[Bug target/114775] on mingw __attribute__ ((__format__ (__printf__, ...))) doesn't recognize C99 specifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114775 --- Comment #15 from Jamaika --- https://github.com/brechtsanders/winlibs_mingw/issues/233

[Bug rtl-optimization/116244] [15 Regression] reload ICE building libstdc++ for coldfire

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116244 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/116229] [15 Regression] wrong code at -Ofast aarch64 due to missing fneg to generate 0x8000000000000000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116229 Tamar Christina changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug other/116246] obstack could use ASAN and Valgrind annotations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116246 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug other/116250] Add ASAN/Valgrind annotations to vec

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116250 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug c++/116251] New: Invalid use of pseudo destructor is not diagnosed in unevaluated contexts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116251 Bug ID: 116251 Summary: Invalid use of pseudo destructor is not diagnosed in unevaluated contexts Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug fortran/102689] Segfault with RESHAPE of CLASS as actual argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102689 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4cb07a38233aadb4b389a6e5236c95f52241b6e0 commit r15-2739-g4cb07a38233aadb4b389a6e5236c95f52241b6e0 Author: Paul Thomas Date: Tue A

[Bug other/116250] New: Add ASAN/Valgrind annotations to vec

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116250 Bug ID: 116250 Summary: Add ASAN/Valgrind annotations to vec Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: internal-improvement Severity: normal Pri

[Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 --- Comment #106 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #103) > (In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #102) > > Created attachment 55543 [details] > > Arithmetic right shift late expanding v2 > > > > Here's the patch. I ho

[Bug target/116240] RISC-V: ICE during RTL pass: combine with -fwrapv -march=rv64imv_xtheadcondmov_xventanacondops at -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116240 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/116200] [15 regression] ICE in stage 2 since r15-2696-gba730fd10934e4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116200 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9 from

[Bug fortran/116249] [15 Regression] ICE in import_iso_c_binding_module on x86_64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-linux-gn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116249 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org Statu

[Bug fortran/116249] New: [15 Regression] ICE in import_iso_c_binding_module on x86_64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-linux-gn

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: doko at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- trunk 20240805 fails to bootstrap with a profiled LTO build, seen on x86_64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le

[Bug target/65317] [SH] Shifts used instead of and with const_int

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65317 --- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo --- If larger constants are formed during 1st combine (note -- we now have a 2nd late combine pass after register allocation), they could be at least be hoisted out of loops. See also the latest patch https://gcc.gn

[Bug tree-optimization/115060] [15 Regression] Probable an issue around usage of vect_look_through_possible_promotion in tree-vect-patterns.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115060 Feng Xue changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/115228] Suspicious code in tree-vect-data-refs.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115228 Feng Xue changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/115228] Suspicious code in tree-vect-data-refs.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115228 --- Comment #2 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Feng Xue : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:95990db02b86282249396b06f65f4f9f582bab42 commit r15-2738-g95990db02b86282249396b06f65f4f9f582bab42 Author: Feng Xue Date: Mon Aug 5 1

[Bug tree-optimization/115707] [15 regression] FAIL in gcc.target/aarch64/sve/sad_1.c since r15-863-ga3aeff4ce95b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115707 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Feng Xue : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3c089ee5d5a86cab0b27c69b96c4354c496520ac commit r15-2737-g3c089ee5d5a86cab0b27c69b96c4354c496520ac Author: Feng Xue Date: Mon Aug 5 1

[Bug target/116189] [14/15 Regression] compare debug failure at -O2 on sh since r14-8319-g86de9b66480b71

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116189 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/116189] [14/15 Regression] compare debug failure at -O2 on sh since r14-8319-g86de9b66480b71

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116189 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||12.4.1, 13.3.1, 14.2.1,

[Bug target/116189] [14/15 Regression] compare debug failure at -O2 on sh since r14-8319-g86de9b66480b71

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116189 --- Comment #17 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dfacc021c9775b1563c717cf3f8114d0f874b030 commit r12-10660-gdfacc021c9775b1563c717cf3f8114d0f874b030 Author: Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/116189] [14/15 Regression] compare debug failure at -O2 on sh since r14-8319-g86de9b66480b71

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116189 --- Comment #16 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:73064a28689fe3799f4fb5f1bab7634df889a43e commit r13-8962-g73064a28689fe3799f4fb5f1bab7634df889a43e Author: Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/116189] [14/15 Regression] compare debug failure at -O2 on sh since r14-8319-g86de9b66480b71

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116189 --- Comment #15 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba45573c8072f06f67af22a2ca60da5f5c12beae commit r14-10564-gba45573c8072f06f67af22a2ca60da5f5c12beae Author: Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/116189] [14/15 Regression] compare debug failure at -O2 on sh since r14-8319-g86de9b66480b71

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116189 --- Comment #14 from GCC Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0355c943b9e954e8f59068971d934f1b91ecb729 commit r15-2736-g0355c943b9e954e8f59068971d934f1b91ecb729 Author: Andrew Pinski Date: S

[Bug sanitizer/116248] segfault when building fortran with hwaddress

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116248 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I posted a patch but have not heard back.

