[Bug target/96759] [10/11 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2294

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96759 --- Comment #3 from Kito Cheng --- ICE after g:70cdb21e579191fe9f0f1d45e328908e59c0179e

[Bug fortran/96909] ICE with nested polymorphic allocatable component

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96909 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/96907] [docs] document builtins for fputc and putc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96907 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- They are not really "builtins", they are merely present to have default attributes attached to them.

[Bug middle-end/96903] [11 regression] excess errors from gcc.dg/pr89350.c after r11-2973

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96903 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug middle-end/96900] [9/10/11 Regression] bogus -Warray-bounds on strlen with valid pointer obtained from just-past-the-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96900 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.4

[Bug c/96810] This is a case that gcc shoud not compile successfully, but gcc acts opposite.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96810 --- Comment #5 from Wei Wentao --- Sorry for the last comment.I don't know how this happened. Let's get to the point. >>And while the bug described in the comment is really hard to diagnose at >>compile time and in most cases impossible, what cl

[Bug libfortran/96890] Wrong answer with intrinsic IALL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96890 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug target/96246] [AVX512] unefficient code generatation for vpblendm*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96246 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|REOPENED

[Bug target/96906] Failure to optimize __builtin_ia32_psubusw128 compared to 0 to __builtin_ia32_pminuw128 compared to operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96906 --- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu --- (gdb) f 6 #6 0x00f04a33 in expand_vect_cond_optab_fn (stmt=0x7fffea1193f0, optab=vcond_optab) at ../../../gcc/gnu-toolchain/master/gcc/internal-fn.c:2612 2612 expand_insn (icode, 6, ops); (gdb) p

[Bug target/96861] Integer min/max optimization failed under -march=skylake-avx512

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96861 --- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2) > . Difference comes from /* Cost the integer to sse and sse to integer moves. */ cost += n_sse_to_integer * ix86_cost->sse_to_integer; /* ??? integer_to_sse

[Bug target/96906] Failure to optimize __builtin_ia32_psubusw128 compared to 0 to __builtin_ia32_pminuw128 compared to operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96906 --- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #1) > For vector compare to integer mask, gcc use UNSPEC, that's why it's not > handled by general part, maybe peephole2 should be added for this. Or in ix86_expand_int_vc

[Bug target/96906] Failure to optimize __builtin_ia32_psubusw128 compared to 0 to __builtin_ia32_pminuw128 compared to operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96906 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||crazylht at gmail dot com --- Comment #1 f

[Bug target/96861] Integer min/max optimization failed under -march=skylake-avx512

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96861 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug target/96246] [AVX512] unefficient code generatation for vpblendm*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96246 --- Comment #8 from Hongtao.liu --- Should be fixed in GCC11.

[Bug target/96855] [11 Regression] r11-571 regression FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92658-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96855 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/96857] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr95488-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmullw[^\n]*zmm 2 on Linux/x86_64 (-m64 -march=cascadelake)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96857 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/96856] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92645-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "VEC_PACK_TRUNC" 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96856 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/96855] [11 Regression] r11-571 regression FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92658-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96855 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd commit r11-2990-g8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd Author: liuhongt Date: Mon Aug 3

[Bug target/96857] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr95488-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmullw[^\n]*zmm 2 on Linux/x86_64 (-m64 -march=cascadelake)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96857 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd commit r11-2990-g8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd Author: liuhongt Date: Mon Aug 3

[Bug target/96246] [AVX512] unefficient code generatation for vpblendm*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96246 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd commit r11-2990-g8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd Author: liuhongt Date: Mon Aug 3

[Bug target/96856] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92645-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "VEC_PACK_TRUNC" 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96856 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd commit r11-2990-g8bd5530bfa136663f1fa79e9a1d3932b5adf15bd Author: liuhongt Date: Mon Aug 3

[Bug fortran/96910] New: intrinsic assignment does not duplicate allocatable component of nested derived type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96910 Bug ID: 96910 Summary: intrinsic assignment does not duplicate allocatable component of nested derived type Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug fortran/96909] New: ICE with nested polymorphic allocatable component

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96909 Bug ID: 96909 Summary: ICE with nested polymorphic allocatable component Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug c++/96908] New: [c++20] substitution failure if lambda in default template param

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96908 Bug ID: 96908 Summary: [c++20] substitution failure if lambda in default template param Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/96903] [11 regression] excess errors from gcc.dg/pr89350.c after r11-2973

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96903 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||88443 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug fortran/96902] internal compiler error in gimplify_scan_omp_clauses with "!$omp target enter data" directive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96902 michalak at ucar dot edu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug libfortran/96890] Wrong answer with intrinsic IALL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96890 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|fortran |libfortran Status

[Bug c++/96905] ICE with consteval function: internal compiler error: in cp_gimplify_expr, at cp/cp-gimplify.c:827

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96905 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yeah, we certainly never want to genericize them.

