https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
--- Comment #3 from roc at ocallahan dot org ---
This is the Fedora 34 package.
$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 11.1.1 20210531 (Red Hat 11.1.1-3)
$ rpm -qa|grep ^gcc-11
gcc-11.1.1-3.fc34.x86_64
$ rpm -qa|grep binutils-2
binutils-2.35.1-41.fc34.x86_6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
> cat tmp/t.c
void foo(int i) {}
> gcc-11 -g -o tmp/t.o tmp/t.c -c
and the DWARF ends up
<0>: Abbrev Number: 1 (DW_TAG_compile_unit)
DW_AT_producer: (indirect string, offset: 0x0): GNU C17 11.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > cat tmp/t.c
> void foo(int i) {}
> > gcc-11 -g -o tmp/t.o tmp/t.c -c
>
> and the DWARF ends up
>
> <0>: Abbrev Number: 1 (DW_TAG_compile_unit)
>DW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > > cat tmp/t.c
> > void foo(int i) {}
> > > gcc-11 -g -o tmp/t.o tmp/t.c -c
> >
> > and the DWARF ends up
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101432
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101433
Bug ID: 101433
Summary: [modules] Bad File Data from simple function returning
std::vector
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101419
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dddb6ffdc5c25264dd75ad82dad8e48a0718d2d9
commit r12-2270-gdddb6ffdc5c25264dd75ad82dad8e48a0718d2d9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
> With -gsplit-dwarf (and without -gno-as-loc-support) I can reproduce in 11,
> but not on the trunk, where it got fixed with
> r12-1777-ga21dc9d1529b8a8071e36b22b6e8492fc2ce7d5a
> The .file 0 emission in 11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101431
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101390
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> scalar patterns are the appropriate way to do this
There may be parts of the compiler I'm not familiar here, so apologies...
By scalar patterns do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101434
Bug ID: 101434
Summary: vector-by-vector left shift expansion for char/short
is not optimal
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101435
Bug ID: 101435
Summary: Bad error with missing typename keyword
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100778
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c2e5ab1468d959200334f2f5039d8d6af01f9fb
commit r11-8721-g1c2e5ab1468d959200334f2f5039d8d6af01f9fb
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100778
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f32145c27eec468247353b59ec5f62fcba3ae2c7
commit r11-8722-gf32145c27eec468247353b59ec5f62fcba3ae2c7
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101423
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2d90f3ed9c63926cb6f150aa0dcad4d16a4c16c7
commit r11-8723-g2d90f3ed9c63926cb6f150aa0dcad4d16a4c16c7
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101394
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d060844c0de1ed65da84374cae6fa1598011f4a
commit r11-8724-g7d060844c0de1ed65da84374cae6fa1598011f4a
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101291
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5df86357becfc5c3a676b9f506bf2c1c625306f2
commit r11-8725-g5df86357becfc5c3a676b9f506bf2c1c625306f2
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100778
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.1.1
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101435
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Schlüter ---
Grrr, I made a mistake in describing the issue with the code: what is missing
is the `template` keyword before `cast`, so it should read
return err == 0 ? M{ v.template cast() } : fallback;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101430
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It seems acceptable, but isn't the diagnostic bug still there if users write
exactly the same code? The use of npos there is valid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This would be better, because it avoids the redundant range checking done when
this->compare calls this->substr:
{
const auto __len = this->size();
const auto __xlen = __x.size();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101436
Bug ID: 101436
Summary: Yet another bogus "array subscript is partly outside
array bounds"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101436
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101435
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101384
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
r226407 works fine, r23 already fails (even at -O0 or -O2 or -Og).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101384
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|wrong code at -Og
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-13
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And that change only helps the testcase in comment 1, not the original one in
comment 0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101434
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
So technically
(int)short-var << a
-> short-var << (min (a, 15))
we know a is <= 31 because of the int shift (and >= 0) but we cannot simply
emit short-var << a because how the target behaves is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101384
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=101434
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Probably low priority if not doable nicely w/o XOP.
-mxop can be substituted with -mavx512bw -mavx512vl for the same effect.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101419
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100785
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10 Regression] ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101062
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] wrong |[10 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93781
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f75560398af6f1f696c820016f437af4e8b4265c
commit r12-2284-gf75560398af6f1f696c820016f437af4e8b4265c
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93781
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316
Bug 85316 depends on bug 93781, which changed state.
Bug 93781 Summary: Optimizer produces suboptimal code related to -ftree-vrp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93781
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97420
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bbad9d7cfdb8dd8e28589160120546a61adeeedf
commit r11-8726-gbbad9d7cfdb8dd8e28589160120546a61adeeedf
Author: Patrick Palka
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100918
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6530cf0d50ae4c23c8e1ba908d1d0d4472e2966c
commit r11-8727-g6530cf0d50ae4c23c8e1ba908d1d0d4472e2966c
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100387
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:927548b42c4850094eb41c7ae882cbe219b24231
commit r11-8728-g927548b42c4850094eb41c7ae882cbe219b24231
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101182
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f6c007f3f7e9b6fdd9906ed1e4c791f6b15
commit r11-8729-g0f6c007f3f7e9b6fdd9906ed1e4c791f6b15
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98832
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:660cbbae327fbfa315e26d286b03efffc3c21cb5
commit r11-8730-g660cbbae327fbfa315e26d286b03efffc3c21cb5
Author: Patrick Palka
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101194
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1b57a9fb90552e52f2a121e2ae12534484b39859
commit r11-8731-g1b57a9fb90552e52f2a121e2ae12534484b39859
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2902f2d8424cfa365fec49401fa066e2b6de9ca4
commit r11-8732-g2902f2d8424cfa365fec49401fa066e2b6de9ca4
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d11dd94e53103641f9826b14e3086399f2a948c
commit r11-8733-g6d11dd94e53103641f9826b14e3086399f2a948c
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101181
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:63566075309907ca807c1c6cef57bf19f4602825
commit r11-8734-g63566075309907ca807c1c6cef57bf19f4602825
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97420
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10 Regression] NTTP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100918
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10 Regression] Naming a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101182
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 101182, which changed state.