[Bug sanitizer/115205] ICE when using -fsanitize=hwaddress

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115205 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||madhavmj at yahoo dot com --- Comment #

[Bug sanitizer/116248] segfault when building fortran with hwaddress

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116248 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug sanitizer/116248] segfault when building fortran with hwaddress

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116248 --- Comment #1 from Mahesh Madhav --- Created attachment 58846 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58846&action=edit mod file produced with -freport-bug

[Bug sanitizer/116248] New: segfault when building fortran with hwaddress

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116248 Bug ID: 116248 Summary: segfault when building fortran with hwaddress Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug other/31233] obstack.h typo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31233 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution

[Bug other/37080] vasprintf in libiberty fails for %llu on solaris

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37080 --- Comment #3 from Sam James --- See r5-5735-g01ca36af914385 and r14-8937-g53bb7145135c0c which may fix it.

[Bug lto/98922] -fstack-usage not working with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98922 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/98922] -fstack-usage not working with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98922 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 CC|

[Bug lto/70611] Compiling binutils with -flto -Wstack-usage fails.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70611 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug lto/70611] Compiling binutils with -flto -Wstack-usage fails.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70611 --- Comment #8 from Sam James --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4) AFAIK, it's "just" the generic late-optimisation warnings issue in general, so the warning isn't broken with LTO, it's just more likely to have be bogus there.

[Bug demangler/88783] integer overflow in libiberty, heap overflow will be triggered in nm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88783 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 --- Comment #10 from Sam James --- (In

[Bug other/55358] Valgrind errors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55358 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/55430] [4.8 Regression] LRA miscompilation of ree.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55430 Bug 55430 depends on bug 55358, which changed state. Bug 55358 Summary: Valgrind errors https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55358 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/108796] Can't intermix C2x and GNU style attributes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108796 Bruno Haible changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bruno at clisp dot org --- Comment #12 f

[Bug other/116246] obstack could use ASAN and Valgrind annotations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116246 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/116247] [15 regression] RISC-V: shared_ptr_atomic.h: uintptr_t not declared in scope since r15-2655-g3a817a4a5a6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116247 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[15] RISC-V:|[15 regression] RISC-V: |

[Bug libstdc++/116247] New: [15] RISC-V: shared_ptr_atomic.h: uintptr_t not declared in scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116247 Bug ID: 116247 Summary: [15] RISC-V: shared_ptr_atomic.h: uintptr_t not declared in scope Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug other/116246] obstack could use ASAN and Valgrind annotations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116246 --- Comment #1 from Sam James --- We should check if we can use the (extended) malloc attributes as well. I imagine there's a few missing parts for that in libiberty. gnulib does not have these for its obstack but it does for e.g. bitset_obstac

[Bug other/116246] New: obstack could use ASAN and Valgrind annotations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116246 Bug ID: 116246 Summary: obstack could use ASAN and Valgrind annotations Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug testsuite/116148] c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c fails on big-endian (finally tested starting with r15-2403-g136f364e26d9ad)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116148 --- Comment #8 from Sam James --- I don't have my machine running atm (need to get new ram), could you check which condition first fails?

[Bug tree-optimization/108379] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive on conditional use

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108379 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug libstdc++/116210] 17_intro/names.cc test fails with >=glibc-2.35 and _FORTIFY_SOURCE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116210 --- Comment #7 from Sam James --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #2) > This probably only shows up with _FORTIFY_SOURCE. We should have this test run twice, maybe thrice if we ever sort out the _GNU_SOURCE problem.

[Bug target/42910] invalid memcpy() in trivial tail-call with large struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42910 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug target/116043] [15 regression] TLS relocation issue when building glibc with -O3 -mavx512bf16 by r15-1619

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116043 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/116163] RFE: add a linting tool for DejaGnu tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116163 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug testsuite/116163] RFE: add a linting tool for DejaGnu tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116163 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug target/116152] RISC-V: Proposed deprecation of LP64E abi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116152 --- Comment #1 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick O'Neill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:51db1f307ba395ee322de5adadf56c316e82ae00 commit r15-2731-g51db1f307ba395ee322de5adadf56c316e82ae00 Author: Patrick O'Neill Date:

[Bug middle-end/116118] dump_properties has not been updated for many new PROP_*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116118 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-08-05 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/116245] [15 regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr116037.c fails on s390x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #1) > oh, it only fails for -m31 (s390)... __int128 should not be supported there ...

