[Bug c++/95430] GCC doesn't detect out of bounds runtime error in a simple case

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95430 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/95430] GCC doesn't detect out of bounds runtime error in a simple case

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95430 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Already doing such address arithmetics is UB (though of course a + 10 is ok above), but we don't have a warning for that and as I said in another PR, ubsan could detect only the cases where the compiler can s

[Bug target/95453] Failure to avoid useless sign extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95453 --- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu --- Duplicated as PR95076?

[Bug driver/95456] New: [11 Regression] gcc/gcc.c:6035:16: runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95456 Bug ID: 95456 Summary: [11 Regression] gcc/gcc.c:6035:16: runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null Product: gcc Versio

[Bug driver/95456] [11 Regression] gcc/gcc.c:6035:16: runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95456 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to work|

[Bug c++/95455] ICE in capture with initializer in requires block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC|

[Bug c++/95451] [8/9/10 regression] ICE for lambda capturing this and calling operator() since r8-2720-gf44a8dd56f5bfbd0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95451 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/95237] LOCAL_DECL_ALIGNMENT shrinks alignment, FAIL gcc.target/i386/pr69454-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237 --- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak --- ICEs are "fixed" by the first hunk, the testcase in Comment #0 by the second: --cut here-- diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c index 060e2df62ea..cd7abaf7e04 100644 --- a/gcc/config/i3

[Bug c++/95455] ICE in capture with initializer in requires block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455 --- Comment #2 from Avi Kivity --- Appears to be invalid. Clang rejects it even after some massaging (lambda in unevaluated context).

[Bug target/95400] -march=native and -march=icelake-client produce different results on icelake client

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95400 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- Can we backport the change to active branches?

[Bug c++/95455] ICE in capture with initializer in requires block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455 --- Comment #3 from Avi Kivity --- Here's a valid version (which gcc accepts): void f() { int foo = 4; auto lambda = [bar = foo] {}; static_assert(requires (decltype(lambda) x) { x; }); }

[Bug c++/95455] ICE in capture with initializer in requires block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Keywords|

[Bug ada/95452] Overflow Bug in GNAT Heapsort implementations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95452 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org Last reco

[Bug c++/95455] ICE in capture with initializer in requires block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug target/95435] bad builtin memcpy performance with znver1/znver2 and 32bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfir

[Bug target/95435] bad builtin memcpy performance with znver1/znver2 and 32bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- All right, there are results for a micro-benchmark that we have in contrib folder: ZNVER1 (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X): 64-bit: contrib/bench-stringop 64 32000 gcc -march=znver1 memcpy block size libcall rep1

[Bug target/95435] bad builtin memcpy performance with znver1/znver2 and 32bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #7

[Bug c++/95457] New: Inadequate diagnostics on constrained coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95457 Bug ID: 95457 Summary: Inadequate diagnostics on constrained coroutines Product: gcc Version: 10.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/95435] bad builtin memcpy performance with znver1/znver2 and 32bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435 --- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov --- There's no tuning tables for memcmp at all, existing structs cover only memset and memcpy. So as far as I see retuning memset/memcpy doesn't need to wait for [1], because there's no infrastructure in plac

[Bug target/95435] bad builtin memcpy performance with znver1/znver2 and 32bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435 --- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #8) > There's no tuning tables for memcmp at all, existing structs cover only > memset and memcpy. So as far as I see retuning memset/memcpy doesn't need to > wait fo

[Bug target/95435] bad builtin memcpy performance with znver1/znver2 and 32bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435 --- Comment #10 from Martin Liška --- And this is for znver2: AMD EPYC 7502P 32-Core Processor 64-bit: memcpy block size libcall rep1noalg rep4noalg rep8noalg loop noalg unrlnoalg sse noalg bytePGO

[Bug target/84302] ICE: Segmentation fault (in extract_insn) on SPE target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84302 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/82138] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Assembler messages: Error: can't resolve `.got2' {.got2 section} - `.LCF0' {.text.unlikely section}

