[Bug c/120303] [15/16 Regression] ICE , in groktypename at gcc/c/c-decl.cc:5442 with _Generic after an error since r15-1190-g0cf68222d2df3a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120303 uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uecker at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #14 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:54da199f28da07166a44eae7d53acb9e3abe1306 commit r16-1399-g54da199f28da07166a44eae7d53acb9e3abe1306 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #15 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2e4688a7202d73baeb4de18ca4591e6b0985f4a4 commit r16-1400-g2e4688a7202d73baeb4de18ca4591e6b0985f4a4 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #13 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8154fc95f097a146f9c80edcaafb2baff73065b5 commit r16-1398-g8154fc95f097a146f9c80edcaafb2baff73065b5 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date

[Bug c++/99625] GCC does not detect narrowing in aggregate initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99625 --- Comment #6 from Giuseppe D'Angelo --- Related to this: https://github.com/cplusplus/CWG/issues/686

[Bug target/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

--- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-June/685880.html

[Bug cobol/119211] [15/16 Regression] Cobol GCC 15 release checklist

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119211 Bug 119211 depends on bug 119217, which changed state. Bug 119217 Summary: cobol: build broken on non-linux by unguarded use of Linux-specific facilities. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119217 What|Removed

[Bug target/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 --- Comment #7 from bug-reports.delphin at laposte dot net --- But compilation and installation OK for GCC v. 14.3.0.

[Bug target/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 --- Comment #8 from bug-reports.delphin at laposte dot net --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > What version of texinfo you have installed? > > Are you building from the tar balls or from git tag? > > > If from git tag, then `Texi

[Bug target/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 --- Comment #6 from bug-reports.delphin at laposte dot net --- But compilation and installation OK for GCC v. 14.3.0.

Re: GCC 32bit ARM compiler integer division bugs -O2 or -O3

On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 4:16 PM Jeff Danae via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > gcc version for reproducer bug > == > I tried this on the most recent gcc 32bit compiler version at godbolt.org, > and it is reporoducing the same assembly language for this benchmark as the >

GCC 32bit ARM compiler integer division bugs -O2 or -O3

gcc version for reproducer bug == I tried this on the most recent gcc 32bit compiler version at godbolt.org, and it is reporoducing the same assembly language for this benchmark as the gcc version I am using, Raspbian 8.3.0-6+rpi1. The optional performance enhancement I

[Bug c++/120534] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] internal compiler error: in adjust_temp_type, at cp/constexpr.cc:1789 since gcc 5.1

error: in |[12/13/14/15/16 Regression] |adjust_temp_type, at|internal compiler error: in |cp/constexpr.cc:1789 since |adjust_temp_type, at |gcc 5.1 |cp/constexpr.cc:1789 since

[Bug c++/120536] internal compiler error: in build_over_call, at cp/call.cc:10918 since gcc 5.5

||a/show_bug.cgi?id=38087 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Related to PR 38087 where GCC incorrectly accepts the other Derived2 and Derived case.

[Bug c++/120536] internal compiler error: in build_over_call, at cp/call.cc:10918 since gcc 5.5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120536 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-06-09 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #22 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cdfa5fe03512f7ac5a293480f634df68fc973060 commit r16-1298-gcdfa5fe03512f7ac5a293480f634df68fc973060 Author: liuhongt Date: Tue

[Bug rtl-optimization/118946] Missed optimization: GCC reserves stack space for optimized-out variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118946 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 61602 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61602&action=edit Patch under testing

[Bug rtl-optimization/118946] Missed optimization: GCC reserves stack space for optimized-out variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118946 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug rtl-optimization/118946] Missed optimization: GCC reserves stack space for optimized-out variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118946 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-06-09 Status|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/113754] GCC complains when using a type that depends on lambda

--- Comment #3 from Stas Sergeev --- I have the same problem, but without using decltype: https://godbolt.org/z/fxa95eKvh It seems to happen on gcc-14, but probably not on 15. Is this a different problem?