[Bug target/116245] [15 regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr116037.c fails on s390x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245 --- Comment #1 from Sam James --- oh, it only fails for -m31 (s390)...

[Bug target/116245] New: [15 regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr116037.c fails on s390x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245 Bug ID: 116245 Summary: [15 regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr116037.c fails on s390x Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: testsuite-fail

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #59 from Kees Cook --- (In reply to Bill Wendling from comment #57) > (In reply to Kees Cook from comment #47) > > So, with the builtin being used within the allocator to set counter, now the > > old code pattern still works (as coun

[Bug rtl-optimization/116244] New: [15 Regression] reload ICE building libstdc++ for coldfire

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116244 Bug ID: 116244 Summary: [15 Regression] reload ICE building libstdc++ for coldfire Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code

[Bug libstdc++/116243] Add ASAN annotations to std::string and friends

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116243 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/116243] Add ASAN annotations to std::string and friends

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116243 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv

[Bug middle-end/116235] Add ASAN annotations to ggc like we do for Valgrind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116235 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug libstdc++/116243] New: Add ASAN annotations to std::string and friends

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116243 Bug ID: 116243 Summary: Add ASAN annotations to std::string and friends Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/116189] [14/15 Regression] compare debug failure at -O2 on sh since r14-8319-g86de9b66480b71

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116189 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma

[Bug fortran/116128] missed optimisation: fortran sum instrinsic performed in order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116128 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 --- Comment #2 from anlau

[Bug c++/101288] Invalid instantiated redeclaration considered valid by gcc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101288 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #58 from Alejandro Colomar --- (In reply to Kees Cook from comment #55) > I was expecting "s->n = 7", not " ...= m", and for > "__lengthof__(memberof(struct s, fam))" to be "== 7". It should be reporting > the array element count, no

[Bug target/116145] SVE constant pool loads not hoisted outside loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116145 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski --- > Since the SVE load doesn't support the full LO_SUM range, there is no hint > that the address refers to invariant memory. IA64 has a similar issue IIRC and the idea then was to use cselib more to find t

[Bug target/113652] [14/15 regression] Failed bootstrap on ppc unrecognized opcode: `lfiwzx' with -mcpu=7450

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113652 --- Comment #30 from Erhard F. --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #29) > csfore, erhard, could you test > https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/zpioop6il_igm...@cowardly-lion.the- > meissners.org/? The patches apply cleanly on Gentoos' g

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #57 from Bill Wendling --- (In reply to Kees Cook from comment #47) > Yes, the counter must be manually set until Linux minimum compiler versions > are raised to include counted_by support, but this is about making the > transition t

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #56 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/659478.html

[Bug tree-optimization/116166] risc-v (last) insn-emit-nn.c build takes hours

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166 --- Comment #13 from Andi Kleen --- Created attachment 58842 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58842&action=edit add a param to limit BBs for dominator pass Maybe something like this patch. It adds a check to disable the dom

[Bug testsuite/115140] [15 regression] libgomp.oacc-c++/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/acc_prof-kernels-1.c excess errors after r15-579-ga9251ab3c91c8c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115140 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug fortran/116221] -Wmaybe-uninitialized in symbol.cc's gfc_get_ha_symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116221 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug c++/94568] template specialization of equivalent nontype template argument involving member pointer considered distinct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94568 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #55 from Kees Cook --- (In reply to Alejandro Colomar from comment #49) > For reading the counted_by value, that is, for reading the number of > elements in the FAM, I'm implementing a __lengthof__ operator, which returns > the value

[Bug target/116242] New: [meta-bug] Tracker for zvl issues in RISC-V

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116242 Bug ID: 116242 Summary: [meta-bug] Tracker for zvl issues in RISC-V Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: targ

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #54 from Alejandro Colomar --- In a similar manner, I've made the following cases compile-time errors for __lengthof__ (still under development): extern int x[]; void f(int a[]) { size_t n; n = __lengthof__(a); n = __

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #53 from Alejandro Colomar --- (In reply to qinzhao from comment #52) > (In reply to Alejandro Colomar from comment #51) > > I would make it a compile-time error. Why would we want to allow a non-FAM > > there? (Unless the [[gnu::c

[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #52 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Alejandro Colomar from comment #51) > I would make it a compile-time error. Why would we want to allow a non-FAM > there? (Unless the [[gnu::counted_by()]] attribute makes sense e

