[Bug target/101796] Miss optimization to optimized (vashl op0, (op1: const_duplicate_vector)) to (ashl op0 op1_inner)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101796 --- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu --- > 2. x86 backend use ix86_gen_scratch_sse_rtx (mode) which prevent > simplication. Correct: ix86_gen_scratch_sse_rtx doesn't prevent optimization here.

[Bug c++/101780] Missing initializers whereas structure has default initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101780 --- Comment #4 from KL --- I get it but, as is, with no more contextual information, it is an annoying warning. Not enough information for the developer is the real problem here.

[Bug target/64165] __builtin_frame_address causes segmentation fault in __static_initialization_and_destruction_0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64165 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/61722] [ 4.9 ] gcc sometimes does not optimise movaps with movups

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61722 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug c++/61463] g++ does not emit DW_AT_mutable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61463 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug other/101711] Error when gcc cross compile libvtv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101711 --- Comment #8 from bootmgr at 163 dot com --- (In reply to ctice from comment #6) > I applied the patch supplied in comment 5. I added > --with-sysroot=/usr/local to my configure command (still not using > --enable-threads=mcf or --enable-vtab

[Bug c++/52288] operator?: and lambdas error message could be better

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52288 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/101796] Miss optimization to optimized (vashl op0, (op1: const_duplicate_vector)) to (ashl op0 op1_inner)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101796 --- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu --- There's 2 issues. 1. simplify_rtx should be able to simplify it. 2. x86 backend use ix86_gen_scratch_sse_rtx (mode) which prevent simplication.

[Bug target/101796] New: Miss optimization to optimized (vashl op0, (op1: const_duplicate_vector)) to (ashl op0 op1_inner)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101796 Bug ID: 101796 Summary: Miss optimization to optimized (vashl op0, (op1: const_duplicate_vector)) to (ashl op0 op1_inner) Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/95816] Aarch64 jumps between Hot/Cold sections does not clobber registers x16/x17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95816 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- The edge is also marked with EDGE_CROSSING. So maybe there is a way to try communicate this to the register allocator.

[Bug c++/101783] unnecessary error when top level cv qualifier is dropped

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101783 --- Comment #1 from nick huang --- The following snippet of code and error gives more clear the issue. Considering: template struct A{ typedef T& Type; }; template void f(const typename A::Type){} struct B{}; template <> void f(const ty

[Bug target/95816] Aarch64 jumps between Hot/Cold sections does not clobber registers x16/x17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95816 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/101787] There's no document for cond_ashr/ashl/lshr which is introduce by r10-2540

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101787 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug target/99744] __attribute__ ((target("general-regs-only"))) doesn't work with GPR intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99744 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||heinzisoft at web dot de --- Comment #13 from

[Bug target/100438] `_serialize` macro clashes with user defined identifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100438 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE --- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu --- I

[Bug target/100438] `_serialize` macro clashes with user defined identifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100438 --- Comment #11 from Filipe Brandenburger --- BTW, I just checked and see that the commit is already pushed upstream: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/72264a639729a5dcc21dbee304717ce22b338bfd Thanks!

[Bug target/100438] `_serialize` macro clashes with user defined identifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100438 --- Comment #10 from Filipe Brandenburger --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #9) > Please try: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-August/576603.html > > on GCC master branch. I can create a backport branch for GCC 11 if nee

[Bug target/57024] gcc too eager splitting cvtss2sd into unpcklps + cvtps2pd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57024 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.5.3, 4.9.0, 4.9.4, 5.1.0 Resol

[Bug target/56406] attribute((target(xpto))) causes ICE in i386 and rs6000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56406 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug other/101711] Error when gcc cross compile libvtv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101711 --- Comment #7 from ctice at gcc dot gnu.org --- Also, I downloaded the sources for mcfgthread from the repo supplied in comment5, but I can't seem to get that to build -- the GCC on my machine does not recognize "-municode" as a valid flag. Is

[Bug other/101711] Error when gcc cross compile libvtv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101711 --- Comment #6 from ctice at gcc dot gnu.org --- I applied the patch supplied in comment 5. I added --with-sysroot=/usr/local to my configure command (still not using --enable-threads=mcf or --enable-vtable-verify). Now it configures, but the m

[Bug tree-optimization/53100] Optimize __int128 with range information

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53100 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |tree-optimization Status|UNC

[Bug target/50214] strmov/strset should use :P

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50214 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- The problem is you cann't use :P unless you have a templated pattern which strmov/strset are.

[Bug tree-optimization/45632] const function pointer propagation issues with inlining

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45632 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c/47409] volatile struct member bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47409 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW See Also|

[Bug rtl-optimization/38544] missed opportunity to use adc (conditional store)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38544 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC, ICC, clang nor MSVC does this. Someone would need to look at the instruction to see if it is valid to do for the C++11 memory model too. Does it write to the memory location even without the add?