[Bug d/96869] __vectors unsupported in hardware should be rejected at compile-time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96869 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug d/96869] __vectors unsupported in hardware should be rejected at compile-time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96869 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f0a3bab43fda3084eaf1bdaac58936757f30ea35 commit r11-2988-gf0a3bab43fda3084eaf1bdaac58936757f30ea35 Author: Iain Buclaw Date: Mon Au

[Bug c/96907] [docs] document builtins for fputc and putc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96907 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- putc was added by g-b53b5aa509 fputc has been there since before 2003.

[Bug c++/81999] templated lambda in template context: cannot call operator() explicitly with template parameters (expected primary-expression before ...)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81999 bastien penavayre changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/96905] ICE with consteval function: internal compiler error: in cp_gimplify_expr, at cp/cp-gimplify.c:827

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96905 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- It looks like we've never cp_genericized the consteval function.

[Bug c++/96905] ICE with consteval function: internal compiler error: in cp_gimplify_expr, at cp/cp-gimplify.c:827

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96905 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC|

[Bug c/96907] New: [docs] document builtins for fputc and putc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96907 Bug ID: 96907 Summary: [docs] document builtins for fputc and putc Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/96906] New: Failure to optimize __builtin_ia32_psubusw128 compared to 0 to __builtin_ia32_pminuw128 compared to operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96906 Bug ID: 96906 Summary: Failure to optimize __builtin_ia32_psubusw128 compared to 0 to __builtin_ia32_pminuw128 compared to operand Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCO

[Bug testsuite/96904] [11 regression] excess errors from old-deja.exp=g++.old-deja/g++.abi/cxa_vec.C after r11-2979

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96904 --- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- Yup, thanks

[Bug c++/60304] Including disables -Wconversion-null in C++ 98 mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60304 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/60304] Including disables -Wconversion-null in C++ 98 mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60304 --- Comment #29 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f049cda373d29ea1bce4065b24cbb392cdc5b172 commit r11-2985-gf049cda373d29ea1bce4065b24cbb392cdc5b172 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug c++/96905] New: ICE with consteval function: internal compiler error: in cp_gimplify_expr, at cp/cp-gimplify.c:827

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96905 Bug ID: 96905 Summary: ICE with consteval function: internal compiler error: in cp_gimplify_expr, at cp/cp-gimplify.c:827 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug analyzer/96894] Analyzer assumes pointer is NULL, even if pointer was tested to be non-null before

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96894 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/96904] [11 regression] excess errors from old-deja.exp=g++.old-deja/g++.abi/cxa_vec.C after r11-2979

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96904 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/96900] [9/10/11 Regression] bogus -Warray-bounds on strlen with valid pointer obtained from just-past-the-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96900 --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor --- The underlying cause is fold_nonarray_ctor_reference() returning a scalar zero for apparently out-of-bounds references when determining the initializer for s.a from &s.a[sizeof s.a]. Its caller, constant_byte

[Bug testsuite/96904] New: [11 regression] excess errors from old-deja.exp=g++.old-deja/g++.abi/cxa_vec.C after r11-2979

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96904 Bug ID: 96904 Summary: [11 regression] excess errors from old-deja.exp=g++.old-deja/g++.abi/cxa_vec.C after r11-2979 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status

[Bug testsuite/96903] New: [11 regression] excess errors from gcc.dg/pr89350.c after r11-2973

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96903 Bug ID: 96903 Summary: [11 regression] excess errors from gcc.dg/pr89350.c after r11-2973 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/96902] internal compiler error in gimplify_scan_omp_clauses with "!$omp target enter data" directive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96902 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Component|libgomp |fortran CC|

[Bug libgomp/96902] New: internal compiler error in gimplify_scan_omp_clauses with "!$omp target enter data" directive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96902 Bug ID: 96902 Summary: internal compiler error in gimplify_scan_omp_clauses with "!$omp target enter data" directive Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/86419] codecvt::in() and out() incorrectly return ok in some cases.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86419 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Thanks for the analysis.

[Bug libstdc++/56109] Add light-weight ABI-compatible debug checks to standard containers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56109 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|redi at gcc dot gnu.org|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/96901] [11 Regression] Many libstdc++ tests FAIL on i686-linux due to a PCH FE bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96901 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug c++/96901] [11 Regression] Many libstdc++ tests FAIL on i686-linux due to a PCH FE bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96901 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/96900] [9/10/11 Regression] bogus -Warray-bounds on strlen with valid pointer obtained from just-past-the-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96900 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to fail|

[Bug c++/96901] New: [11 Regression] Many libstdc++ tests FAIL on i686-linux due to a PCH FE bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96901 Bug ID: 96901 Summary: [11 Regression] Many libstdc++ tests FAIL on i686-linux due to a PCH FE bug Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/96877] Erroneous warning when default initializing function pointer types defined using std::declval