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82138 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/87083] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2305 (error: unrecognizable insn)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87083 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/81288] [8 Regression] ICE on 32-bit BE powerpcspe w/ -misel -O2 (-O3, -Ofast, -Os)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81288 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/79438] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE during RA w/ -O3 (or -Ofast) -funroll-loops for 32-bit BE SPE target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79438 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/85170] ICE: in final_scan_insn_1, at final.c:3139 (error: could not split insn)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85170 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/81628] Backport r250637 and r250638 to the powerpcspe* target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81628 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/79451] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in expand_expr_real_2, at expr.c:9021 w/ -O3 -floop-nest-optimize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79451 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/85121] Assembler messages: Error: operand out of range (264 is not between 0 and 248)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85121 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/80700] [8 Regression] ICE: Bus error (on SPE target)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80700 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/95458] New: Inline strncmp is *much* slower than glibc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95458 Bug ID: 95458 Summary: Inline strncmp is *much* slower than glibc Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug target/95459] New: aarch64: ICE in in aarch64_short_vector_p, at config/aarch64/aarch64.c:16803

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95459 Bug ID: 95459 Summary: aarch64: ICE in in aarch64_short_vector_p, at config/aarch64/aarch64.c:16803 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug c++/95202] Assignment to a member is wrongly optimized away by g++ with -fstrict-aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95202 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfir

[Bug c++/94867] [9 Regression] New (since gcc 8) false positive with -Wnull-dereference in very simple code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94867 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC|

[Bug c++/94485] [10.0.1, c++2a] g++ optimizes away necessary code, accepts arbitrary inline asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94485 --- Comment #6 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- I bisected this issue to the commit: commit 35a952ba70028b50fbd2fd19f7dc91f2da45371e Author: Martin Jambor Date: Tue Jun 13 13:34:51 2017 +0200 [PR80803 1/2] Streamline SRA access enqueuing

[Bug c++/94867] [9 Regression] New (since gcc 8) false positive with -Wnull-dereference in very simple code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94867 --- Comment #4 from Vadim Zeitlin --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3) > It's gone since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797d6. This commit is included in releases/gcc-10.1.0 tag, but I still see the warning with the provided example when using g

[Bug c/95460] New: ice in execute, at adjust-alignment.c:74

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95460 Bug ID: 95460 Summary: ice in execute, at adjust-alignment.c:74 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c/95460] ice in execute, at adjust-alignment.c:74

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95460 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/95428] ABI breakage for "base object constructor" for final classes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428 --- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell --- i have filed ABI issue 104 https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/104

[Bug fortran/42693] Missing gcc-internal-format on messages from gfc_arith_error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42693 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||markeggleston at gcc do

[Bug target/95459] aarch64: ICE in in aarch64_short_vector_p, at config/aarch64/aarch64.c:16803

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95459 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/94867] [9 Regression] New (since gcc 8) false positive with -Wnull-dereference in very simple code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94867 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 fro

[Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348 --- Comment #17 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6) more details: > > Which means one run takes 100MB is size, right? As you mentioned, having > 1000 .gcda files, it means that one takes 0.1MB? > Out

[Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348 --- Comment #18 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16) > > For our application, all processes generating profiling feedback data to a > > single directory seems is not a choice. > > Why is it problem? You

[Bug c++/92633] [concepts] constrained lambda with placehoder syntax getting wrong substitution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92633 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/95461] New: GCC misses -Warray-bounds warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461 Bug ID: 95461 Summary: GCC misses -Warray-bounds warning message Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348 --- Comment #20 from Qing Zhao --- Created attachment 48653 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48653&action=edit A.data --- Comment #21 from Qing Zhao --- Created attachment 48654 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.

[Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348 --- Comment #19 from Qing Zhao --- Hi, Martin, I attached 3 profiling data files with this email (among over 5000 files under one typical directory), Hope this is helpful. Thanks. Qing

[Bug jit/95462] New: Different int types for the same call to gcc_jit_context_get_int_type()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95462 Bug ID: 95462 Summary: Different int types for the same call to gcc_jit_context_get_int_type() Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/95252] testcase gcc.dg/torture/pr67916.c failure when testing with -msave-restore

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95252 Kito Cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kito.cheng at gmail dot com --- Comment #8

[Bug sanitizer/95385] GCC stop detect UBs after a divide by zero in for statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95385 --- Comment #4 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Haoxin Tu from comment #3) Hi, so sorry to bother you. Is still there any problem here? Please take a look at test3.cc and test4.cc. Thank you so much.

