[Bug c++/116317] [modules] checking ICE in type_node, at cp/module.cc:8693 on stream out with trailing return type based on decltype of argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116317 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/103524] [meta-bug] modules issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524 Bug 103524 depends on bug 116317, which changed state. Bug 116317 Summary: [modules] checking ICE in type_node, at cp/module.cc:8693 on stream out with trailing return type based on decltype of argument https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?

[Bug c++/116317] [modules] checking ICE in type_node, at cp/module.cc:8693 on stream out with trailing return type based on decltype of argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116317 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.0

[Bug c++/116317] [modules] checking ICE in type_node, at cp/module.cc:8693 on stream out with trailing return type based on decltype of argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116317 --- Comment #9 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4a99443c5dd9a235022652ba0fb143c6370ea99d commit r15-4861-g4a99443c5dd9a235022652ba0fb143c6370ea99d Author: Nathaniel Shead Date:

[Bug c++/113814] [modules] canonical types ICE with imported partial specialization matching existing template-id

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113814 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:815e48e3d42231b675bae1dec5fa26890f048ef1 commit r15-4862-g815e48e3d42231b675bae1dec5fa26890f048ef1 Author: Nathaniel Shead Date:

[Bug c++/117231] [15 regression] Incorrect code generation for std::generator since r15-3840-g650e9156656187

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117231 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-11-02 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/117095] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-11-02 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/56513] Wrong code generation with -O3 on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56513 --- Comment #7 from Sam James --- I'm not sure what to suggest for this if it's an ancient wrong-code bug which seems to have been legitimate but was latent as of 2013. Could easily have been fixed properly since. Needs proper analysis before tha

[Bug rtl-optimization/99221] copyprop_hardreg_forward_1 deletes insn by mistake

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99221 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/106408] PRE with infinite loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106408 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/117398] [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE: in invert, at value-range.cc:2165 at -O3 with "-fno-thread-jumps"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117398 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/116799] [14/15 Regression] Miscompiled code (vim testsuite fails) on s390x at -O2 since r14-2675-gef28aadad6e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116799 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[14/15 Regression] |[14/15 Regression] |Misco

[Bug middle-end/92419] const variable aliases lead to folding non-const initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92419 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/117417] New: ICE: verify_gimple failed: non-top-level 'bit_field_ref' with -Ofast

-trunk-r15-4860-20241101203111-g6a2e8913df6-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64 Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 15.0.0 20241102 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug target/117418] New: ICE: in plus_constant, at explow.cc:102 with -mx32 -maddress-mode=long and __builtin_ia32_encodekey256_u32()

: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 15.0.0 20241102 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug tree-optimization/115157] incorrect TBAA for derived types involving enum types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115157 uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASS

[Bug testsuite/117419] test failures for enum-alias-{1,2,30 on arm-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117419 uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uecker at gcc dot gnu

[Bug c/117391] wrong composite for unspecified sizes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117391 --- Comment #2 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org --- PATCH: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-November/667285.html

[Bug gcov-profile/117415] Bogus execution count for assignment to *func()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117415 --- Comment #3 from Jørgen Kvalsvik --- >From a quick look it seems like the problem is fundamentally the difference in how gcc counts executions (on the basic block) and how that is mapped to lines. I don't know if there a complete fix if the e

[Bug c++/111224] modules: xtreme-header-1_a.H etc. ICE (in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6108) on AArch64 with SVE types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111224 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/103524] [meta-bug] modules issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524 Bug 103524 depends on bug 111224, which changed state. Bug 111224 Summary: modules: xtreme-header-1_a.H etc. ICE (in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6108) on AArch64 with SVE types https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111224 What

[Bug debug/15736] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:12441

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15736 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Carlo Wood from comment #9) > Just curious... what caused the 20 years of delay? Sam has been auditing the testsuite to find issues like a missnamed testcase (like in this case). So the testcas

[Bug tree-optimization/102705] [12/13/14/15 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 since r12-2637-g145bc41dae7c7bfa093d61e77346f98e6a595a0e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102705 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/55212] [SH] Switch to LRA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212 --- Comment #417 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- I haven't been able to find any regressions. Thus, my suggestion would be to clean the patches up now and get them merged if that's okay. This would expose the patches to a larger audience and

[Bug fortran/117381] -fmax-identifier-length= is completely ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117381 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Status|WAITING

[Bug tree-optimization/115157] incorrect TBAA for derived types involving enum types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115157 --- Comment #9 from Sam James --- Thanks!