[Bug c/120570] -pedantic option may not direct GCC to print a warning message if __attribute__ feature is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120570 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Pavel M from comment #2) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > Since __ is the implementation space, we don't error out on purpose. > Then why does "__int128 x;" lead to "warning: IS

[Bug c/120570] -pedantic option may not direct GCC to print a warning message if __attribute__ feature is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120570 --- Comment #2 from Pavel M --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Since __ is the implementation space, we don't error out on purpose. Then why does "__int128 x;" lead to "warning: ISO C does not support '__int128' types [-Wpedantic]

[Bug c/120570] -pedantic option may not direct GCC to print a warning message if __attribute__ feature is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120570 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/120570] New: -pedantic option may not direct GCC to print a warning message if __attribute__ feature is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120570 Bug ID: 120570 Summary: -pedantic option may not direct GCC to print a warning message if __attribute__ feature is used Product: gcc Version: 14.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 61594 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61594&action=edit gcc16-pr120434-3.patch Part 3/3.

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #61587|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/108415] ICE in emit_library_call_value_1 at gcc/calls.cc:4181

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108415 --- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool --- What is the current state here? We should simply not allow -mmodulo at all if we do not generate such insns (we do not have a -mcpu= that allows those). We do not want multiple ways to do thing, certa

[Bug c/114869] [13/14 Regression] GCC says nullptr_t is a C built in but it should be in

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug middle-end/117236] [13/14/15/16 regression] -Wnull-dereference false positive in GNU tar (regression from GCC 12) since r13-3596-ge7310e24b1c0ca

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug target/115880] [13/14/15/16 regression] GCC 14+ fails to parse CoreFoundation header

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug libstdc++/114865] [13/14/15/16 Regression] std::atomic::compare_exchange_strong seems to hang under GCC 13 for C++11

Jelinek --- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug middle-end/117271] [13/14/15/16 regression] GCC trunk emits larger code at -Os than 12.4.0 since r14-3084-gaadc5c07feb0ab

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug target/113641] [13/14/15/16 regression] 510.parest_r with PGO at O2 slower than GCC 12 (7% on Zen 3&2, 4% on CascadeLake) since r13-4272-g8caf155a3d6e23

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug analyzer/111305] [13/14/15/16 Regression] GCC Static Analyzer -Wanalyzer-out-of-bounds false postive

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug middle-end/109856] [13 regression] -Wnull-dereference false positive in Emacs itree.c (regression from GCC 12) since r13-3596-ge7310e24b1c0ca

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug c++/109753] [13/14 Regression] pragma GCC target causes std::vector not to compile (always_inline on constructor)

Jelinek --- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug target/108415] ICE in emit_library_call_value_1 at gcc/calls.cc:4181

--- GCC 13.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.5.

[Bug tree-optimization/120231] GCC fails to notice that (double)u64 is non-negative

at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Should be implemented now.

[Bug tree-optimization/120231] GCC fails to notice that (double)u64 is non-negative

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120231 --- Comment #12 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b6b238ddcb119bb51555ead9be0fa7b06b8a6be7 commit r16-1191-gb6b238ddcb119bb51555ead9be0fa7b06b8a6be7 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date

[Bug bootstrap/120556] GCC trunk 2a8af97e3528f fail to build on Debian/Trixie/x86-64

|RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- It bootstraps fine for me with this configuration: ~/src/gcc/gcc/configure --disable-multilib --with-gcc-major-version-only --program-suffix=-trunk --enable-cet --enable-checking=release --enable-host-shared --enable-languages=c

[Bug c++/102012] GCC accepts any non-bool atomic constraint type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102012 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|NEW

[Bug bootstrap/120556] GCC trunk 2a8af97e3528f fail to build on Debian/Trixie/x86-64

|WAITING Last reconfirmed||2025-06-05 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Your build fails with: In file included from /usr/src/Lang/gcc/gcc/jit/jit-playback.h:31, from /usr/src/Lang/gcc/gcc/jit/dummy-frontend.cc:24: /usr/src/Lang