[Bug middle-end/31985] Wide operations (i.e. adddi3) are split too late

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31985 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|target |middle-end Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug tree-optimization/49869] Excessive loop versioning done by vectorization + predictive commoning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49869 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- On the trunk I only see one copy of the loop: .L11: movups (%rbx,%rax), %xmm7 movups 0(%rbp,%rax), %xmm0 movups (%r9,%rax), %xmm1 subps %xmm7, %xmm0 movups (%r11,

[Bug target/47626] internal compiler error: in print_reg (only for i686, and i486, not x86_64)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47626 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Keywords|

[Bug other/101711] Error when gcc cross compile libvtv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101711 --- Comment #5 from bootmgr at 163 dot com --- (In reply to ctice from comment #4) > Is there something special I need to download, set up, or build in order to > do mingw32 cross-compiles? > > I'm getting configure/build failures even when I o

[Bug middle-end/46143] __attribute__((optimize)) emits wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46143 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||8.1.0, 9.1.0 Known to fail|

[Bug libstdc++/96416] to_address() is broken by static_assert in pointer_traits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96416 gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc-bugs at m

[Bug target/46551] Generate complex addressing mode CMP instruction in x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46551 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Resolution|-

[Bug c/39843] -funsigned-bitfields discards "aligned" attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39843 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug target/43225] Structure copies not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43225 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/47895] usage of __attribute__ ((__target__ ("xyz"))) with buitins

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47895 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- This was fixed by r0-124016.

[Bug middle-end/47895] usage of __attribute__ ((__target__ ("xyz"))) with buitins

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47895 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target|

[Bug c++/101795] New: (x > QNaNf) is not a constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101795 Bug ID: 101795 Summary: (x > QNaNf) is not a constant expression Product: gcc Version: 11.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/45090] x86_64 passing structure by value to a non-inlined function causes register-resident structures to flush to stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45090 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug libstdc++/101794] New: std::lerp with NaN input does not result in NaN

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101794 Bug ID: 101794 Summary: std::lerp with NaN input does not result in NaN Product: gcc Version: 11.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug tree-optimization/42646] Jump threading breaks canonical loop forms

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42646 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization --- Comment #5 from

[Bug c/39843] -funsigned-bitfields discards "aligned" attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39843 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||ILP32 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug c/39843] -funsigned-bitfields discards "aligned" attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39843 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-08-05 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/101793] Incorrect production of ‘may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101793 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to thutt from comment #3) > Thanks for the quick triage. If the optimizer is getting confused about > control / data flow, is it possible that it's making bad decisions for > codegen? No, the cfg

[Bug middle-end/31802] SSE2 performance is deteriorating when __m128 is placed in union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31802 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.5.3, 4.7.1 Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/101793] Incorrect production of ‘may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101793 --- Comment #3 from thutt at vmware dot com --- Thanks for the quick triage. If the optimizer is getting confused about control / data flow, is it possible that it's making bad decisions for codegen?

[Bug target/30492] Undocumented ASM_OUTPUT_EXTERNAL_LIBCALL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30492 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/30685] Move ASM_OUTPUT_* macros to gcc_target structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30685 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-08-05 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/101793] Incorrect production of ‘may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101793 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-08-05 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug c++/101792] Compiling access to templated parent object fails with unrelated message: invalid use of 'auto'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101792 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c/101793] Incorrect production of ‘may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101793 --- Comment #1 from thutt at vmware dot com --- Also using godbolt.org, this sample fails from 4.9.0 to trunk.

[Bug c/101793] New: Incorrect production of ‘may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101793 Bug ID: 101793 Summary: Incorrect production of ‘may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]' Product: gcc Version: 9.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug c++/101731] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in cp_parser_skip_to_pragma_eol, at cp/parser.c:4055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101731 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- This is most likely caused by r7-2434.

[Bug c++/101731] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in cp_parser_skip_to_pragma_eol, at cp/parser.c:4055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101731 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/101731] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in cp_parser_skip_to_pragma_eol, at cp/parser.c:4055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101731 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery, |

[Bug c++/101792] New: Compiling access to templated parent object fails with unrelated message: invalid use of 'auto'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101792 Bug ID: 101792 Summary: Compiling access to templated parent object fails with unrelated message: invalid use of 'auto' Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/101505] [10/11 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: incompatible types in 'PHI' argument 0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505 --- Comment #8 from David Binderman --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7) > This is a different bug though, probably caused by HJs changes, looks like > the fixed PR101742, indeed updating and re-building my dev tree makes the > issu

