https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 68694, which changed state.
Bug 68694 Summary: SLP loads should be permuted until supported if possible
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68694
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68694
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95084
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102765
--- Comment #4 from Siarhei Siamashka ---
First of all, it's my own fault for not just bisecting the GDC code from the
day one to figure out all the relevant details many months earlier. The code is
large and takes a lot of time to compile, so I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104317
Siarhei Siamashka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104319
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Summary|"parse e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104319
Bug ID: 104319
Summary: "parse error of template argument list" due to missing
space in ">==", a better error message should be given
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104317
--- Comment #1 from Siarhei Siamashka ---
An attempted fix for the linker error had been introduced in GDC11 via:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99914
But it made function templates non-inlineable as a side effect:
https:/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Bug ID: 104318
Summary: [modules] ICE tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:16621
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104317
Bug ID: 104317
Summary: D language: rt.config module doesn't work as expected
in GDC 9/10 (multiple definition linker error)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104302
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced further:
struct ss {};
static ss ff(void* const v);
template
void f1(void) {
int mem[mem_size];
ss StateRegs[] = {
ff(mem)
};
}
CUT ---
mem's array size needs to be value d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104300
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced a little further:
struct ss {
char r;
ss();
};
struct a {
ss e[6];
};
a vv;
void ff() { vv = {}; }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104309
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104316
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||23384
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104316
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88798
--- Comment #6 from Wojciech Mula ---
Hongtao, thank you for your patch and for pinging back! I checked the code from
this issue against version 11.2.0 (Debian 11.2.0-14), but still, there are
KMOVQs before performing any bit ops. Here is the out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104316
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
return slot optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104316
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Missing optimization for|RSO is not used when doing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104288
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod ---
its a bit more tightly intertwined than that unfortunately. I had plans to
replace the current non-null processing with a range_after_stmt side-effect API
which would work in conjunction with dominator wal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104316
Bug ID: 104316
Summary: Missing optimization for uninitialized local struct
variable
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104315
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-31
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104315
--- Comment #1 from Gabriel Ravier ---
PS: I've just stumbled upon the more generic case, which would be this code:
unsigned int stb_bitreverse(unsigned int n)
{
n = ((n & 0x) >> 1) | ((n & 0x) << 1);
n = ((n & 0x)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104315
Bug ID: 104315
Summary: [AArch64] Failure to optimize 8-bit bitreverse pattern
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104279
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104310
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104309
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104314
--- Comment #2 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 08:14:39PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Untested patch.
>
Seems to pass regression testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95084
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88378
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88378
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55641
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61755
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104311
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-31
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68694
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Fixed with r10-1321-g332d6c4189218b06.
So just made a latent I think really.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101135
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #6 from anla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84939
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.5 |11.0
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102434
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102414
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16994
Bug 16994 depends on bug 101874, which changed state.
Bug 101874 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE with auto specifier for VLAs since
r12-1933-ge66d0b7b87d105d2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101874
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101874
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102414
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:874ad5d6745bf3bbe4aa138cef09c669b3fb9b07
commit r12-6952-g874ad5d6745bf3bbe4aa138cef09c669b3fb9b07
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101874
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:874ad5d6745bf3bbe4aa138cef09c669b3fb9b07
commit r12-6952-g874ad5d6745bf3bbe4aa138cef09c669b3fb9b07
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102434
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b1a8b92f8f78536a00012e2e53a0d12ddbe6836d
commit r12-6951-gb1a8b92f8f78536a00012e2e53a0d12ddbe6836d
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83220
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104294
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104294
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:76dc465aaf1b74bf92143510b6db5671e1c053d6
commit r12-6950-g76dc465aaf1b74bf92143510b6db5671e1c053d6
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104314
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104314
Bug ID: 104314
Summary: ICE in deferred_op_assign, at fortran/resolve.cc:11794
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104313
Bug ID: 104313
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE verify_gimple failed with
-ff2c
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104312
Bug ID: 104312
Summary: ICE with -ff2c in fold_convert_loc, at
fold-const.cc:2451
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104311
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104311
Bug ID: 104311
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE out of memory
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104230
--- Comment #2 from anton at socialhacker dot com ---
Hmm, sorry, still learning the bugzilla UI. I thought that patch would be
attached to my next comment. I don't believe that patch is a solution to the
problem. It was just a way I was able
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104230
--- Comment #1 from anton at socialhacker dot com ---
Created attachment 52321
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52321&action=edit
Patch to get member references via pointers accepted as template arguments
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104291
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104291
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0eb06ee9a40a09d2f492461289d69aa39f757e66
commit r12-6949-g0eb06ee9a40a09d2f492461289d69aa39f757e66
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104298
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2cbe5dd54f15e88e0b42567319aa9c8e7bad7946
commit r12-6948-g2cbe5dd54f15e88e0b42567319aa9c8e7bad7946
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104075
Bug 104075 depends on bug 104232, which changed state.
