https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63311
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.5|13.2
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120787
--- Comment #4 from Simon Sobisch ---
> If CHANGED is not important, we can emit a not-implemented warning and always
> print, changed or not.
This is what GnuCOBOL does, leading to:
* existing code compiles
* code does run, it "just" creates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121029
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121027
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121014
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121014
>
> Robin Dapp changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121026
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121032
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120870
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 61837
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61837&action=edit
A patch
Please try this. No idea why it works for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121032
Bug ID: 121032
Summary: ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu: 'verify_gimple' failed during
GIMPLE pass: lower with vector_size and amp
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121031
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119117
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ats-gccbugs at offog dot org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121031
Bug ID: 121031
Summary: if condition misparsed as declaration in Objective C
method
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117468
--- Comment #3 from Matt Parks ---
Created attachment 61835
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61835&action=edit
Patch (also e-mailed to gcc-patches)
Adding patch as text attachment because apparently my e-mail to gcc-patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117366
--- Comment #7 from Matt Parks ---
Created attachment 61834
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61834&action=edit
Patch (also e-mailed to gcc-patches)
Adding as text attachment because apparently my gcc-patches e-mail was not
f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
--- Comment #19 from Alexandre Oliva ---
--with-specs are quite useful to change compiler defaults, but I don't suppose
you'll want to change them. I'd have added the options to BOOT_CFLAGS if that
was as easy as --with-specs for a test build ;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
--- Comment #18 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #17)
> FWIW, with the candidate fix, and
> --with-specs='%{!mno-long-calls:-mlong-calls}
> %{!fno-function-sections:-ffunction-sections}'
TIL you can do that.
> on to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430
--- Comment #17 from Alexandre Oliva ---
FWIW, with the candidate fix, and --with-specs='%{!mno-long-calls:-mlong-calls}
%{!fno-function-sections:-ffunction-sections}' on top of the earlier configure
and make flags, I've completed a profiledboot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121030
Bug ID: 121030
Summary: #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored
"-Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value" is ineffective
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121029
Bug ID: 121029
Summary: GCC does not vectorize conditional min/max reduction
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120998
James K. Lowden changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jklowden at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120554
James K. Lowden changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120787
--- Comment #3 from James K. Lowden ---
This takes me back. According to the MF documentation, EXHIBIT appeared around
the time of Comet Kohoutek.
"These features are extensions to ANS X3.23-1974 that appear in IBM OS/VS
COBOL."
Exciting ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120779
James K. Lowden changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120621
--- Comment #13 from James K. Lowden ---
Please apply https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-June/687385.html,
and thank you for the work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117785
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Hana Dusíková from comment #1)
> It's not part of the wording as CWG told me to take it out. But it's very
> useful when an exception is not caught to call it's `.what()` and print
> resulting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338
Bug 110338 depends on bug 117785, which changed state.
Bug 117785 Summary: [C++26] P3068R5 - constexpr exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117785
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117785
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120767
James K. Lowden changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jklowden at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120628
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8f063b40e5b8f23cb89fee21afaa71deedbdf2aa
commit r16-2185-g8f063b40e5b8f23cb89fee21afaa71deedbdf2aa
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120569
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bcb51fe0e26bed7e2c44c4822ca6dec135ba61f3
commit r16-2184-gbcb51fe0e26bed7e2c44c4822ca6dec135ba61f3
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117785
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:baaee10123db6cf896283175b345d535b225defb
commit r16-2183-gbaaee10123db6cf896283175b345d535b225defb
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121000
--- Comment #13 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
fixed in gcc16.
should be backported to GCC15 as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121000
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Qing Zhao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1cf8d08a977f528c6e81601b7586ccf8bc8aa2a6
commit r16-2180-g1cf8d08a977f528c6e81601b7586ccf8bc8aa2a6
Author: Qing Zhao
Date: Wed Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120870
--- Comment #16 from Sam James ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #15)
> also failed to build. -fprofile-generate isn't needed.
Ugh. Not sure why I keep making mistakes on this one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121028
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121028
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.2
Summary|Some tests adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121028
Bug ID: 121028
Summary: Some tests added in r15-5785-gdfa78681851 fail with
-fstack-protector-strong
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121007
--- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Thanks!
If there is anything we (Power people) can do, please let us know!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121027
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121027
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.4
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121027
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121027
Bug ID: 121027
Summary: [14 Regression] ICE with BF16 and SVE at -O2
-msve-vector-bits=256
Product: gcc
Version: 14.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121007
--- Comment #13 from Vladimir Makarov ---
It seems problem is in reloading an address (process_address_1). I think the
existing code has enough address transformations (possible address reloads) but
it chooses the wrong one.
So we should modif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117007
--- Comment #17 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Hi!
So, why do we not generate xxspltib where it would help. Please send a patch?
Improvements will usually be to the xxspltib-generating code itself, not to
the legacy code that generates the old (c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120987
--- Comment #13 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 61833
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61833&action=edit
gdb.ltrans58.ltrans.135t.sra.gz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120987
--- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 61832
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61832&action=edit
gdb.ltrans58.ltrans.134t.bitintlower1.gz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120987
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
I build with -fdump-tree-all -fdump-ipa-all -fdump-rtl-all, resulting in a
rather large build:
...
$ du -hs build/
107Gbuild/
...
