https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120228
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9506c28a557bcea34af13478f05d2d9fc3727072
commit r16-535-g9506c28a557bcea34af13478f05d2d9fc3727072
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Mon May 12 10:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108678
Radek Barton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||radek.barton at microsoft dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119377
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2025-03-21 00:00:00 |2025-5-12
--- Comment #10 from Iain Sando
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101852
Bug 101852 depends on bug 21231, which changed state.
Bug 21231 Summary: cmov and cstore standard names not documented.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21231
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85559
Bug 85559 depends on bug 21231, which changed state.
Bug 21231 Summary: cmov and cstore standard names not documented.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21231
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21231
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120223
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 61407
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61407&action=edit
probably related -freport-bug output, less reduced, with more flags; fails on
ior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120230
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-12
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120230
Bug ID: 120230
Summary: cmov_optab is not used for expansion
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: internal-improvement
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119003
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120229
Bug ID: 120229
Summary: [GCOV] AutoFDO cannot distinguish privatized functions
of different LTO partitions
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120228
Bug ID: 120228
Summary: Need to call df_insn_rescan after emit_insn
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120227
Bug ID: 120227
Summary: Incorrect debug info generation with options
-gcodeview -g
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120226
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> It could be
> https://gcc.gnu.org/cgit/gcc/commit/
> ?id=8335fd561fa823d32556512c09dfce44463e8eaa
So this jump back to before the
https://gcc.gnu.org/cgit/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120226
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
It could be
https://gcc.gnu.org/cgit/gcc/commit/?id=8335fd561fa823d32556512c09dfce44463e8eaa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120226
Bug ID: 120226
Summary: 8% regression of exchange2 with -O2 between
g:d0571638a6bad932 and g:9b13bea07706a7ca
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120224
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am 99% sure this was exposed by r14-6343-g0c018a74eb1aff .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120224
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
/* If we ran into a problem, make sure we complained. */
gcc_assert (seen_error ());
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120224
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-11
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120224
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in |[14/15/16 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120225
Bug ID: 120225
Summary: [F2023] Use mpfr_sinu etc. with mpfr 4.2.0+ for
decimal trigonometric functions
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120224
Bug ID: 120224
Summary: ICE in cp_parser_expression_statement with ambiguous
std::void_t overload resolution since 14.1 until trunk
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120051
--- Comment #21 from Christoph Reiter ---
> Try removing the -g switch from the command line (leaving -gcodeview) -
the combination of the -gcodeview -g switches (and in that order!) leads
to such errors. Well, only those who know what SHOULD h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282
--- Comment #18 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
> this problem is first present in the output of the pass
> "x.c.100t.fixup_cfg3.c"
Sorry, there are non-tree dumps as well. the first wrong dump is (of course)
the "inline" ipa dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #5 from Christophe Jaillet
---
Created attachment 61406
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61406&action=edit
generated asm file
The generated output.
The first fuction has a shrq. A shift is expected here.
The 2n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #4 from Christophe Jaillet
---
The naming I've used is really bad.
function_ok() is where the code looks *NOT* optimal and function_ko() where the
generated code looks better...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #3 from Christophe Jaillet
---
Created attachment 61405
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61405&action=edit
Reduced reproducer
With the attached file, I manage to reproduce the behavior.
The #define are the one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Keywords|
on algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 16.0.0 20250511 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40883
Bug 40883 depends on bug 90179, which changed state.
Bug 90179 Summary: typo in diagnostic for unrecognized control register
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90179
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90179
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119377
--- Comment #9 from Robert Dubner ---
Whether or not this will fix any other problems, I don't know. I do know that
valgrind was reporting uninitialized data, and now it is not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120206
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> One reason is that this is one of the few users of rhs_to_tree, aka we go
> back to GENERIC and its folding.
Yes I noticed that when I disabled forward_propaga
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119377
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robert Dubner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7d24f9cc55d5cf0a70a984d4e63e8a307710d9e
commit r16-528-gd7d24f9cc55d5cf0a70a984d4e63e8a307710d9e
Author: Robert Dubner
Date: Su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120208
Kael Franco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61399|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|FAIL: |[16 Regression] FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119377
--- Comment #7 from Robert Dubner ---
Never mind. I am seeing the valgrind error, thank you very much.