[Bug tree-optimization/115177] incorrect TBAA for derived types involving hardbool types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115177 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.0 --- Comment #7 from Sam James --- Tha

[Bug c/117391] wrong composite for unspecified sizes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117391 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/115157] incorrect TBAA for derived types involving enum types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115157 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uecker at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/111593] wrong code for 128-bit multiplication on MIPS64R6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111593 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/113243] mips: Wrong code for pr91323.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113243 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/115177] incorrect TBAA for derived types involving hardbool types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115177 uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uecker at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug testsuite/117419] New: test failures for enum-alias-{1,2,30 on arm-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117419 Bug ID: 117419 Summary: test failures for enum-alias-{1,2,30 on arm-eabi Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug tree-optimization/117414] missing predicated VN due to combining if statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117414 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20241102150921.3319089-1-quic_apin...@quicinc.com/T/#t Though I wonder if some of this could be done using the ranger, maybe for another time.

[Bug tree-optimization/117420] New: wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu

local/software/local/gcc-trunk --enable-sanitizers --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib gcc version 15.0.0 20241102 (experimental) (GCC) [675] % [675] % gcctk -O1 small.c [676] % ./a.out Aborted [677] % cat small.c

[Bug middle-end/55369] expmed.c is miscompiled in stage1 bootstrap at -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55369 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|WAITING

[Bug middle-end/117384] [15 regression] ICE when building gwenhywfar-5.10.1 (error: non-trivial conversion in ‘var_decl’)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117384 --- Comment #6 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1fb467dbcc2cdd3bb89fa860a1f86b7e334e0ce3 commit r15-4863-g1fb467dbcc2cdd3bb89fa860a1f86b7e334e0ce3 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: S

[Bug libstdc++/117406] std::ilogb should return INT_MAX when argument is infinite also for 16-bit floats

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117406 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed on the trunk so far.

[Bug middle-end/117384] [15 regression] ICE when building gwenhywfar-5.10.1 (error: non-trivial conversion in ‘var_decl’)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117384 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/117406] std::ilogb should return INT_MAX when argument is infinite also for 16-bit floats

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117406 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:36a9e2b22596711455e702ea5a5a3f26e145321c commit r15-4864-g36a9e2b22596711455e702ea5a5a3f26e145321c Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: S

[Bug target/117416] New: [15 Regression] ICE: in gen_prefetch, at config/i386/i386.md:28541 with __builtin_ia32_prefetch()

_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --enable-libsanitizer --disable-libstdcxx-pch --prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r15-4860-20241101203111-g6a2e8913df6-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64 Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 15.0.0 20241102 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug c++/117422] New: Error: template parameter was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117422 Bug ID: 117422 Summary: Error: template parameter was not declared in this scope Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug middle-end/117423] union not written to with particular layout

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117423 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 59525 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59525&action=edit Cleanuped testcase

[Bug tree-optimization/117423] [12/13/14/15 Regression] union not written to with particular layout

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117423 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Obvbious workaround `-fno-tree-sra` .

[Bug tree-optimization/117423] [12/13/14/15 Regression] union not written to with particular layout

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117423 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/100037] lookup doesn't find class template parameter in default member initializer of forward declared nested class template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100037 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug tree-optimization/117423] [12/13/14/15 Regression] union not written to with particular layout since r10-6321-g636e80eea24b78

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117423 --- Comment #4 from Sam James --- r10-6321-g636e80eea24b78

[Bug c/117289] gcc.dg/debug/ctf/ctf-function-pointers-2.c failure with -std=gnu23

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117289 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/117422] Error: template parameter was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117422 --- Comment #4 from eczbek.void at gmail dot com --- Wow, very strange. Thanks for the workaround.