[Bug middle-end/95463] New: missing -Warray-bounds caused by assuming unsigned integer wrapping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95463 Bug ID: 95463 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds caused by assuming unsigned integer wrapping Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/95463] missing -Warray-bounds caused by assuming unsigned integer wrapping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95463 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||56456 Severity|normal

[Bug middle-end/95461] GCC misses -Warray-bounds warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Compon

[Bug middle-end/95461] GCC misses -Warray-bounds warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/35587] -Warray-bounds does not work at all or does not find all trivial cases, and :works only with -O2 or -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35587 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||haoxintu at gmail dot com --- Comment #13

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 95461, which changed state. Bug 95461 Summary: GCC misses -Warray-bounds warning message https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/65461] -Warray-bounds due to loop unrolling in the linux kernel (free_area_init_nodes)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65461 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|-Warray-bounds warnings in |-Warray-bounds due to loop

[Bug middle-end/78678] possibly missing -Warray-bounds warning without -fsanitize=object-size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78678 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||10.1.0, 11.0, 7.3.0, 8.2.0,

[Bug middle-end/95464] [10/11 Regression] Miscompilation of mesa on x86_64-linux since r10-6426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95464 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-01 Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug middle-end/95464] New: [10/11 Regression] Miscompilation of mesa on x86_64-linux since r10-6426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95464 Bug ID: 95464 Summary: [10/11 Regression] Miscompilation of mesa on x86_64-linux since r10-6426 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/94361] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Memory leak in nested types with final

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b703627d668257c0955a43838288e91973bf2721 commit r10-8218-gb703627d668257c0955a43838288e91973bf2721 Author: Thomas Koenig

[Bug c++/95465] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE on jump into a statement expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95465 Bug ID: 95465 Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE on jump into a statement expression Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/95465] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE on jump into a statement expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95465 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gabravier at gmail dot com Target Mile

[Bug fortran/94361] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Memory leak in nested types with final

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2a0de88ccf2ecc6659b0f1e4580c1ce5cff976b3 commit r9-8643-g2a0de88ccf2ecc6659b0f1e4580c1ce5cff976b3 Author: Thomas Koenig

[Bug fortran/94361] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Memory leak in nested types with final

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:75f5824b77632ef583a7a65302b326e8bf1b851c commit r8-10289-g75f5824b77632ef583a7a65302b326e8bf1b851c Author: Thomas Koenig

[Bug fortran/94361] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Memory leak in nested types with final

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/37336] [F03] Finish derived-type finalization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336 Bug 37336 depends on bug 94361, which changed state. Bug 94361 Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] Memory leak in nested types with final https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/93691] Type bound assignment causes too many finalization of derived type when part of other type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93691 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org Ever conf

[Bug c++/95350] [coroutines] coroutines with move-only by-value parameters attempt to copy parameter instead of move it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95350 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:88f48e2967ead9be262483618238efa9c7c842ec commit r11-773-g88f48e2967ead9be262483618238efa9c7c842ec Author: Iain Sandoe Date: Mon J

[Bug c++/95466] New: [11 Regression] ICE in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3794 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466 Bug ID: 95466 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3794 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/95466] [11 Regression] ICE in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3794 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug fortran/95467] New: ICE in parse_omp_structured_block: OpenMP Offload (target_parallel__simd)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95467 Bug ID: 95467 Summary: ICE in parse_omp_structured_block: OpenMP Offload (target_parallel__simd) Product: gcc Version: lto Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/50439] gfortran infinite loop with -floop-interchange

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50439 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC|

[Bug fortran/94109] Memory leak introduced in 8.3.0->8.3.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94109 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig --- So, fixed with the patch for PR 94109?