Bug 104232 Summary: [12 Regression] spurious -Wuse-after-free after conditional
free
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104232
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104232
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104232
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:48d3191e7bd6245bd2df625731f1ad9207a26655
commit r12-6947-g48d3191e7bd6245bd2df625731f1ad9207a26655
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102952
--- Comment #39 from H.J. Lu ---
The GCC 11 backport is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/589527.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #11 from Michael Meissner ---
The patch has been posted, I'm awaiting approval.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/589469.html
BTW, the copy_to_mode_reg bug I mentioned earlier goes away with the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Sorry, I wasn't able to debug those additional failures until the weekend.
They ultimately turned out to be a bug in some recent newlib refactoring. I
got clean or1k builds once I applied your patch and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153
--- Comment #6 from rdapp at linux dot ibm.com ---
One thing wrong with the previous snippet is that cc_cmp and rev_cc_cmp can be
NULL. This can also be the reason for your failures as seen on SPARC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104310
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
r12-6931-ga1544878966020d1f7a640b35d1f7a5f0e055624
should fix that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104310
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
The code I gave crashes in fre. This code crashes in forwprop:
int i_5;
void func_3() {
int *ptr_11;
unsigned int ui_15;
ptr_11 = &ui_15;
(ui_15 = 0 >= 0) / i_5 << 1;
}
My apologies for getting t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104310
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this was already fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104310
Bug ID: 104310
Summary: ice in forwprop
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104307
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104308
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Yes; using -fdump-ipa-analyzer=stderr shows that the memmove becomes:
_1 = &s + 1;
_3 = MEM [(char * {ref-all})_1];
MEM [(char * {ref-all})&s] = _3;
where the first and third stmts in the gimple-s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104291
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104307
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r11-2577-g229752afe3156a3990dacaedb94c76846cebf132 but I think the
real bug is caused by r11-2362-g55c9695cbe91c406805ac0cd342949f32f13b779
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104308
Kamil Dudka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kdudka at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104307
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86345
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86703
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103341
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #6)
> g++ 12.0.1 20220130 snapshot (g:baf98320ac6cd56da0c0b460fb94e3b87a79220d)
> still ICEs on the testcase in comment 3.
Looks like that one requires a different f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103706
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103706
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101913
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84939
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83220
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86143
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88378
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61755
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61594
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68694
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59485
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82980
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101717
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104308
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Sorry, link should have been:
https://godbolt.org/z/ecWYnE73T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104308
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-31
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97986
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104232
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
The full link to the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/589366.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104075
Bug 104075 depends on bug 104269, which changed state.
Bug 104269 Summary: [12 Regression] Bogus -Wuse-after-free seen in xen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104232
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
*** Bug 104269 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102952
--- Comment #38 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #37)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #36)
> > HJ, does it make sense to backport these to branches since AFAIU they also
> > address possible security issues?
>
> Yes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104232
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor
1 - 100 of 183 matches
Mail list logo