[Bug target/117304] ICE: in emit_move_insn, at expr.cc:4633 with -mavx10.1 and __builtin_ia32_cvtudq2ps512_mask()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117304 --- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka --- Created attachment 59523 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59523&action=edit testcase using __builtin_ia32_cvttpd2udq512_mask() $ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -mavx10.1 testcase.c during RTL p

[Bug target/117416] [15 Regression] ICE: in gen_prefetch, at config/i386/i386.md:28541 with __builtin_ia32_prefetch() by r15-4833-ge9ab41b79933d4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117416 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/117421] [RISCV] Use byte comparison instead of word comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117421 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Note riscv is sometimes does not support unaligned accesses which might be part of the issue here. Reduced to just: ``` int ext_is_gzip(char * ext) { return __builtin_memcmp(ext, "gzip", 4) == 0; } ```

[Bug rtl-optimization/117423] New: union not written to with particular layout

: rtl-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: tpg+gcc at mutabah dot net Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 59524 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59524&action=edit Preprocessed output of reproduction (2-20241102-TimeCodegen

[Bug c++/117422] Error: template parameter was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117422 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-11-03 Known to fail|

[Bug c++/117422] Error: template parameter was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117422 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Looks very similar to the issue of PR 100037 too.

[Bug c/117289] gcc.dg/debug/ctf/ctf-function-pointers-2.c failure with -std=gnu23

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117289 --- Comment #2 from Indu Bhagat --- Regarding handling of duplicate types in CTF, the bulk of expectation lies on the link-time de-duplication. On the compiler side, we simply try to not emit duplicate CTF types to avoid bloating up the object

[Bug c++/117422] Error: template parameter was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117422 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid --- Comment #2 from And

[Bug c++/117422] Error: template parameter was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117422 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to eczbek.void from comment #4) > Wow, very strange. Thanks for the workaround. Most likely what is happening is the 2 decls are merged early and then the template argument from the other decl is

[Bug tree-optimization/112090] ``(1 >> X) != 0` pattern should be extended to support other constants

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112090 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Also for `1 >> x` it should just be turned into `x == 0` instead but that is PR 102705 .

[Bug tree-optimization/117424] [12/13/14/15 regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 --- Comment #3 from Sam James --- -O3 -fno-unswitch-loops works.

[Bug c/117424] New: Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 Bug ID: 117424 Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c/117424] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/117424] [12/13/14/15 regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |tree-optimization Target Milestone|--

[Bug c/117424] [12/13/14/15 regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.5.0 Known to fail|

[Bug tree-optimization/117424] [12/13/14/15 regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/117398] [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE: in invert, at value-range.cc:2165 at -O3 with "-fno-thread-jumps"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117398 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | --- Comment #4 from Sam James --- Thank y

[Bug tree-optimization/117424] [12/13/14/15 regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 --- Comment #5 from Sam James --- -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations or -fno-strict-overflow as well

[Bug c/117425] New: Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425 Bug ID: 117425 Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c/117425] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425 --- Comment #2 from Yunbo Ni --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #1) > (In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #0) > > The version is gcc 4.7.3. > > When you say this, do you mean that is the first version you saw it on? Sorry for the misunders

[Bug c/117425] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 fr

[Bug c/117425] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/117425] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- That is: ``` e() ; ((*c = 0, 0) || 0); ``` vs: ``` ((*c = 0, 0) || 0); e() ; ``` GCC has a warning for sequence points (-Wsequence-point) but this one is hard to figure out since e() depends on th

[Bug tree-optimization/110361] [13/14/15 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination when using __builtin_unreachable since r13-2020-g16b013c9d9b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110361 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | --- Comment #7 from Sam James --- Fixed b

[Bug c/117425] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425 --- Comment #6 from Yunbo Ni --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > A good resource for sequence points is https://c-faq.com/expr/seqpoints.html > . Thanks for your detailed explanation! I'll check it out.

[Bug c/117425] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117425 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- A good resource for sequence points is https://c-faq.com/expr/seqpoints.html .

