https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102010
Bug ID: 102010
Summary: ICE in stack-check-8.c in i386_pe_seh_unwind_emit
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101630
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101478
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.4.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100532
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anbu1024.me at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101196
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100532
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: tree check: expected |[12 Regression] ICE: tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101196
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102009
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-22
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102009
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
-gnu
Configured with: /tmp/tmp.MRrxfWzUCx-gcc-builder/gcc/configure
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto --enable-checking-yes --enable-multiarch
--prefix=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210821 (experimental
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38497
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
CLANG/LLVM does this while ICC peels off the first iteration of the loop.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32093
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21093
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2006-08-21 06:03:41 |2021-8-21
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57082
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77820
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37537
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||8.2.0, 9.3.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77820
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90773
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guillaume.melquiond at inria
dot f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33103
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Dup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-01-29 00:00:00 |2021-8-21
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94086
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
The testcase in comment #0 in GCC11+ GCC can optimize it to just a move
followed by a return. Note the optimization only happens on the RTL level
even.
I have not looked into what allowed this to be optimize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94889
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-22
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93487
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-22
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94006
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-03-03 00:00:00 |2021-8-21
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33103
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49872
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86017
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82689
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last reconfirmed|2020-03-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43147
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88922
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zingaburga+gcc at hotmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92437
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92038
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
Severity|nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92436
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86, aarch |x86, aarch64
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85482
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101971
--- Comment #11 from Giulio Benetti ---
I think I've found, a -fPIC was in CPPFLAGS while -static too. They can't work
together. Indeed removing -fPIC it builds fine.
So this is the solution.
Please correct if I'm wrong because I'm not that exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43147
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90483
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68110
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> but since we don't
> have any pass to generate __builtin_sub_overflow from a-b and a CSE __builtin_sub_overflow with either of those, I am a bit wary of dropping
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68110
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101971
--- Comment #10 from Giulio Benetti ---
Created attachment 51344
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51344&action=edit
Pre-processed seclang-parser.cc(seclang-parser.s)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101971
--- Comment #9 from Giulio Benetti ---
Created attachment 51343
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51343&action=edit
Pre-processed seclang-parser.cc(seclang-parser.ii)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101971
--- Comment #8 from Giulio Benetti ---
Hello Andrew,
what you point:
https://buildroot.uclibc.narkive.com/EOUb7PvD/patch-v2-m68k-disable-br2-binfmt-flat-sep-data-for-coldfire
doesn't give problem since 6 years for all package Buildroot has, it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12395
--- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #18)
> This is what is produced (at least for 7.3.0):
Which has been produced since GCC 6.
that is due to ifcvt.c changes.
On the trunk we can produce on the gimple no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101971
Giulio Benetti changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88868
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last reconfirmed|2019-01-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88670
Bug 88670 depends on bug 59650, which changed state.
Bug 59650 Summary: Inefficient vector assignment code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59650
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59650
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93847
--- Comment #5 from Giulio Benetti ---
Created attachment 51342
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51342&action=edit
Pre-processed ref-filter.c(ref-filter.s)
This is the assembly of ref-filter.c Hope this helps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93847
--- Comment #4 from Giulio Benetti ---
Created attachment 51341
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51341&action=edit
Pre-processed ref-filter.c(ref-filter.i)
This is the -save-temps of ref-filter.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286
Bug 23286 depends on bug 5738, which changed state.
Bug 5738 Summary: Missed code hoisting opportunity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5738
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16996
Bug 16996 depends on bug 5738, which changed state.
Bug 5738 Summary: Missed code hoisting opportunity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5738
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5738
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31667
--- Comment #6 from Allan Jensen ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> We produce this now:
>
> movdqa x(%rip), %xmm1
> pxor%xmm0, %xmm0
> movdqa %xmm1, %xmm2
> punpckhbw %xmm0, %xmm1
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88670
Bug 88670 depends on bug 24073, which changed state.
Bug 24073 Summary: (vector float){a, b, 0, 0} code gen is not good
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24073
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24073
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88873
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||101926
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99410
--- Comment #8 from Giulio Benetti ---
This bug still shows up on gcc 9.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54770
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> It is just that though, a workaround, it doesn't workaround say:
The testcase in comment #7 was fixed in GCC 10+ by the patches which fix PR
59813 and PR 90418
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85740
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |target
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68274
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||102008
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102008
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Component|tree-optimizati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102008
Bug ID: 102008
Summary: [12 Regression] no cmov generated for loads next to
each other
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimiza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80040
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54174
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-21
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65335
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
So for GCC 7+, -ftree-vectorize vs -fno-tree-vectorize case is no longer
different and there is no cmov in the code any more.
Note I noticed ICX/LLVM convert this to cmov while ICC and MSVC do not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95905
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linux at carewolf dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78563
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95905
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97249
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95524
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95488
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||56456
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
--- Comment #4 from Dmitriano ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Can you attach the prepcoessed source?
attached ListTest.cpp.i file that I generated with the command
make Tests/ListTest.cpp.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
--- Comment #3 from Dmitriano ---
(In reply to Dmitriano from comment #2)
> Created attachment 51340 [details]
> preprocessed source file
attached ListTest.cpp.i file that I generated with the command
make Tests/ListTest.cpp.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
--- Comment #2 from Dmitriano ---
Created attachment 51340
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51340&action=edit
preprocessed source file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102007
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
Please note that this bug comes from the following ill-formed code that GCC
accepts.
template concept A = true;
template concept B = true;
static_assert(B<>);
https://godbolt.org/z/7d54sYhv3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102007
Bug ID: 102007
Summary: ICE: in dependent_type_p, at cp/pt.c:26784
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95389
--- Comment #7 from Ulrich Teichert ---
Hi, after building under x86_64 I can confirm that the PkgPath issue is fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101986
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Teichert ---
After trying out the same compilation under x86_64, I can confirm that this
issue is sparc64 specific.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102004
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you attach the prepcoessed source?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96961
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase from PR 102005:
int foo();
template
void bar() { f(); }
int main() {
bar();
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96961
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hewillk at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102005
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102006
Bug ID: 102006
Summary: A false warning "Array subscript -N is outside array
bounds warning"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102005
Bug ID: 102005
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected function_type or
method_type, have integer_type in
set_flags_from_callee, at cp/call.c:334
Product: gcc
Version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102004
Bug ID: 102004
Summary: The opaque-enum-declaration whose enum-head-name
contains a nest-name-specifier should be permitted in
an explicit specialization
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101996
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab ---
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc-10
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib64/gcc/riscv64-suse-linux/10/lto-wrapper
Target: riscv64-suse-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --infodir=/usr/share/info
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101996
--- Comment #2 from Alpine User ---
Can you post your `gcc -v` output? Maybe we are using different GCC version and
this has been fixed already? I grepped through the commit 10.X..11.X commit log
manually but wasn't able to find anything this wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
95 matches
Mail list logo