[Bug c/29970] mixing ({...}) with VLA leads to massive breakage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29970 --- Comment #9 from Martin Uecker --- The sizeof problem is that in c_expr_sizeof_expr the argument of sizeof is only evaluated for VLAs but not for structs of variable size. The information about the size is then lost. Changing this fixes some m

[Bug c++/86369] constexpr const char* comparison fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86369 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Another possibility would be to detect it in cxx_eval_binary_expression before calling fold_binary_loc and punt. But, the constant evaluation actually doesn't track whether it is the same or different evalua

[Bug libstdc++/101782] [12 regression] Excess errors in g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-pr67774.C after r12-2729

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101782 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c8b024fa4b76bfd914e96dd3cecfbb6ee8e91316 commit r12-2773-gc8b024fa4b76bfd914e96dd3cecfbb6ee8e91316 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/79938] gcc unnecessarily spills xmm register to stack when inserting vector items

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79938 --- Comment #6 from postmaster at raasu dot org --- I tried identical code using intrinsics with both clang and gcc: clang: movdqa xmm1,XMMWORD PTR [rip+0xd98]# 402050 <_IO_stdin_used+0x50> pand xmm1,xmm0 movdqa xmm2,xmm0 pshufb xm

[Bug sanitizer/101744] [12 regression] hwasan new failures since r12-2424

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101744 --- Comment #7 from Matthew Malcomson --- Hi there, I didn't check all the new tests that Christophe mentioned, but all those I checked had `dg-require-effective-target hwaddress_exec` in them. The test that determines that effective target sh

[Bug c++/101780] Missing initializers whereas structure has default initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101780 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to KL from comment #2) > > How would P,Q,R be left uninitialized? > > Only if the analyzer has the info that, at this stage, there no default > value for the field. > It could be interesting in

[Bug c++/89085] call of overload is ambiguous with parameter packs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89085 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Accepted since r11-1571 and r10-8343: c++: Refinements to "more constrained". P2113 from the last C++ meeting clarified that we only compare constraints on functions or function templates that have equiv

[Bug middle-end/101791] missing warning on a mismatch between scalar and array forms of new and delete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101791 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0 Blocks|

[Bug middle-end/101791] New: missing warning on a mismatch between scalar and array forms of new and delete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101791 Bug ID: 101791 Summary: missing warning on a mismatch between scalar and array forms of new and delete Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/71267] [C++14] recursive metafunction won't compile: no type named 'type'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71267 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Accepted since r12-1094 and r11-8714: c++: argument pack with expansion [PR86355] This testcase revealed that we were using PACK_EXPANSION_EXTRA_ARGS a lot more than necessary; use_pack_expansion_extra_ar

[Bug c++/100977] [C++23] Implement C++ Identifier Syntax using Unicode Standard Annex 31

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100977 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4739344d36e6d24764cbedde44a3fff6edc70f6c commit r12-2772-g4739344d36e6d24764cbedde44a3fff6edc70f6c Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug c++/100977] [C++23] Implement C++ Identifier Syntax using Unicode Standard Annex 31

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100977 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4805b92a32637b987f924463d6af9dcf95b21f63 commit r12-2771-g4805b92a32637b987f924463d6af9dcf95b21f63 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug c++/57466] [DR 1584] Argument deduction fails for 'const T*' when T is function type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57466 --- Comment #20 from Jonathan Wakely --- The core issue is still open, for some reason.

[Bug c++/61543] static_cast(static_cast(enum_value)) doesn't get an error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61543 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > GCC 8+ rejects the first "// accepted" in the reduced testcase. Since r249083 > GCC 9+ rejects both. Since approximately r267272

[Bug c++/86369] constexpr const char* comparison fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86369 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/82204] G++ doesn't connect friend and extern declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82204 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed by r11-3699: c++: block-scope externs get an alias [PR95677,PR31775,PR95677]

[Bug c++/86369] constexpr const char* comparison fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86369 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords|

[Bug libstdc++/88736] [DR 3484] nullptr_t available without namespace qualification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88736 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |SUSPENDED Summary|nullptr_t

[Bug tree-optimization/101770] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with only locals in GNU diffutils

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101770 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic CC|

[Bug c++/100372] [11/12 Regression] ICE with variadic template template, internal compiler error: in strip_typedefs, at cp/tree.c:1544

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100372 --- Comment #5 from Marc C. Steinbach --- Thanks for fixing! I was unable to install any development snapshots, so I waited for the 11.2.0 release to test my codes.