[Bug tree-optimization/117423] [12/13/14/15 Regression] union not written to with particular layout since r10-6321-g636e80eea24b78

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117423 --- Comment #5 from John Hodge --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Obvbious workaround `-fno-tree-sra` . Thanks for pointing out the flag to avoid this issue, that's allowed me to progress with my other testing. And thanks very mu

[Bug testsuite/117419] test failures for enum-alias-{1,2,30 on arm-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117419 --- Comment #3 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org --- I sent a patch before but there is still something wrong: PATCH: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/655473.html Discussion: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-July/

[Bug tree-optimization/117420] [15 regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-4601-ge2e798b8607401

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117420 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org Summ

[Bug testsuite/117419] test failures for enum-alias-{1,2,30 on arm-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117419 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||testsuite-fail Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/117417] [15 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: non-top-level 'bit_field_ref' with -Ofast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117417 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.0 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/115700] [12/13 regression] Bogus warning for associate with assumed-length character array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115700 --- Comment #14 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to GCC Commits from comment #13) > The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : > > https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f93910a8b5d606ad742a3594750f0c2b20d8bda > > commit r15-4835-g7f93910a

[Bug tree-optimization/117420] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117420 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.0 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/110361] [13/14/15 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination when using __builtin_unreachable since r13-2020-g16b013c9d9b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110361 --- Comment #6 from Sam James --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #5) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > > Looks like this was fixed sometime after r13-2020-g16b013c9d9b but before > > the release of GCC 13. > > I'll bisect whe

[Bug tree-optimization/117417] [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: non-top-level 'bit_field_ref' with -Ofast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117417 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[15 Regression] ICE:|[12/13/14/15 Regression]

[Bug tree-optimization/117417] [15 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed: non-top-level 'bit_field_ref' with -Ofast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117417 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 59522 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59522&action=edit New reduced testcase This one fails even in GCC 14.

[Bug testsuite/117419] test failures for enum-alias-{1,2,30 on arm-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117419 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||arm --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/117421] New: [RISCV] Use byte comparison instead of word comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117421 Bug ID: 117421 Summary: [RISCV] Use byte comparison instead of word comparison Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Comp

[Bug c/117426] New: Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117426 Bug ID: 117426 Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags Product: gcc Version: 14.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/109780] [12/13/14/15 Regression] csmith: runtime crash with -O2 -march=znver1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109780 --- Comment #28 from Sam James --- trunk works for me, but 14 doesn't. (Needed -fno-stack-protector -fno-stack-clash-protection to override some defaults.) I don't think https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109780#c23 was committed tho

[Bug middle-end/111843] [meta-bug] wrong-code due to -fstack-reuse=/clobbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111843 --- Comment #2 from Sam James --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1) > Don't meta-bugs usually put all their other bugs in the "Depends on" field, > rather than "Blocks"? yes, fixed

[Bug tree-optimization/113662] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code for std::sort with fancy pointer since r13-6945-g429a7a88438cc8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113662 --- Comment #7 from Sam James --- > I'd be glad to perform other tests if needed. We could really do with the Boost dependency being dropped if you could try spend time on that. Also, please attach preprocessed source for the original testcase

[Bug middle-end/117426] [14/15 Regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117426 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- And yes my current patch for scope conflicts fixes the issue. Though I have to rewrite it.

[Bug c/115023] __builtin_assoc_barrier does not talk about contracting even though it prevents it too

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115023 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch URL|

[Bug tree-optimization/117424] [12/13/14/15 regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags since r12-4871-g502ffb1f389011

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117424 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/117426] [14/15 Regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117426 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Miscompile with different |[14/15 Regression] |o

[Bug middle-end/117426] [14/15 Regression] Miscompile with different optimization flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117426 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org La

[Bug debug/15736] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:12441

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15736 --- Comment #9 from Carlo Wood --- Just curious... what caused the 20 years of delay?

[Bug target/115931] mips: vec_pack_usat_m's pattern is wrong at gcc/config/mips/loongson-mmi.md:167

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115931 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/117398] [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE: in invert, at value-range.cc:2165 at -O3 with "-fno-thread-jumps"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117398 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Macleod --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #2) > * With just -O1, 11 works and >=12 fails, bisected to > r12-2591-g2e96b5f14e4025. > * With -O2 -fno-thread-jumps, 12 works and >=13 fails. Needs bisection I > guess

[Bug c++/64346] gcc generates incorrect debug info for ctor/dtor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64346 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to dehao from comment #3) > For AutoFDO, we actually needs symbols from the symbol table because > indirect call promotion needs the symbol name to find the right callee. I don't understand why the

  1   2   >