At gdb.ltrans58.ltrans.134t.bitintlower1, I have in parse_linespec:
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110093
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15/16 |[12/13/14 Regression][avr]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121000
--- Comment #11 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
I just sent out the patches to gcc-patches alias to fix this bug and also
reduce the # of arguments from 6 to 4.
I splited the changes into 2 separ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120986
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
I also get an unrecognisable insn ICE when compiling a variant of this testcase
where the FPMR has a compile-time unknown value:
$ cat t.c
#pragma GCC aarch64 "arm_sve.h"
svfloat16_t foo(svfloat16_t a, svmflo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121026
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #0)
> Fourthly, I don't think this ranges::uninitialized_move optimization is
> valid:
>
> auto [__in, __out]
> = ranges::copy_n(std::make_m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121026
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We could also take the opportunity to look into whether any of those
optimizations still buy us much performance. Is the compiler smart enough to
turn the default implementation (in terms of a loop) into m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119754
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10)
> However, ranges::uninitialized_value_construct has the same bug as
> std::uninitialized_value_construct and wasn't fixed by my recent commit (but
> I do ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121026
Bug ID: 121026
Summary: ranges::uninitialized_xxx algos perform invalid
optimizations
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86019
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mmyangfl at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121022
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121022
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121025
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.2
Summary|[7.0 Regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120955
--- Comment #9 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
So when the issue goes away wihout LTO, then you can't drop -flto obviously.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120765
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by James K. Lowden :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3f59a1cac717f8af84e884e9ec0f6ef14e102e6e
commit r16-2177-g3f59a1cac717f8af84e884e9ec0f6ef14e102e6e
Author: James K. Lowden
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120987
--- Comment #10 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> and then rethrown:
> ...
> if (file_exception.reason < 0)
> throw_exception (std::move (file_exception));
> ...
>
> The gdb_exception class contain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109285
Jan Dubiec changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121014
Robin Dapp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118734
Robin Dapp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118734
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dcba959fb30dc250eeb6fdd05aa878e5f1fc8c2d
commit r16-2174-gdcba959fb30dc250eeb6fdd05aa878e5f1fc8c2d
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Thu Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121014
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5aa21765236730c1772c19454cbb71365b84d583
commit r16-2175-g5aa21765236730c1772c19454cbb71365b84d583
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Wed Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120977
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Christop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116363
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116363
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e6f2daff77ee1f709105cb9f8e3e92f04c179431
commit r16-2173-ge6f2daff77ee1f709105cb9f8e3e92f04c179431
Author: Jan Dubiec
Date: Thu Jul 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121024
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-07-10
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121025
Bug ID: 121025
Summary: [7.0 Regression] macOS ld sysroot delegation breaks
libtool
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119876
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Aha, I was looking into scalar-to-vector improvements promoting scalar integer
+ 1 to vector on AMD CPUs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120986
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121012
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119876
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
I think I made the testcase while working on something else that I forgot,
sorry :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121008
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120243
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #10)
> that's fine too - my plan is to back port the stack of changes made on trunk
> rather than doing piecemeal - to try and avoid churn..
Yeah, backporting this pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119754
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119754
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jiang An from comment #6)
> > It seems that algorithms in std properly destroy trivially destructible
> > objects, but those in std::ranges don'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121024
Bug ID: 121024
Summary: ranges::destroy and ranges::destroy_n do not end
lifetime of trivial types
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||110367
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120939
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119754
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jiang An from comment #6)
> It seems that algorithms in std properly destroy trivially destructible
> objects, but those in std::ranges don't.
Isn't this a completely separate bug?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121023
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=106390
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Related: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-lifetime-annotations-for-c/61377
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119754
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #0)
> #include
> #include
>
> consteval bool f(int n)
> {
> int* p = std::allocator().allocate(n);
> std::uninitialized_value_construct(p, p+n);
> std::al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121020
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Pengfei Li from comment #7)
> Hi Sam, sorry about the issue. I just followed your build steps (make
> command revised) but didn't reproduce it. I also tried valgrind but it
> exited with no error. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120870
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #10)
> Created attachment 61824 [details]
> ceval.i.xz
>
> ceval.o is broken.
>
> ```
> $ gcc -c -fno-strict-overflow -O2 -mavx -mtune=znver2 -std=c11
> -fvisibility=hidden -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121023
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121023
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120780
Siddhesh Poyarekar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120780
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Siddhesh Poyarekar
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:63c4d4f59a92007c6d0f35e4d7aa1a97691306db
commit r15-9948-g63c4d4f59a92007c6d0f35e4d7aa1a97691306db
Author: Siddhesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121023
Bug ID: 121023
Summary: musttail vs. IPA optimizations on the caller
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120999
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7bd72ce71df5266e7a7039da318e49862389a72
commit r16-2165-gb7bd72ce71df5266e7a7039da318e49862389a72
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121022
--- Comment #1 from Yangfl ---
The motivation:
#include
#include
bool refcnt_release(atomic_int *refcnt) {
int orig = atomic_fetch_sub_explicit(refcnt, 1, memory_order_release);
if (orig > 1) {
return false;
}
// atomic_thread_fe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121020
--- Comment #7 from Pengfei Li ---
Hi Sam, sorry about the issue. I just followed your build steps (make command
revised) but didn't reproduce it. I also tried valgrind but it exited with no
error. I was trying on an Intel CPU with avx512. Could
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114070
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.5.0
Target Milestone|12.5
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
