https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40210
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96392
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101396
--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Testcase:
$ cat a.cpp
enum class A : __INT32_TYPE__ {
a,
b,
c
};
int main()
{
return (int) A::a;
}
$ cat b.cpp
enum class A : __UINT64_TYPE__ {
a,
b,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101396
--- Comment #2 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Created attachment 51128
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51128&action=edit
proposed patch
Patch proposed. Will bootstrap & regtest to make sure it correct.
epo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-2234-20210709194853-g1798cac7a8b-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.0 20210710 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101396
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92335
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101404
Bug ID: 101404
Summary: cond_removal_in_popcount_clz_ctz_pattern and
factor_out_conditional_conversion do a similar
transformation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101404
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Ever confirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101373
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On July 9, 2021 9:43:52 PM GMT+02:00, "ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101373
>
>--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
>Or maybe I misundersto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101373
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On July 10, 2021 7:13:47 PM GMT+02:00, rguenther at suse dot de
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101373
>
>--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de de> ---
>On July 9, 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101396
--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Patch sent to gcc-patches:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/574890.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101166
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-10
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Isn't the testcase UB? It reads uninitialized u (though it doesn't use the
> value for anything).
You are very right about that! The value is used, even though t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101405
Bug ID: 101405
Summary: internal compiler error: in reshape_init_class, at
cp/decl.c:6483
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101406
Bug ID: 101406
Summary: shared_ptr in _S_atomic mode still uses
__atomic_add_dispatch()
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101407
Bug ID: 101407
Summary: non-determinism in -fdump-go-spec
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101407
--- Comment #1 from Toolybird ---
The bug is present on trunk. Will try to bisect...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
--- Comment #4 from Hongyu Wang ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3)
> Created attachment 51125 [details]
> An updated patch
This works, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56223
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I did submit a patch
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/574892.html) for:
int abs0(int a, int b)
{
int c = a - b;
if (c <= 0) c = b - a;
return c;
}
But this is unrelated to your
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101407
--- Comment #2 from Toolybird ---
> Will try to bisect
Well, that was a complete waste of time. There seems to an element of
randomness to the problem. It turns out that GCC 10 is also affected as I was
able to trigger it all the way back to
b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101408
Bug ID: 101408
Summary: [gcov] "__FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ " leads to incorrect
coverage of case statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101409
Bug ID: 101409
Summary: [Gcov] the incorrect coverage of the "default”
statement in the "if" statement
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
28 matches
Mail list logo
