https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101595
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101099
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nwentzell@flatironinstitute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95292
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tilin97 at yandex dot ru
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101071
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.4|9.5
Summary|[10/11/12 Regres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101073
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72848
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64636
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikulas at artax dot
karlin.mff.cu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64636
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57683
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.3
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102562
Bug ID: 102562
Summary: [12 Regression][modules] Failing
g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header tests since
r12-4067-gc46ecb0112e91c8
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102562
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102103
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
Bug ID: 102563
Summary: ice during GIMPLE pass: vrp-thread
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102562
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oh,I saw these failures but thought they were already happening. I guess I made
it worse.
I think the library code is correct but I'll check it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102564
Bug ID: 102564
Summary: Missed loop vectorization with reduction and ptr
load/store inside loop
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
=/data/bin/gcc-dev/ --disable-multilib
--enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20211002 (experimental) (GCC)
git ver: 9d116bcc5556c7df32803f7bf8e6e2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99327
m.cencora at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m.cencora at gmail dot com
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53871
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84898
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101765
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-02
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101765
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
New failures between r12-4031 and r12-4090:
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-3_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-3_a.H -std=c++17 (test for excess errors)
F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102564
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102560
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See PR 102562
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99327
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 51534
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51534&action=edit
untested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102561
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||haoxintu at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51534|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100127
--- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Riccardo Brugo from comment #0)
> Created attachment 50621 [details]
Of course, we should not ICE - but ...
> struct promise_type {
> std::optional _value = std::nullopt;
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
Bug ID: 102566
Summary: [i386] GCC should emit LOCK BTS for simple
bit-test-and-set operations with std::atomic
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102560
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102560
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Going up the backtrace we see:
(gdb)
#3 0x01b43aff in irange::intersect (this=0x7fffc8e0,
other=0x3c7aa40 )
at /home/aldyh/src/gcc/gcc/value-range.cc:1514
(gdb)
#4 0x01b3e1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102447
--- Comment #7 from TC ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> I have looked in detail (I have the 3rd, 4th and 5th editions here) but my
> brain started oozing out of my ears.
>
> 15.10.2.15 NonemptyClassRanges and 15.10.2.16 Nonem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99575
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101133
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100673
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99710
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |iains at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101765
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65410
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86145
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93455
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102521
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Tentative patch:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/decl.c b/gcc/fortran/decl.c
index b3c65b7175b..cebc59e4ab5 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/decl.c
@@ -2228,12 +2228,15 @@ add_init_expr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102567
Bug ID: 102567
Summary: Missing noexcept specialization of std::function
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102568
Bug ID: 102568
Summary: "taking address of temporary array" error when passing
temporary array
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6c0dd02964a624c65859808f9a40721c3796319a
commit r12-4095-g6c0dd02964a624c65859808f9a40721c3796319a
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102563
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102560
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Probably needs GTY markers, and possibly putting it invalid_range in file
scope.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102568
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94264
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kamkaz at windowslive dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92061
fink at snaggledworks dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fink at snaggledworks dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94174
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99327
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102567
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102567
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #0)
> In earlier language versions, code like this used to compile because
> noexcept was not part of the type system.
This also used to compile:
void f() noexcep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102567
--- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> This is not a libstdc++ bug, we implement what the standard says.
>
> Maybe it used to compile, but it was meaningless. You could say it was a
> function of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102562
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102567
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> > This is not a libstdc++ bug, we implement what the standard says.
> >
> > Maybe it used to compile, but it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102567
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #3)
> Neither paper seems to cover a polymorphic function type that takes
> ownership, though, so I don't quite see how these replace std::function.
To be clear, s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98649
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98703
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102569
Bug ID: 102569
Summary: Missed redudant add with add_overflow on the tree
level
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96397
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100340
fink at snaggledworks dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fink at snaggledworks dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102570
Bug ID: 102570
Summary: missed fully redudant with internal function of
add_overflow in FRE
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102571
Bug ID: 102571
Summary: FAIL: libgomp.c/../libgomp.c-c++-common/atomic-21.c
execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102562
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
spawn -ignore SIGHUP
/export/users/hjl/build/gnu/tools-build/gcc-32bit-gitlab-native/build-i686-linux/gcc/testsuite/g++8/../../xg++
-B/export/users/hjl/build/gnu/tools-build/gcc-32bit-gitlab-native/build-i686-linu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92979
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93040
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 92979 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92949
Bug 92949 depends on bug 92979, which changed state.
Bug 92979 Summary: bswap not finding a bswap with a memory load at the
beginging of the instruction stream
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92979
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93216
Bug 93216 depends on bug 92979, which changed state.
Bug 92979 Summary: bswap not finding a bswap with a memory load at the
beginging of the instruction stream
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92979
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101716
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101595
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Resol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101764
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hewillk at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44690
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43476
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Code has changed slightly but it still seems to apply today:
/* After switches have been processed, which perhaps alter
`fixed_regs' and `call_used_regs', convert them to HARD_REG_SETs. */
static void
ini
2.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /testing/gcc/gcc_src/configure --enable-multilib
--prefix=/testing/gcc/bin --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20211002 (d7705b0ada9e9852b580ca25a45570c82152f287) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102573
Bug ID: 102573
Summary: optimized code removes the underlying elements of the
std::initializer_list being copied
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102573
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102573
--- Comment #2 from wjf <13508417 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> GCC warns:
> : In function 'int main()':
> :9:19: warning: assignment from temporary 'initializer_list' does
> not extend the lifetime of the under
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102573
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to wjf from comment #2)
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I know that adding "-fsanitize=address" could detect the
> stack-use-after-scope in runtime. But why not just delete the copy member in
> std::initializer_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102572
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102572
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
if (!useless_type_conversion_p (masktype, TREE_TYPE (vec_mask)))
{
poly_uint64 sub1 = TYPE_VECTOR_SUBPARTS (TREE_TYPE
(mask_op));
poly_uint64
89 matches
Mail list logo