Let me see if I can get rid of it, and we'll move on from there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119377
--- Comment #6 from Robert Dubner ---
Declarative and Exception processing have been changed significantly in recent
days. Is the declarative_1 problem still showing up?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282
--- Comment #17 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Actually my test file in comment 16 is invalid. This means the failure happens
before the optimized pass and it needs the DCE-disabled GCC I described in
comment 15 to reproduce the faulty optimized d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119377
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jklowden at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.5
Summary|Segmentation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120222
Bug ID: 120222
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-28.c
scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282
--- Comment #16 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Created attachment 61401
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61401&action=edit
innocent gimple code failing with trunk with -O3 -fno-dce -fno-tree-dce
-fno-dse -fno-tree-dse or with -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120098
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Can you give a preprocessed testcase please?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
Bug ID: 120221
Summary: Missed optimization related to switch handling
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120211
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:44cd55a1df897e3160cffeb10f96171bafc06400
commit r15-9655-g44cd55a1df897e3160cffeb10f96171bafc06400
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120211
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120211
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:833db92d69cf371af3ade32e2a2b154c22e7ef15
commit r16-526-g833db92d69cf371af3ade32e2a2b154c22e7ef15
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120051
--- Comment #20 from Iouri Kharon ---
(In reply to Christoph Reiter from comment #19)
> After doing some more testing, the 32bit build now fails with these patches:
>
> [1/301] Compiling C++ object
> operations/external/exr-save.dll.p/exr-save.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120219
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120218
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120215
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120211
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120210
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||24639
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120206
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
One reason is that this is one of the few users of rhs_to_tree, aka we go back
to GENERIC and its folding.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120200
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, diagnostic
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120198
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119519
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.2.1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aef1a618e200158e5f83331ae618492d1ef3573d
commit r14-11759-gaef1a618e200158e5f83331ae618492d1ef3573d
Author: Dimitar Dimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0902cdb6069c12a027a1d0cfd1b7a0daa1a21b5c
commit r14-11758-g0902cdb6069c12a027a1d0cfd1b7a0daa1a21b5c
Author: Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120209
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Paul Cercueil from comment #2)
>
> Well, but I'm doing
>
> if (x < -1.0f)
> x2 += -1.0f;
>
> So that's only one constant, -1.0.
Yes, that's what you wrote in the code. But the "+ -1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120220
Bug ID: 120220
Summary: Lack of testing for -fc-prototypes and
-fc-prototypes-external
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119919
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120219
Bug ID: 120219
Summary: [16 Regression] ~11% slowdown of 548.exchange2_r on
AMD Zen
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120209
--- Comment #2 from Paul Cercueil ---
> The test case is somewhat bogus. Changing the "-1.0f" to "1.0f" will
> generate the "fldi1" instruction for the comparison as well.
Yes, I got confused while writing the bug report. The problem is loadin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120218
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282
--- Comment #15 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
There's indeed a miscompilation and I've confirmed it's still present in the
current trunk. With -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce the issue was visible
until r12-248 which made the issue latent. So
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120218
Bug ID: 120218
Summary: [16 Regression] 8% slowdown of 507.cactuBSSN_r on
Intel
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120209
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120089
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120146
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.1.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120143
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120089
--- Comment #28 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4017b37de2b39f4bbd7bb9524101558002a258e8
commit r15-9652-g4017b37de2b39f4bbd7bb9524101558002a258e8
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120043
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120146
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:47e830211d39b5efb14144bbdaf8f2d83ba8375e
commit r15-9654-g47e830211d39b5efb14144bbdaf8f2d83ba8375e
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120143
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:94d10c0ef2dca46f1c043c81bcda67ee7e2efc67
commit r15-9653-g94d10c0ef2dca46f1c043c81bcda67ee7e2efc67
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120043
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:856c493db1d5e2fa9377f4a0c438afbcaf6c7e01
commit r15-9651-g856c493db1d5e2fa9377f4a0c438afbcaf6c7e01
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120211
Yunbo Ni changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yunboni at smail dot nju.edu.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119919
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pheeck at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117778
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Safe enough to backport?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116379
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
This looks safe enough to backport?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116855
--- Comment #14 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> Too late for backporting to 14.3 IMO, also not sure how important it is - we
> did not have an actual case where this caused problems AFAIK. early-break
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119303
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Looks easy to backport?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118775
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #6)
> Fixed on trunk so far. I think I'll backport at least to 14.
So?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118590
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Looks trivial enough to backport?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118245
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Nathaniel Shead from comment #10)
> This is fixed for GCC 15. Unfortunately this patch isn't appropriate for
> backporting as it will cause ABI changes without also backporting the fix
> for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117811
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener ---
This looks good to backport?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117887
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
r15-3530-gdfb63765e994be is listed as dependent, but is it? Can this be
backported?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117501
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Safe enough to backport?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115645
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
This looks safe enough to backport?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
This looks safe enough for backporting?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116855
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Too late for backporting to 14.3 IMO, also not sure how important it is - we
did not have an actual case where this caused problems AFAIK. early-break
vectorization is quite restricted on the 14 branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117498
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc589c2a4be9bf7242d7f17d44629fb87309a4a9
commit r14-11757-gcc589c2a4be9bf7242d7f17d44629fb87309a4a9
Author: Jakub Jeline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117498
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02e9aa56a469ea6c3021a4d3052cb229cdda4e04
commit r13-9648-g02e9aa56a469ea6c3021a4d3052cb229cdda4e04
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117498
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