[Bug libstdc++/101782] [12 regression] Excess errors in g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-pr67774.C after r12-2729

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101782 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/101786] P1143R2 constinit implementation is incomplete (joining with thread_local)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101786 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- IMHO clang++ implements it incorrectly, if you compile the testcase I've added in the patch with clang, then it will properly use _ZTH for the 4th variable (as it has non-trivial dtor, that dtor needs to be

[Bug c++/101786] P1143R2 constinit implementation is incomplete (joining with thread_local)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101786 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/101780] Missing initializers whereas structure has default initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101780 --- Comment #2 from KL --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) Thanks, I thought that this warning is fine if it helps to assure the developer that everything is still under control: that if the analyzer sees that a field is left uni

[Bug libstdc++/101782] [12 regression] Excess errors in g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-pr67774.C after r12-2729

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101782 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7b1de3eb9ed3f8dde54732d88520292c5ad1157d commit r12-2766-g7b1de3eb9ed3f8dde54732d88520292c5ad1157d Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug c++/101790] [12 Regression] ICE on invalid regression in trunk: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101790 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|ICE on invalid regression |[12 Regression] ICE on

[Bug c++/97475] An unnamed class with a typedef name for linkage purposes having a method.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97475 --- Comment #4 from Anders Granlund --- Sounds good to me! On Thu, 5 Aug 2021, 13:35 redi at gcc dot gnu.org, wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97475 > > --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- > Maybe we should make this

[Bug target/99744] __attribute__ ((target("general-regs-only"))) doesn't work with GPR intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99744 --- Comment #12 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:72264a639729a5dcc21dbee304717ce22b338bfd commit r12-2765-g72264a639729a5dcc21dbee304717ce22b338bfd Author: H.J. Lu Date: Sat Jul 17 07

[Bug middle-end/101787] There's no document for cond_ashr/ashl/lshr which is introduce by r10-2540

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101787 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/101790] New: ICE on invalid regression in trunk: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101790 Bug ID: 101790 Summary: ICE on invalid regression in trunk: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFI

[Bug middle-end/101787] There's no document for cond_ashr/ashl/lshr which is introduce by r10-2540

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101787 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c04bb6d93f3bd009800cb99e56c779a69d832691 commit r12-2764-gc04bb6d93f3bd009800cb99e56c779a69d832691 Author: Richard Sandiford D

[Bug testsuite/46895] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46895 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/90773] Improve piecewise operation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90773 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #17 fr

[Bug target/56511] memcpy misses chance to use AVX instructions

.size memcpy_char, .-memcpy_char .ident "GCC: (GNU) 12.0.0 20210805 (experimental) [master revision f7aa81892eb:82bfff3e5fa:c16f21c7cf97ce48967e42d3b5d22ea169a9c2c8]" .section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits [hjl@gnu-skl-2 gcc]$ *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 90773 ***

[Bug middle-end/90773] Improve piecewise operation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90773 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com --- Comment #16

[Bug target/89226] codegen for copying a 512-bit object fails to use avx instructions

vmovdqa 32(%rdi), %ymm1 vmovdqa %ymm0, (%rsi) vmovdqa %ymm1, 32(%rsi) vzeroupper ret .cfi_endproc .LFE5670: .size _Z5copy2RK10smart_pairRS_, .-_Z5copy2RK10smart_pairRS_ .ident "GCC: (GNU) 12.0.0 20210805 (experimental) [master revis

[Bug jit/100613] libgccjit should produce dylib on macOS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100613 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org|iains at gcc dot gnu.org Last re

[Bug target/101723] arm: incorrect order of .fpu and .arch_extension directives leads to unsupported instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101723 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c1cdabe3aab817d95a8db00a8b5e9f6bcdea936f commit r12-2762-gc1cdabe3aab817d95a8db00a8b5e9f6bcdea936f Author: Richard Earnshaw Dat

[Bug c++/69302] parentheses cause address of register variable to be requested (c++1y)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed by r253266 PR c++/56973, DR 696 - capture constant variables only as needed. * expr.c (mark_use): Split out from mark_rvalue_use and mark_lvalue_use. Handle lambda capture of constant variables. (m

[Bug ipa/101625] [11/12 Regression] ICE in modref_tree::merge with LTO and -m32 since r11-3825-g71dbabccbfb295c8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101625 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug c++/101780] Missing initializers whereas structure has default initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101780 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to KL from comment #0) > Can you confirm it is the intended behavior? See the documentation for -Wmissing-field-initializers. It doesn't warn about members being uninitialized, it warns about t

[Bug c++/97475] An unnamed class with a typedef name for linkage purposes having a method.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97475 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Maybe we should make this ill-formed for C++20, and a pedwarn otherwise, so existing code continues to compile using previous standards.

[Bug c++/46589] struct member function not declared global

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46589 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- This code was made ill-formed by https://wg21.link/p1766r1 (new in C++20 but a DR against previous standards). So GCC should just reject it (maybe with a switch to allow the old behaviour). See PR 97475.

  1   2   >