[Bug bootstrap/120556] GCC trunk 2a8af97e3528f fail to build on Debian/Trixie/x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120556 --- Comment #1 from Basile Starynkevitch --- this bug is still observable with GCC trunk 1d90f8c7933eb

[Bug bootstrap/120556] New: GCC trunk 2a8af97e3528f fail to build on Debian/Trixie/x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120556 Bug ID: 120556 Summary: GCC trunk 2a8af97e3528f fail to build on Debian/Trixie/x86-64 Product: gcc Version: 16.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 61587 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61587&action=edit gcc16-pr120434-wip.patch So, I've started playing with expansion, so that it defers most of the IL changes unt

GCC trunk 2a8af97e3528f fail to build on Debian/Trixie/x86-64

Hello all, On Linux/Debian/Trixie/x86-64 /usr/src/Lang/gcc contains the GCC trunk source tree (commit 2a8af97e3528f) /usr/src/Lang/_GccTrunk is my build tree with configuration usr/src/Lang/gcc/configure --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=new --enable-libstdcxx

[Bug tree-optimization/92645] Hand written vector code is 450 times slower when compiled with GCC compared to Clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92645 Bug 92645 depends on bug 92658, which changed state. Bug 92658 Summary: x86 lacks vector extend / truncate https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/58889] GCC 4.9 fails to compile certain functions with intrinsics with __attribute__((target))

||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Hongtao Liu --- Fixed.

[Bug tree-optimization/120231] GCC fails to notice that (double)u64 is non-negative

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120231 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 61583 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61583&action=edit gcc16-pr120231.patch Untested patch for the float -> int and int -> float casts and their reverse ops. Unfor

[Bug target/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-06-04 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/120231] GCC fails to notice that (double)u64 is non-negative

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120231 --- Comment #10 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7960a3f966a0f87888de0fc588999d026918449 commit r16-1108-gb7960a3f966a0f87888de0fc588999d026918449 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date

[Bug regression/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 --- Comment #4 from bug-reports.delphin at laposte dot net --- Created attachment 61577 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61577&action=edit Display when make

[Bug regression/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 --- Comment #3 from bug-reports.delphin at laposte dot net --- Created attachment 61576 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61576&action=edit Display by ./configure

[Bug regression/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 --- Comment #2 from bug-reports.delphin at laposte dot net --- Created attachment 61575 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61575&action=edit config.log

[Bug regression/120544] GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 --- Comment #1 from bug-reports.delphin at laposte dot net --- Created attachment 61574 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61574&action=edit Screenshot

[Bug regression/120544] New: GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120544 Bug ID: 120544 Summary: GCC 15.1.0 and MacOS Monterey : compilation failed Product: gcc Version: 15.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/120536] New: internal compiler error: in build_over_call, at cp/call.cc:10918 since gcc 5.5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120536 Bug ID: 120536 Summary: internal compiler error: in build_over_call, at cp/call.cc:10918 since gcc 5.5 Product: gcc Version: 16.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug c++/120534] New: internal compiler error: in adjust_temp_type, at cp/constexpr.cc:1789 since gcc 5.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120534 Bug ID: 120534 Summary: internal compiler error: in adjust_temp_type, at cp/constexpr.cc:1789 since gcc 5.1 Product: gcc Version: 16.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #21 from Thiago Macieira --- (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #19) > Looks like it's fixed by r16-170-ga670ebde399548. > > Now it generates decent code as Thank you!

[Bug c/51579] GCC should be able report a warning for usage of parameters marked with __attribute__((unused))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51579 uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #20 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4ab36e8e56280d774d4b5ef07b0838020ba20a6a commit r16-1070-g4ab36e8e56280d774d4b5ef07b0838020ba20a6a Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue Jun 3

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

|--- |FIXED CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #19 from Hongtao Liu --- Looks like it's fixed by r16-170-ga670ebde399548. Now it generates decent code as "_Z8qustrchrPDsS_Ds": cmp rdi, rsi

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 --- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich --- I confirm gdb and llvm build successfully now. Thank you!

