https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #6 from Janez Zemva ---
I have since changed the repo. You can still demonstrate the bug by
uncommenting the line:
//[&a, &r, &s]() noexcept -> bool // uncomment for bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106263
--- Comment #2 from James Hilliard ---
Should this be backported to the gcc 12 branch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
--- Comment #7 from Jorn Bruggeman ---
None from me; thanks for the explanation!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106694
Bug ID: 106694
Summary: Redundant move instructions in ARM SVE intrinsics use
cases
Product: gcc
Version: rust/master
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106691
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Waterman from comment #3)
> Relaxation to gp happens at link time
Doing any kind of relaxation like this is REALLY REALLY BAD at link time.
Sorry but the whole relaxation in the RISCV li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106691
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Waterman ---
Relaxation to gp happens at link time, and because of the relatively small
load/store offsets, the small-data limit is actually useful. I don't think we
should turn it off, because when we relax to gp, we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106692
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> Started with r238754 but removing that match.pd doesn't help, so the problem
> is elsewhere.
>
> We optimize away zz1_1(D) != 0:
>
> __attribute__((fn spec ("
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106691
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|Section anchors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106692
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r238754 but removing that match.pd doesn't help, so the problem is
elsewhere.
We optimize away zz1_1(D) != 0:
__attribute__((fn spec (". w ")))
void shape_cray (real(kind=4) & restrict zz1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106691
Andrew Waterman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew at sifive dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106693
Bug ID: 106693
Summary: gnat: poisoned calloc in gcc/ada/adaint.[hc] due to
use of sched.h on musl
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106692
Bug ID: 106692
Summary: [10/11/12/13 Regression] Cray pointer comparison
wrongly optimized away
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #5 from Janez Zemva ---
The workaround is very simple, just put "[&]() noexcept -> bool" into sq2.hpp.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106691
Bug ID: 106691
Summary: Section anchors is not implemented for riscv
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #4 from Janez Zemva ---
Created attachment 53482
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53482&action=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106247
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #3 from Janez Zemva ---
BTW: I already tried to make a minimal test case, but failed, all compiled
fine. Maybe tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
--- Comment #2 from Janez Zemva ---
Sorry, I can't, because I already changed the code a little and I'm keeping the
repo such as it is so as to not invalidate this bug report. Why not clone the
repo and do what you need to do? I'm keeping it in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-08-19
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106690
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53481
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53481&action=edit
patch under testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106690
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106690
Bug ID: 106690
Summary: check_effective_target_bswap should be enabled for
riscv if ZBB ISA extension is enabled
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689
Bug ID: 106689
Summary: gcc crash while compiling a generic lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99089
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The zero extend is gone on the trunk ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
-fno-tree-coalesce-vars also fixes the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|leaving SSA emits |out of ssa Coalescing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|middle-end
--- Comment #4 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
--- Comment #2 from A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #0)
> It looks as if going out of SSA places in the loop a register copy
> corresponding to a phi node which is outside of the loop. Strangely, RTL
> optimizations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl ---
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 07:16:21PM +, j...@bolding-bruggeman.com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jorn Bruggeman ---
> Thanks; it does look like older
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106688
Bug ID: 106688
Summary: leaving SSA emits assignment into the inner loop
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Bruggeman ---
Thanks; it does look like older gfortran versions (and ifort) are too forgiving
here, and that, given the F2018 definition of "conformable", the latest
gfortran releases are correct.
As for "stand-alone" v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106101
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(Sorry I missed this)
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #11)
> I've tried to change our movstrict backend patterns to use a predicate on
> the dest operand which enforces a subreg. However, si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl ---
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 06:01:46PM +, j...@bolding-bruggeman.com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
>
> --- Comment #2 from Jorn Bruggeman ---
>
> Are you effectively saying th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
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=106684
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Bruggeman ---
I interpret the quoted F2018, 7.5.10 as "the same rules should govern
initialization of components of derived types and initialization of stand-alone
variables". That was previously (in 10.3, 11.2, and othe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106600
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53480
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53480&action=edit
Patch which is under test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106601
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53479
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53479&action=edit
Patch which is under test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
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=106686
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-August/600033.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 105348, which changed state.
Bug 105348 Summary: Overly aggressive -Warray-bounds after conditional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105348
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105348
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106247
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|2022-07-10 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 106446, which changed state.
Bug 106446 Summary: -Warray-bounds false positive on downcast under condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106446
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106446
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106648
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53471|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106687
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-08-19
Status|UNCONFIRM
5 != 42)
__builtin_abort();
}
Error:
>$ g++ -O1 small.cpp && ./a.out
42
>$ g++ -O2 small.cpp && ./a.out
0
Aborted (core dumped)
gcc version 13.0.0 20220819 (81e20a6eb9e6b7eb62a09ac58811387f0343bd14)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106683
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106683
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106685
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106685
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53477
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53477&action=edit
No more headers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106685
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53476
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53476&action=edit
More reduced
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106685
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53475
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53475&action=edit
testcase
Please next time attach the testcase instead of linking to godbolt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106646
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Thanks, I can look into that for C++.
I notice that with your patch we say "#warning before C2X is a GCC extension"
even when compiling with cc1plus; I suppose the C2X message should be guarded
by CPP_OPTIO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106686
Bug ID: 106686
Summary: [lto][offloading] lto-wrapper leaves "target.o"
temporay files behind when error diagnostic occurred
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106685
Bug ID: 106685
Summary: [12/13 Regerssion] ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105646
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|g++ does not raise "xxx is |g++ does not raise "xxx may
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105937
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106511
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
VRP could use max_stmt_executions here (note it doesn't properly handle loop
nests so the name is somewhat misleading)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105660
--- Comment #6 from Romain Dolbeau ---
Please consider this for 12.2, it's a trivial bug with a trivial fix that's
been available for two months.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684
Bug ID: 106684
Summary: inconsistent array initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 10.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106590
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #10 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #11 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106589
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106608
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106570
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106482
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106395
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106458
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #16 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106069
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #33 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106342
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106022
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #21 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106297
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105972
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105952
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106206
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105705
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105918
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106199
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105867
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105679
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106155
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105841
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105617
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #16 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106101
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #12 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105580
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105012
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #16 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106041
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105545
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105010
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #16 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106514
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105937
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105069
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #11 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104912
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #12 from Richard Bien
1 - 100 of 214 matches
Mail list logo