https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119647
--- Comment #2 from Sergey Fedorov ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Dup.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 93469 ***
What about `timespec_get` part though?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119647
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sergey Fedorov from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > Dup.
> >
> > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 93469 ***
>
> What about `timespec_get` part t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118891
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119647
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93469
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vital.had at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105584
--- Comment #8 from Sergey Fedorov ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #7)
> Nor could they really be related if it's in libstdc++. Needs to be filed
> separately.
Done: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119647
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119647
Bug ID: 119647
Summary: cstdlib: error: 'aligned_alloc' has not been declared
in '::'; ctime: error: 'timespec_get' has not been
declared in '::'
Product: gcc
Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105584
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
Nor could they really be related if it's in libstdc++. Needs to be filed
separately.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105584
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
I'm not sure that's related, at least the quoted lines don't mention
_LIBCPP_USING_IF_EXISTS.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105584
--- Comment #5 from Sergey Fedorov ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #0)
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/
> 14e83ada16b3944a4431617ed4ce7088f7f7cd9a/libcxx/include/__config#L772
>
> #if __has_attribute(using_if_exists)
> # defi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78874
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78874
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:13c9b353895fef8d5b1593b7527df41487c512d1
commit r15-9232-g13c9b353895fef8d5b1593b7527df41487c512d1
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118626
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a91400c142899ea0aeb8b62577496cf24c68156
commit r15-9231-g7a91400c142899ea0aeb8b62577496cf24c68156
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118626
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:58c5055162b698dab6a493b1f90c18af1a34ac65
commit r15-9230-g58c5055162b698dab6a493b1f90c18af1a34ac65
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #13 from Sam James ---
That regtests fine on amd64, will test it with the usual troublemaker packages.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81831
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81831
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:027491d79b2749afb57aa5c8284ed69e6b1c44b5
commit r15-9228-g027491d79b2749afb57aa5c8284ed69e6b1c44b5
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #21 from Ken Jin ---
I sincerely apologize for my previous performance figures. The baseline was
worse due to a Clang-19 bug https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/106846.
So the numbers were inaccurate.
On Clang-20, on the pys
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119646
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>Was not able to reduce to something reasonable.
That is because coroutines requires some interesting class structures
sometimes.
le-libstdcxx-pch --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-libgomp
--disable-libquadmath --disable-libvtv CFLAGS='-O1 -g0' CXXFLAGS='-O1 -g0'
LDFLAGS='-O1 -g0'
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 15.0.1 20250405 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119643
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ebotcazou at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119645
Bug ID: 119645
Summary: GCN, nvptx: libstdc++ 'checking for atomic builtins
[...]... no'
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118442
--- Comment #10 from Ken Jin ---
Wow, I tried a patched version of CPython and it now builds with musttail and
PGO. Massive thanks to all the GCC contributors that worked towards this! I'm
always in awe at how complex software like GCC work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118249
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdiez-2006 at rd10 dot de
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117700
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
swapped the 2 and 4 in the duplicated bug # :).
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 118249 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117700
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 117700, which changed state.
Bug 117700 Summary: spurious error "non-constant condition" when inside a class
member
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117700
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118429
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdiez-2006 at rd10 dot de
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117700
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116884
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias
Component|middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118249
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Resol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 118249, which changed state.
Bug 118249 Summary: Misdiagnosing use of 'this' while doing class member access
in constant evaluation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118249
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118249
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f60570b26446781c0205981804f6aa4ff1708b12
commit r15-9226-gf60570b26446781c0205981804f6aa4ff1708b12
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104965
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #11 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104965
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.4.0, 14.2.0
--- Comment #10 from And
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104541
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Looks to be fixed in GCC 12 and 11.4.0.
Maybe due to PR 104637?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104541
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #5 from And
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97108
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
--- Comment #19 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #18)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #17)
> Thanks for the corrections to generate_reduce_op_wrapper in comment 16 and
> the test of the maximum wrapper n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119644
--- Comment #3 from Geoff Wozniak ---
> This should be an error while expanding into RTL and it is the backend
> responsibility for that.
Sorry. Wasn't exactly sure where to put it.
> So don't use -mgeneral-regs-only if you need to use FP at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119644
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119644
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This should be an error while expanding into RTL and it is the backend
responsibility for that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119644
Bug ID: 119644
Summary: __builtin_arm_set_fpscr ICE with -mgeneral-regs-only
on Arm targets
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119628
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to ak from comment #2)
> The existing attributes could just handle this case?
Caller needs to know what registers are saved by callee. But caller doesn't
know what ISAs are used by callee.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
--- Comment #18 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #17)
> Created attachment 61014 [details]
> Enhanced version of reduce_4.f90
>
> This fixes also a copy&paste of a subtest and tests the maximum symbol
> length of the wrappe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119211
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I've noticed a serious problem, there are tons of if (getenv (__func__))
do_some_debugging spots in the FE.