[Bug jit/95426] libgccjit.so: error: RTL check: expected elt 2 type 'B', have '0' (rtx barrier) in BLOCK_FOR_INSN

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95426 --- Comment #5 from David Malcolm --- Created attachment 48657 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48657&action=edit Reduced test case I've reduced the reproducer you posted to this test case. Seems to require a call to __built

[Bug c++/95371] [10/11 Regression] ICE concepts with template template parameter since r10-3735-gcb57504a55015891

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95371 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/95181] [10/11 Regression] ICE in push_access_scope, at cp/pt.c:241 since r10-3735-gcb57504a55015891

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/95466] [11 Regression] ICE in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3794 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/95468] New: ICE in expression sfinae

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95468 Bug ID: 95468 Summary: ICE in expression sfinae Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee

[Bug middle-end/95464] [10/11 Regression] Miscompilation of mesa on x86_64-linux since r10-6426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95464 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov --- Jakub, thank you for working on the PR and providing the test case. It seems to me that the problem occurs in inheritance sub-pass of LRA. It is a very complicated sub-pass. Making a fix and testing it

[Bug libfortran/95418] [11 Regression] Static assert going off on MinGW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:832c1192eba6dd100e2f757e30ea6373f782ff55 commit r11-774-g832c1192eba6dd100e2f757e30ea6373f782ff55 Author: Uros Bizjak Date: Mon Ju

[Bug libfortran/95418] [11 Regression] Static assert going off on MinGW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/95237] LOCAL_DECL_ALIGNMENT shrinks alignment, FAIL gcc.target/i386/pr69454-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237 --- Comment #4 from Sunil Pandey --- This test case and many other regression on x86 caused by following change set r11-508 Good $ /local/skpandey/gccwork/pr95237/tools-build/gcc-debug-r11-507/release/usr/gcc-11.0.0-x86-64/bin/gcc -m32 -mpr

[Bug c++/95311] [11 Regression] ICE in cp_ubsan_maybe_instrument_member_call at gcc/cp/cp-ubsan.c:136 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95311 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591 commit r11-775-g172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mon

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591 commit r11-775-g172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mon

[Bug c++/95466] [11 Regression] ICE in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3794 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591 commit r11-775-g172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mon

[Bug c++/95466] [11 Regression] ICE in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3794 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/95232] [11 Regression] ICE in make_ssa_name_fn, at tree-ssanames.c:279 since r11-283-gf315d1477d5164cb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95232 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/95193] [11 Regression] ICE in tsubst_decl, at cp/pt.c:14624

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95193 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/95237] LOCAL_DECL_ALIGNMENT shrinks alignment, FAIL gcc.target/i386/pr69454-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu --- On i386, we don't do dynamic stack realignment for long long objects with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 on purpose. A backend should be allowed to opt-out gcc_assert (align >= DECL_ALIGN (var)); based one variabl

[Bug target/84553] -rdynamic generates TEXTREL relocations on ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84553 --- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Gentoo runs the patch for a while system-wide and it seems to work fine. Worth submitting the patch for review?

[Bug middle-end/95395] gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-11.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95395 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-01 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug middle-end/95395] gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-11.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95395 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug target/95469] New: [11 regression] several vperm test case failures after r11-736 on power 9 (only)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95469 Bug ID: 95469 Summary: [11 regression] several vperm test case failures after r11-736 on power 9 (only) Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libstdc++/95392] [11 Regression] Build failure on MinGW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95392 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cd3f067b82a1331f5fb695879ba5c3d9bb2cca3a commit r11-777-gcd3f067b82a1331f5fb695879ba5c3d9bb2cca3a Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/95392] [11 Regression] Build failure on MinGW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95392 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|10.1.0

[Bug jit/95470] New: Type checking too rigid for shifts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95470 Bug ID: 95470 Summary: Type checking too rigid for shifts Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: jit

[Bug c++/92633] [concepts] constrained lambda with placehoder syntax getting wrong substitution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92633 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897 commit r11-779-gc2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897 Author: Patrick Palka Date: Mon

  1   2   >