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96877 --- Comment #6 from Ian Henriksen --- Thanks, this makes sense. I originally got this idea from https://stackoverflow.com/a/27489923. The discussion there implied there was some kind of ambiguity in the standard and showed some examples where ex

[Bug middle-end/96900] New: bogus -Warray-bounds on strlen with valid pointer obtained from just-past-the-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96900 Bug ID: 96900 Summary: bogus -Warray-bounds on strlen with valid pointer obtained from just-past-the-end Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug c++/93317] return type deduction fails for templated unary function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93317 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Oops, wrong bug number, I meant PR 64194 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 64194 ***

[Bug c++/64194] [C++14] for function template with auto return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64194 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||max.kan...@nu-cost.com --- Comment #13

[Bug libstdc++/92978] std::gcd mishandles mixed-signedness

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92978 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31782bd45331ef3006f624d7b1cc9cd11b4abb84 commit r10-8703-g31782bd45331ef3006f624d7b1cc9cd11b4abb84 Author: Jonathan Wakel

[Bug libstdc++/92978] std::gcd mishandles mixed-signedness

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92978 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c71644776f4e8477289a4de16239dbb420db6945 commit r11-2983-gc71644776f4e8477289a4de16239dbb420db6945 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug target/69194] [5/6 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2286

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69194 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||max.kan...@nu-cost.com --- Comment #7

[Bug c++/93317] return type deduction fails for templated unary function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93317 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c++/60304] Including disables -Wconversion-null in C++ 98 mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60304 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug c++/60304] Including disables -Wconversion-null in C++ 98 mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60304 --- Comment #27 from Jonathan Wakely --- The original testcase gets a warning even for -std=c++98 now, thanks to dmalcolm's r268589 (included in GCC 9.1).

[Bug libstdc++/96851] operator< on std::array does not work in constexpr, for sizeof(T) == 1, and N > 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96851 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/96851] operator< on std::array does not work in constexpr, for sizeof(T) == 1, and N > 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96851 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:33c34c4c2466fd4fd050ed8e2d5996c35ebdeef6 commit r10-8702-g33c34c4c2466fd4fd050ed8e2d5996c35ebdeef6 Author: Jonathan Wakel

[Bug c++/60304] Including disables -Wconversion-null in C++ 98 mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60304 --- Comment #26 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #22) > My point is that the fix cannot be only limited to tweaking stdbool.h, as > long as any C++ mode still defines false as a macro. As I said in comment 1

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] Failure to optimize sub+not involving constant to add

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 Gabriel Ravier changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Failure to optimize |Failure to optimize sub+not

[Bug libstdc++/96851] operator< on std::array does not work in constexpr, for sizeof(T) == 1, and N > 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96851 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to milasudril from comment #4) > Actually, I did not even try without the c++20 flag: That's irrelevant. The bug happens when using c++20, so the bug report should include the options necessary t

[Bug libstdc++/96851] operator< on std::array does not work in constexpr, for sizeof(T) == 1, and N > 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96851 --- Comment #4 from milasudril at gmail dot com --- Actually, I did not even try without the c++20 flag: template< class T, std::size_t N > bool operator<( const std::array& lhs, const std::array& rhs ); (3) (until C++

[Bug target/96814] [11 Regression] wrong code with -march=cascadelake since r11-1445-g502d63b6d6141597

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96814 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug libstdc++/96851] operator< on std::array does not work in constexpr, for sizeof(T) == 1, and N > 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96851 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2f983fa69005b603ea1758a013b4134d5b0f24a8 commit r11-2981-g2f983fa69005b603ea1758a013b4134d5b0f24a8 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/93059] char and char8_t does not talk with each other with memcpy. std::copy std::copy_n, std::fill, std::fill_n, std::uninitialized_copy std::uninitialized_copy_n, std::fill, std::unin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93059 --- Comment #46 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2f983fa69005b603ea1758a013b4134d5b0f24a8 commit r11-2981-g2f983fa69005b603ea1758a013b4134d5b0f24a8 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/96822] [11 regression] Starting with r11-2883 ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96822 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCO

[Bug target/96895] ABI of returning V1DF differs between GCC and clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96895 --- Comment #7 from Michael Matz --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > So vector types with element type T and N, a power-of-two, not otherwise > specified are passes the same as > > struct S { T a[N] }; > > ? No. structs, if the

[Bug target/96899] [10 Regression] [SH] Bootstrap fails when building libgomp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96899 --- Comment #2 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Did it work with GCC 10.1? Yes. I'm currently performing some test builds and will hopefully start bisecting soon.