[Bug tree-optimization/116241] [15 Regression] internal compiler error: in operator[], at vec.h:910

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116241 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-08-05 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug middle-end/116235] Add ASAN annotations to ggc like we do for Valgrind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116235 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-08-05 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug fortran/108889] [12/13/14 Regression] (Re)Allocate in assignment shows used uninitialized memory warning with -Wall if LHS is unallocated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108889 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/77504] [12/13/14 Regression] "is used uninitialized" with allocatable string and array constructors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77504 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/108889] [12/13/14 Regression] (Re)Allocate in assignment shows used uninitialized memory warning with -Wall if LHS is unallocated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108889 --- Comment #15 from Paul Thomas --- Fixed on 12-branch through to mainline. Thanks for the report. Paul

[Bug fortran/108889] [12/13/14 Regression] (Re)Allocate in assignment shows used uninitialized memory warning with -Wall if LHS is unallocated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108889 --- Comment #14 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0e945f6e8849ae4722ea7ac70d713f7b35d3fade commit r12-10657-g0e945f6e8849ae4722ea7ac70d713f7b35d3fade Author: Paul Thomas Da

[Bug fortran/108889] [12/13/14 Regression] (Re)Allocate in assignment shows used uninitialized memory warning with -Wall if LHS is unallocated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108889 --- Comment #13 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7195144e39e404ec712ca5401f2328c14d5020eb commit r13-8959-g7195144e39e404ec712ca5401f2328c14d5020eb Author: Paul Thomas Dat

[Bug fortran/108889] [12/13/14 Regression] (Re)Allocate in assignment shows used uninitialized memory warning with -Wall if LHS is unallocated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108889 --- Comment #12 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9906a9863d65386ee4045333eb26a2569783abb5 commit r14-10560-g9906a9863d65386ee4045333eb26a2569783abb5 Author: Paul Thomas Da

[Bug tree-optimization/116166] risc-v (last) insn-emit-nn.c build takes hours

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166 --- Comment #12 from Mark Wielaard --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #11) > You can add target-specific flags like this: > > $(INSNEMIT_SEQ_O): ALL_COMPILERFLAGS += -fno-tree-dominator-opts Thanks. With "$(GIMPLE_MATCH_PD_SEQ_O) $(I

[Bug tree-optimization/116241] [15 Regression] internal compiler error: in operator[], at vec.h:910

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116241 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||15.0 Target Milestone|--

[Bug tree-optimization/116241] New: [15 Regression] internal compiler error: in operator[], at vec.h:910

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116241 Bug ID: 116241 Summary: [15 Regression] internal compiler error: in operator[], at vec.h:910 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-va

[Bug c++/115987] False "possibly dangling reference" false positive when having an extra template parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115987 --- Comment #23 from GCC Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:34d947134403e7482ba4f153d8faabee0bc4933e commit r15-2727-g34d947134403e7482ba4f153d8faabee0bc4933e Author: Marek Polacek Date: W

[Bug target/116033] [14 only] RISC-V: -march=rv64gv_xtheadmemidx generates illegal vse8.v insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116033 --- Comment #5 from Patrick O'Neill --- Thanks for the quick fix!

[Bug testsuite/116148] c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c fails on big-endian (finally tested starting with r15-2403-g136f364e26d9ad)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116148 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/116240] New: RISC-V: ICE during RTL pass: combine with -fwrapv -march=rv64imv_xtheadcondmov_xventanacondops at -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116240 Bug ID: 116240 Summary: RISC-V: ICE during RTL pass: combine with -fwrapv -march=rv64imv_xtheadcondmov_xventanacondops at -O2 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIR

[Bug c++/116239] Different function redeclaration in function scope is wrongly accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116239 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/116219] [14/15 regression] -O3 -march=znver3 -gno-statement-frontiers -fcompare-debug failure when building botan-3.2.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/116236] [LRA] [M68K] ICE insn does not satisfy its constraints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236 --- Comment #6 from Michael Matz --- This works for me for the full testcase. a) accept pseudos during lra_in_progress only when they're allocated to the right hardreg b) but _only_ do (a) if the pseudo is not one of those generated _during_

[Bug c++/116223] [14/15 Regression] GCC rejects program involving integral conversion in non-type template parameter with auto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116223 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- We're effectively rejecting this under https://eel.is/c++draft/temp#deduct.type-20 If P has a form that contains , and if the type of i differs from the type of the corresponding template parameter of the t

[Bug analyzer/116228] [14/15 regression] -fanalyzer ICE in get_or_create_null_ptr, at analyzer/region-model-manager.cc:271

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116228 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-08-05 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug target/113939] Switch m68k to LRA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113939 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

  1   2   >