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 90806, which changed state.
Bug 90806 Summary: Warray-bounds-2.c fail on cross-aarch64 on RH6 host
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84774
Bug 84774 depends on bug 90806, which changed state.
Bug 90806 Summary: Warray-bounds-2.c fail on cross-aarch64 on RH6 host
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90806
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98330
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] ICE in |[9/10/11 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96919
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška ---
> Hi Martin, My sincere apologies for the delay in replying and also for
> uploading a faulty patch. I have attached another patch for this issue. It
> is more of a tweak than a straight-forward approach to f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98292
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17314
--- Comment #23 from Anthony Sharp ---
The patch is now on the mailing list
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/562835.html).
Please take my last comment with a pinch of salt ... I was mainly trying to sum
up what has already
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: doko at debian dot org
Target Milestone: ---
trunk 20210106 ftbfs on s390x-linux-gnu, profiledbootstrap-lean target. an
20210102 snapshot successfully built.
In file included from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98542
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> What do you mean with "twice"? We seem to do interleaving here (on x86_64)
> but since 'v' and 'i' have different types they do not belong to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
this is r11-6500
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98551
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96919
--- Comment #14 from Bhavana Kilambi
---
Hi Martin,
This fix is for a customer who was facing this issue. Since I couldn't find a
trivial fix for it, tried to handle it in a special case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98506
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by John David Anglin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d0b075d662e277a9847f7e8c17d34e7866f0cec
commit r11-6503-g6d0b075d662e277a9847f7e8c17d34e7866f0cec
Author: John David Anglin
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98506
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98555
--- Comment #2 from Campbell ---
> Did you actually run into this for a relevant case?
Yes. The relevant use case is where a sentinel value is needed that has
function pointer type, as function pointers are not interchangeable with other
types o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98563
Bug ID: 98563
Summary: regression: vectorization fails while it worked on gcc
9 and earlier
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98564
Bug ID: 98564
Summary: valgrind error with -fanalyzer
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98565
Bug ID: 98565
Summary: internal compiler error: in conv_function_val, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:3950
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98563
--- Comment #1 from N Schaeffer ---
I just found the -mprefer-vector-width=512 to force to use zmm.
The reported regression however remains.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98564
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Bug ID: 98566
Summary: g++.dg/warn/Wmismatched-dealloc.C fails with
-std=c++11
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98567
Bug ID: 98567
Summary: Failure to optimize using ZF flag from blsi
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-06
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98561
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95353
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexander.grund@tu-dresden.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 98561, which changed state.
Bug 98561 Summary: -Wstringop-overflow triggered when memcpy to single char and
writing to differently sized array members
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98561
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98567
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=98568
Bug ID: 98568
Summary: [11 regression] ICE in verify_gimple() during GIMPLE
pass: store-merging
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
1 - 100 of 173 matches
Mail list logo