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---

[Bug cobol/120422] Reducing strcmp() and strlen() gcc/cobol/genapi.cc at f3a62dcfc96cb24127385a7e668133e037b6085d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120422 Robert Dubner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/120231] GCC fails to notice that (double)u64 is non-negative

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120231 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Apparently we are missing range implementation of casts between different floating point types as well. Trying now: --- gcc/range-op-mixed.h.jj 2025-05-20 08:14:06.520404648 +0200 +++ gcc/range-op

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- They often are, because users like to set them to mean "this is a blocker for my work" and that has no bearing on how important it is for GCC. Only Priority really matters for GCC, beca

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

rm in assuming that the RMs will give P1 to a > gcc-16 regression. Yes, I meant to write Severity. And I don't think that "blocker" or "critical" severity settings are ignored though.

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- I assume it's the type_build_dtor_call call that causes the problem, and probably removing lines 238-245 in semantics.cc would fix it. But Jason might know how to preserve the new check without the unwan

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

g that the RMs will give P1 to a gcc-16 regression.

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org Last

[Bug c++/120504] [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |16.0 Keywords|

[Bug c++/120504] New: [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type ... since r16-944-g0629924777ea20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120504 Bug ID: 120504 Summary: [16 Regression] gcc-16 fails to build llvm-20 and gdb-16.3 unique_ptr.h:91:23: error: invalid application of 'sizeof' to incomplete type

[Bug cobol/120422] Reducing strcmp() and strlen() gcc/cobol/genapi.cc at f3a62dcfc96cb24127385a7e668133e037b6085d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120422 Robert Dubner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdubner at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/120502] New: GCC Crash at cp/constexpr.cc:5462 when trying to constant evaluate constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120502 Bug ID: 120502 Summary: GCC Crash at cp/constexpr.cc:5462 when trying to constant evaluate constructor Product: gcc Version: 15.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/120423] ICE in avr-gcc extract_constrain_insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120423 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||14.2.0 --- Comment #2 from Georg-Joh

[Bug target/119298] [15/16 Regression] 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5 since r15-3441-g4292297a0f938f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/120423] ICE in avr-gcc extract_constrain_insn

ed char val; void func (struct data *d) { d->a = 0; d->b = 256 * val - 1; } $ avr-gcc-15 pr120423-2.c -S -Os -mmcu=atmega8 -mno-lra pr120423-2.c: In function 'func': pr120423-2.c:13:1: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints: 13 | } | ^ (insn 9 18 10 2 (set (re

[Bug target/119834] [15 regression] Compiling harfbuzz 11.0.1 with gcc 15 20250413 fails on s390x since r15-1579

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119834 --- Comment #30 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ceb2d19235478213219bb722cf4248a1ac78b73c commit r13-9729-gceb2d19235478213219bb722cf4248a1ac78b73c Author: Jakub Jelinek

[Bug target/120423] ICE in avr-gcc extract_constrain_insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120423 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/119834] [15 regression] Compiling harfbuzz 11.0.1 with gcc 15 20250413 fails on s390x since r15-1579

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119834 --- Comment #29 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:004523c9530f94ae3d64d4c9967ff90388bc commit r14-11818-g004523c9530f94ae3d64d4c9967ff90388bc Author: Jakub

[Bug target/119298] [15/16 Regression] 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5 since r15-3441-g4292297a0f938f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 --- Comment #21 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8859a06fc8143561dd94ef2342234dbc5ccfd937 commit r16-941-g8859a06fc8143561dd94ef2342234dbc5ccfd937 Author: Jan Hubicka Date: Wed