Bug 101182 Summary: [concepts] ICE with ++ in non-template requires-expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101182
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98832
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101194
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10 Regression] aggregate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101181
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 101181, which changed state.
Bug 101181 Summary: [11/12 Regression] ICE when using an alias template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101181
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101437
Bug ID: 101437
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault signal
terminated program cc1
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4d3eaeb4f505b0838c673ee28e7dba8687fc8272
commit r12-2285-g4d3eaeb4f505b0838c673ee28e7dba8687fc8272
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101438
Bug ID: 101438
Summary: Compiler hang on inline asm with local register and
VLA operands
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
The warning depends on the optimizer for eliminating unreachable code but not
all of it can be. For example, the abort below isn't. In theory it could be
but with longer strings that require memory allocati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101439
Bug ID: 101439
Summary: std::atomic<__uint128_t>::load() crashes - possible
fix with mutable
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101440
Bug ID: 101440
Summary: Documentation bug for __attribute__ ((access))
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-10.1.0/gcc/Common-F
unctio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101374
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100137
Bug 100137 depends on bug 101374, which changed state.
Bug 101374 Summary: [12 Regression] bootstrap failure varpool.c:490:19: error:
array subscript 'varpool_node[0]' is partly outside array bounds of
'varpool_node [0]' [-Werror=array-bounds]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101384
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The testcase works fine for me? What does it need to fail?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101393
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101441
Bug ID: 101441
Summary: __FUNCTION__ doesn't work in core.stdc.stdio functions
without cast
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101393
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
A good solution would add all those historical targets to
rs6000_machine_from_flags.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101384
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Created attachment 51146 [details]
> gcc12-pr101384.patch
Bootstrap/regtest found a bug in the gcc.dg/pr101384.c test,
if (y[i] != ((i & 3) ? 0x : 0x8000)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101436
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
|a/show_bug.cgi?id=98
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 101436, which changed state.
Bug 101436 Summary: Yet another bogus "array subscript is partly outside array
bounds"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101436
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101263
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101442
Bug ID: 101442
Summary: Destructor not called for a temporary object, if it
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101442
--- Comment #1 from Egor ---
Example is provided below. It prints `A()` and nothing else. I expected it to
also pring `~A()`.
```
#include
struct A
{
A() {std::cout << "A()\n";}
A(const A &) = delete;
A &operator=(const A &) = del
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
The v3 patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575102.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100949
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101436
--- Comment #3 from Cassio Neri ---
Because of the typeid check the unsafe static_cast never happens and I think
the compiler should not be warning about a problem that doesn't exist. Besides,
there's no array involved in this code. I appreciate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97027
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97027
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101129
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think this is a bug in the swaps rs6000 specific pass.
It in particular changes
(insn 20 19 21 2 (set (reg:DI 155)
(mult:DI (reg:DI 224)
-(subreg:DI (reg:V16QI 148) 0))) "pr101129.c":
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
Bug ID: 101443
Summary: internal compiler error: in wide_int_to_tree_1, at
tree.c:1519
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101444
Bug ID: 101444
Summary: [12 regression]
cc.target/powerpc/pr86731-fwrapv-longlong.c fails
after r12-2266
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100949
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-13
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
--- Comment #2 from Rafi Wiener ---
Hey I just found that if I wrap the lines
template
struct pchar2string {
static Tcast(T& t) {return t;}
};
with those pragma to disable optimization it works.
#pragma GCC push_options
#pragma GCC op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
_93 = MEM[(<<< Unknown tree: nullptr_type >>> &)_84 + 32];
_94 = MEM[(<<< Unknown tree: nullptr_type >>> &)__res$second_88 + 32];
_81 = _93 < _94;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101129
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
Uh, yeah, that is completely unexpected behavior for swaps. I'll try to look
at this soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101323
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101323
--- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner ---
I'll have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101384
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I did run on the cfarm. What kind of machine does it need to fail? p8? p9?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101305
--- Comment #3 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patches posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-July/056236.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101232
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Schlüter ---
Here's another way to trigger this, inspired by my other PR101435
(https://godbolt.org/z/no6aEqvh3):
===
template
class X {
public:
U v;
using Scalar = U;
stati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16233
Tobias Schlüter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-09-18 00:00:00 |2021-07-14 0:00
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101435
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Schlüter ---
Thank you! I would certainly have found the other bug had I put the right
keyword into the title of the PR myself ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67288
Jiu Fu Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression. Note that -O2 works fine.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210713 (experimental
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101445
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:f75211822f8d84bb706421d3692e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #231 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to John Buddery from comment #228)
> These patches are for 11.1.0, but should work on earlier versions too. With
> this I have a working gcc which I've tested on several large projects.
You d
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