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] Failure to optimize not+not+dec+and+not to add+or

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/96899] [10 Regression] [SH] Bootstrap fails when building libgomp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96899 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10.2 Regression] [SH] |[10 Regression] [SH]

[Bug target/96899] [10.2 Regression] [SH] Bootstrap fails when building libgomp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96899 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.3

[Bug target/96895] ABI of returning V1DF differs between GCC and clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96895 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > (In reply to Michael Matz from comment #2) > > The psABI doesn't say anything about such types, no. Maybe it could in some > > additional info pages, but it's

[Bug target/96895] ABI of returning V1DF differs between GCC and clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96895 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Michael Matz from comment #2) > The psABI doesn't say anything about such types, no. Maybe it could in some > additional info pages, but it's always a problem to codify behaviour > retroactivel

[Bug target/96791] ICE in convert_mode_scalar, at expr.c:412

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96791 --- Comment #8 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org --- Another small test case, reduced from my compile failure of c/c-typeck.c and modified to provoke truncation from POImode to various other modes: typedef int *a; struct b { a ba; }; enum c { c1=1

[Bug lto/94311] LTO produces line info entries with invalid line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94311 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 49175 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49175&action=edit gcc11-pr94311.patch Untested patch which implements location and block caching and the above test passes with

[Bug target/96899] New: [10.2 Regression] [SH] Bootstrap fails when building libgomp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96899 Bug ID: 96899 Summary: [10.2 Regression] [SH] Bootstrap fails when building libgomp Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 URL: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=gc

[Bug target/96895] ABI of returning V1DF differs between GCC and clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96895 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Michael Matz from comment #2) > The psABI doesn't say anything about such types, no. Maybe it could in some > additional info pages, but it's always a problem to codify behaviour > retroactively > in

[Bug target/96895] ABI of returning V1DF differs between GCC and clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96895 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gitlab.com/x86-psAB

[Bug target/96895] ABI of returning V1DF differs between GCC and clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96895 --- Comment #2 from Michael Matz --- The psABI doesn't say anything about such types, no. Maybe it could in some additional info pages, but it's always a problem to codify behaviour retroactively in it, when conflicting implementations already e

[Bug target/96893] aarch64:Segmentation fault signal terminated program cc1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96893 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---

[Bug target/96893] aarch64:Segmentation fault signal terminated program cc1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96893 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug target/96898] New: [nvptx] libatomic support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96898 Bug ID: 96898 Summary: [nvptx] libatomic support Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assigne

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] Failure to optimize not+not+dec+and+not to add+or

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- We already transform to return ~(-2 - x) | x; so this is really asking for ~(-2 - x) --> x + 1

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] New: Failure to optimize not+not+dec+and+not to add+or

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 Bug ID: 96897 Summary: Failure to optimize not+not+dec+and+not to add+or Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/93689] ICE with default argument in lambda used as non type template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93689 --- Comment #7 from bastien penavayre --- somewhat related 93595 ( https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93595 ) is still in UNCONFIRMED state.

[Bug fortran/96896] Bogus 'Different ranks in pointer assignment' with 'array-variable = scalar' if LHS is a function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96896 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus --- The error occurs for the LHS of: myshape(b) = 0.0 reshape_test:_F.DA0 => myshape[[((reshape_test:b(FULL)))]] (gfc_debug_expr output) (gdb) p lvalue->rank $9 = 0 (gdb) p rvalue->rank $10 = 2 Maybe

[Bug c++/93689] ICE with default argument in lambda used as non type template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93689 bastien penavayre changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bastien.penavayre at epitech dot e

[Bug fortran/96859] Wrong answer with intrinsic merge_bits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96859 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b567d3bd302933adb253aba9069fd8120c485441 commit r11-2978-gb567d3bd302933adb253aba9069fd8120c485441 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: W

[Bug fortran/96896] New: Bogus 'Different ranks in pointer assignment' with 'array-variable = scalar' if LHS is a function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96896 Bug ID: 96896 Summary: Bogus 'Different ranks in pointer assignment' with 'array-variable = scalar' if LHS is a function Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/96882] Wrong assembly code generated with arm-none-eabi-gcc -flto -mfloat-abi=hard options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96882 --- Comment #6 from Richard Earnshaw --- Yes, the problem is related to returning values in memory and the ABI variants we have. If we have hardware floating-point we generally use registers to return values; if we don't, then we have to return

[Bug target/96607] GCC feeds SPARC/Solaris linker with unrecognized TLS sequences

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96607 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC|ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org | Status|NEW

[Bug target/96607] GCC feeds SPARC/Solaris linker with unrecognized TLS sequences

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96607 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug lto/94311] LTO produces line info entries with invalid line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94311 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- One possible way at the libcpp side is to make sure we don't deplete the location_t stuff too much once we are above highest > LINE_MAP_MAX_LOCATION_WITH_COLS. I mean, the comment above this if block says:

  1   2   >