[Bug target/119172] [12/13 regression] macOS SDK version is not set by gcc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119172 --- Comment #5 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d9cd8d7babe838b577c6ede08589a79bb3df7810 commit r13-9721-gd9cd8d7babe838b577c6ede08589a79bb3df7810 Author: Iain Sandoe

[Bug target/116809] Failure to build GCC on macOS 15 / Xcode 16 for Intel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809 --- Comment #34 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3599245e4972b2322f75c909bc81961e41bc64ad commit r13-9719-g3599245e4972b2322f75c909bc81961e41bc64ad Author: Mark Mentovai

[Bug ada/120420] Improving __gnat_decode() gcc/ada/adadecode.c

||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou --- __gnat_decode is only used for exception backtraces, which are already slow, so we do not really care about its run-time performance; readability and easy

[Bug target/117947] [14/15/16 Regression] GCC miscompile rvv intrinsics at `-O2` and `-O3`, use `vlenb` after an inappropriate `vsetvli`

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117947 JuzheZhong changed: What|Removed |Added CC||juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai --- Comment #2

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- If we wanted to do it in some GIMPLE pass (e.g. VRP or whatever other suitable late GIMPLE pass which uses the ranger), we'd need a target hook to choose preference of sign or zero extension and then probabl

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

, ||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Like for divmod, expansion can use get_range_pos_neg (treeop) == 1 test to find out if the value range for some tree is known to be in the range [0, signed_max] and then could try to expand the

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Kang-Che Sung from comment #5) > Note that I only report this as a bug for x86-64 targets. I've also tested > an RISC-V (64-bit) and on that target the zero-extension would make larger > code. >

[Bug c++/120413] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] C++ OpenMP 'target' SIGSEGV in 'gcc/cp/semantics.cc:finish_omp_target_clauses_r'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120413 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c8e20a8425f123abd54261d03af5a956d4d01c6 commit r15-9729-g9c8e20a8425f123abd54261d03af5a956d4d01c6 Author: Tobias Burnus

[Bug c++/120413] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] C++ OpenMP 'target' SIGSEGV in 'gcc/cp/semantics.cc:finish_omp_target_clauses_r'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120413 --- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus --- ICE FIXED so far for mainline (GCC 16) and GCC 15. * * * Reading: > There is also BIND_EXPR_VARS, dunno if that should be walked instead > or in addition. The current code is about adding map c

[Bug c++/120413] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] C++ OpenMP 'target' SIGSEGV in 'gcc/cp/semantics.cc:finish_omp_target_clauses_r'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120413 --- Comment #3 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:45b849d05b733a25ec7ce612229084b8f4b86d3d commit r16-881-g45b849d05b733a25ec7ce612229084b8f4b86d3d Author: Tobias Burnus Date

[Bug middle-end/120434] GCC uses signed extend (movsxd) for known positive variables rather than zero extend 'mov'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120434 --- Comment #5 from Kang-Che Sung --- Note that I only report this as a bug for x86-64 targets. I've also tested an RISC-V (64-bit) and on that target the zero-extension would make larger code. So I can say such an optimization would be target

[Bug cobol/119211] [15/16 Regression] Cobol GCC 15 release checklist

ist script > > I plan to add a check-nist target to gcc/Makefile.in. > > I think portability issues are addressed more comprehensively by other PRs. > I think everything else mentioned was addressed en route to gcc 15. Please > correct me if I'm wrong. > > My

[Bug target/120417] gcc -m32 -O1 codegen error, leading to SIGSEGV, workaround -fno-tree-coalesce-vars

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120417 --- Comment #9 from Simon Sobisch --- Checked -fstack-reuse=none - same abort. The main issue here is the language this C code has to cover: COBOL allows for any trailing arguments to be "left out". If the COBOL compiler knows about the paramet

[Bug tree-optimization/120425] [12/13/14/15/16 regression] GCC-compiled (with -O{1,2,s,3}) program got segfault from GCC 12.1 since r12-476-gd846f225c25c58

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120425 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >