https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98752
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-01-19 00:00:00 |2021-12-8
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32066
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58590
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91023
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The trunk we get the following ICE:
: In substitution of 'template
std::optional > parse_variant(const Foo >& ...) [with T = ]':
:34:34: required from here
:34:34: internal compiler error: tree check: expec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63707
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||l2m at ukr dot net
--- Comment #24 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91499
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67259
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #3 from Andr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #20 from Hongtao.liu ---
V2HF/V4HF should also be restricted under AVX512FP16.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98614
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-09
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86646
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
MSVC also rejects it for the same reason as GCC (and ICC). Which makes clang
the one which is different than all others.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103622
Bug ID: 103622
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault (in
altivec_resolve_new_overloaded_builtin)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-reco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #19 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #17)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #16)
> > There're already testcases for vec_extract/vec_set/vec_duplicate, but those
> > testcases are written under TARGET_A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79504
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69731
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from Andr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95564
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91760
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87174
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Interesting ICC also rejects it too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84866
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84866
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
#include
#include
// X has trivial copy ctor and nontrivial move ctor
struct X {
X() = default;
X(const X&)=default;
X(X&&) {}
};
// X needs to be nested to trigger the bug
union T1 {
X x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79329
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tyker at outlook dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86949
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81547
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60323
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Obviously this works:
struct A a = {.c = 1, .data = {1}};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34810
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86818
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #18 from Hongtao.liu ---
codegen for foo1/foo2 is suboptimal under -mavx2, i guess we can have
vec_setv16hf_0 and with vpblendw.
typedef _Float16 __v16hf __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (32)));
typedef _Float16 __m256h __attribute__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tilin97 at yandex dot ru
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94310
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xmh970252187 at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100518
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 51955
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51955&action=edit
candidate patch under testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100843
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 51954
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51954&action=edit
candidate patch under testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70832
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
>clang++ 3.7 works
clang 4.0 and above rejects both tests now with the same message as GCC. Are we
sure this was not a clang bug which was fixed?
Also ICC and MSVC rejects the code for the same reason too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69481
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102033
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65221
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Even doing this:
> template< typename A >
> struct X
> {
> using this_type = X;
> // typedef X this_type;
> static this_type inst;
> };
>
> template< typena
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68161
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #17 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #16)
> There're already testcases for vec_extract/vec_set/vec_duplicate, but those
> testcases are written under TARGET_AVX512FP16, i'll make a copy of them and
> test th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
--- Comment #12 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #11)
> On Tue, 7 Dec 2021, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
> >
> > --- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64989
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent.hamp at higaski dot at
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99059
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99059
Jack Adrian Zappa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||adrianh.bsc at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103024
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103530
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103097
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103560
--- Comment #6 from brocolis at eml dot cc ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> > f951.exe: Error: Nonexistent include directory './'
>
> Hmm, that seems wrong. the directory ./ definitely exists as it is the
> current working direc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103097
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:af93386ffc18ca6c7d1949751ff97cc6ce092b2c
commit r12-5853-gaf93386ffc18ca6c7d1949751ff97cc6ce092b2c
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
commit r12-5852-g50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103530
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
commit r12-5851-g2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103024
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
commit r12-5851-g2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102765
--- Comment #3 from Siarhei Siamashka ---
Thanks for the explanations. Is there a small example, which demonstrates
templates inlining causing a real practical problem for older versions of GDC?
A link to a bugtracker, commit message, post in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32066
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schaub.johannes@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48920
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78048
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhonghao at pku dot org.cn
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86602
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78048
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|noexcept operator does not |noexcept operator accepts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100736
--- Comment #4 from HaoChen Gui ---
Yes, there is a question. With my patch, the test case generates following
assembly. Seems they have the same latency (cror vs. crnot). I wonder why we
need reverse the CR bit comparison when finite-math-only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94944
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|compile error accessing |compile error accessing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96416
--- Comment #24 from Zach Laine ---
Sorry for the delay. I confirmed that this makes my case well-formed with
releases/gcc-11, and that it's ill-formed with GCC 11.2 and GCC 10.x.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69373
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think the following patch fixes the warning:
apinski@xeond:~/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp$ git diff except.c
diff --git a/gcc/cp/except.c b/gcc/cp/except.c
index a8acbc4b7b2..28d7810e182 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86583
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang 9 and above started to accept the code. I have not looked into why they
changed it yet though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71825
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|rejects-valid |accepts-invalid, diagnostic
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49729
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> GCC 4.9.0 and above removes the last diagnostics but the secone remains so
> it is better but not fully fixed.
s/secone/second/
typo fingers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49729
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-07-13 09:34:44 |2021-12-8
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #16 from Hongtao.liu ---
There're already testcases for vec_extract/vec_set/vec_duplicate, but those
testcases are written under TARGET_AVX512FP16, i'll make a copy of them and
test them w/o avx512fp16.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #15 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #12)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #10)
>
> > Sure.
> Please find attached the complete patch that enables HF vector modes in
> Comment #11. The patch survives
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103558
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103558
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0fb57034770aa20adced4d176f34ca611c2945bf
commit r12-5849-g0fb57034770aa20adced4d176f34ca611c2945bf
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Sun D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103332
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103621
Bug ID: 103621
Summary: stable_sort could call std::__merge_sort_with_buffer
directly in typical case
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96658
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100736
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Send patches to gcc-patches@, please. Or is there a question? Ask that
question then, please :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59769
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 51953
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51953&action=edit
Implement std::ios_base::__noreplace for C++23
TODO: tests
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101995
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> What is this REG_RETURNED thing?
Ah, something added in ira-lives.c, and you call *that* code fragile?
I agree :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101995
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Also, what is fragile here? This is *removing* fragility and premature
choices!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101995
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I don't see any problem with aarch64 fwiw.
If RA decides it does not want to tie the new pseudo to the argument
register, it may have a reason for it? Or suboptimal heuristics.
What is this REG_RETUR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103609
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103609
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b77968a70537429b4f548f90c369d26e6b6943cc
commit r12-5847-gb77968a70537429b4f548f90c369d26e6b6943cc
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83000
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97984
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> Hm, can't replicate for GCC 10, do you use any -mtune or so?
I can reproduce worse code for GCC 10 at -O3 -mtune=generic:
ldp x2, x3, [x0]
ld
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103618
--- Comment #3 from Maik Urbannek ---
The `constexpr` in the main function is not necessary to produce the warning.
The Function foo has to be constexpr. 'inline' or 'static' (before the
function) does not produce the warning.
Maybe `constexp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103609
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103591
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:423e0a98e3d972fb180803665a8c02b017b72d15
commit r11-9366-g423e0a98e3d972fb180803665a8c02b017b72d15
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103607
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ff9ed7f4f7e80b4602524689dc486cf35e84e87
commit r11-9365-g8ff9ed7f4f7e80b4602524689dc486cf35e84e87
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67217
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||klaus.doldinger64@googlemai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83000
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83476
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80651
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83000
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> $ g++ --version
> g++ (GCC) 12.0.0 20211208 (experimental)
>
> $ g++ pr83000.C -c -fconcepts
> pr83000.C: In function ‘int main()’:
> pr8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88580
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||0x66726565 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84464
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83000
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 12.0.0 20211208 (experimental)
$ g++ pr83000.C -c -fconcepts
pr83000.C: In function ‘int main()’:
pr83000.C:6:18: error: template constraint failure for ‘template
requires sizeof
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81174
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83000
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > > Seems fixed in GCC 10.
> >
> > Are you sure, all releases I have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80651
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
See A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83000
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