I think all those getenv calls should be changed to some inline function and
have some non-default
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119364
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61016|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102250
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112589
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112589
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3026daa8edcc0d04ba6facdab84c5854255e55c6
commit r15-9225-g3026daa8edcc0d04ba6facdab84c5854255e55c6
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119364
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61012|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119643
--- Comment #3 from Michał L. ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #1)
> Hasty generalization though, as this happens only for the replacement of
> Integer by Natural/Positive (...)
That's good news.
Excuse the generalization - I found t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119628
--- Comment #2 from ak at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The existing attributes could just handle this case?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119643
--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou ---
Minimal kluge:
diff --git a/gcc/ada/sem_ch8.adb b/gcc/ada/sem_ch8.adb
index d4ab44fee92..0a9ef419db7 100644
--- a/gcc/ada/sem_ch8.adb
+++ b/gcc/ada/sem_ch8.adb
@@ -9314,11 +9314,12 @@ package body Sem_Ch8 i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119643
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|Subprogram paramet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119364
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Klose ---
goes further, until:
../../src/gcc/cobol/lexio.cc: In function 'replacing_pair_t
parse_replacing_pair(const char*, const char*)':
../../src/gcc/cobol/lexio.cc:725:33: error: call of overloaded 'span_t(long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119643
Bug ID: 119643
Summary: Subprogram parameter subtypes in
renaming-as-declaration are not ignored
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119364
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
checked with 20250405, that this fails with an i686 -> amd64 cross compiler:
[...]
In file included from ../../src/gcc/cobol/cdf.y:37:
../../src/gcc/cobol/../../libgcobol/common-defs.h:185:23: er
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
--- Comment #17 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61014
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61014&action=edit
Enhanced version of reduce_4.f90
This fixes also a copy&paste of a subtest and tests the maximum s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
--- Comment #16 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61013
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61013&action=edit
Minor fixes to the wrapper
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
--- Comment #15 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #14)
> Created attachment 61006 [details]
> Fix for this PR
>
> I believe that this fixes most, if not all, of the problems with the reduce
> intrinsic. I w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119364
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 61012
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61012&action=edit
gcc15-pr119364.patch
Maybe these hunks from the PR119595 patch could be enough, but untested.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61007|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119642
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119642
Bug ID: 119642
Summary: [15 regression] diagnostic push has no effect because
of unmatched pop in bits/formatfwd.h
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 61010
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61010&action=edit
gcc15-pr119614-2.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118891
--- Comment #21 from marcus at mc dot pp.se ---
For completeness, I tried building gcc 14.2.1 using
BOOT_CFLAGS="-O2 -fno-tree-vectorize"
and the build completed, successfully comparing stages 2 and 3
as equal (although I wouldn't trust the resul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100038
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
Testcase submitted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/680233.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And further
struct S {} b;
char *foo ();
int e, g;
void bar ();
void corge (S);
[[gnu::noinline]] char *
baz ()
{
bar ();
return 0;
}
const char *
qux ()
{
if (e)
{
S a = b;
corge (a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119612
--- Comment #12 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
PATCH: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/680232.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Slightly further simplified:
struct S {} a;
char *foo ();
int e, g;
void bar (int);
void freddy (S);
struct U {
void baz ();
template
void
baz (int)
{
static const char *(*f) () { qux };
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61009
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61009&action=edit
Slightly cleaned up
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119612
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61004|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
Sorry, not very nice, but this fails with -O2 and works with -O1:
```
struct {
} b;
struct d {
d(int);
};
typedef const char *(*c)(int *, const char *, int *, d, const int *,
unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I see.
[local count: 138047908]:
_231 = MEM[(short unsigned int *)table_49(D)];
google::protobuf::internal::TcParser::Error.constprop.isra (msg_55(D), _231,
hasbits_67(D)); [must tail call]
goto ; [
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117063
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
wait, let me check again
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108499
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Fixed b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117063
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
>
> As noted, gcc-15 still warns at -O3
I wonder how you were still hitting it at -O3, maybe an old build?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117063
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|15.0|
Summary|[14/15 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #60964|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119540
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86913
--- Comment #1 from Yavor Doganov ---
I cannot reproduce with GCC master, 14.2.0 and 12.2.0 so I conclude that this
bug has been fixed, perhaps as a side effect of fixing another issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119612
--- Comment #10 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
... or actually, it is wrong in a subtle way ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119117
--- Comment #6 from Yavor Doganov ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> >This got broken by the C2y if declarations implementation (PR c/117019,
> >commit 440be01).
>
> No it was broken before that; just now exposed by it because i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
--- Comment #14 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 61006
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61006&action=edit
Fix for this PR
I believe that this fixes most, if not all, of the problems with the reduce
intrinsic. I will b
86 matches
Mail list logo
