[Bug tree-optimization/107409] Perf loss ~5% on 519.lbm_r SPEC cpu2017 benchmark with r10-5090-ga9a4edf0e71bba

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107409 --- Comment #16 from Martin Liška --- @Honza: ???

[Bug lto/108330] [13 Regression] ICE in add, at hash-set.h:64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108330 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/105294] restrict pointer - disagreement with specification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105294 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |tree-optimization Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/108339] New: riscv64-linux-gnu: fails to link libgcc_s.so on the GCC 10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108339 Bug ID: 108339 Summary: riscv64-linux-gnu: fails to link libgcc_s.so on the GCC 10 branch Product: gcc Version: 10.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/108332] dynamic link libstdc++ with win32 thread model's gcc for windows native toolchain would cause .rdata_r: section below image base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108332 nightstrike changed: What|Removed |Added CC||10walls at gmail dot com,

[Bug libstdc++/108326] Question about definitions in c++config.h for gcc13 20221229

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108326 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jamaika from comment #4) > I tried adding c++config definitions to gcc 11.3.1 with > _GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS. What do you mean? The c++config.h file is created by GCC during installation, you c

[Bug middle-end/108300] `abort()` macro cause bootstrap failure on *-w64-mingw32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108300 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes. Your mingw headers have changed, adding which is incompatible with the 'abort' macro in the GCC sources.

[Bug tree-optimization/101912] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #9 from Richard B

[Bug tree-optimization/107767] [13 Regression] switch to table conversion happening even though using btq is better

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107767 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/108321] [13 regression] g++.dg/contracts/contracts-tmpl-spec2.C fails after r13-4160-g2efb237ffc68ec

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108321 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug tree-optimization/91470] [10/11/12 Regression] bogus uninitialized warning in trans-intrinsic.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91470 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener --- OK, so better optimization.

[Bug target/108004] x-form logical operations with dot instructions are not emitted.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108004 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Resolution|INVALID

[Bug tree-optimization/86318] const local aggregates can be assumed not to be modified even when escaped

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86318 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Josh Haberman from comment #4) > Is there any plan or timeline for fixing this bug? No. There's no agreed upon way on how to design such a fix.

[Bug target/108339] riscv64-linux-gnu: fails to link libgcc_s.so on the GCC 10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108339 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/108237] [13 Regression] ICE: in gimple_expand_vec_cond_expr, at gimple-isel.cc:281 at -O since r13-1085-g90467f0ad649d081

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108237 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- Btw, I've also backported the offending rev. to the GCC 12 branch, so presumably we want this fix also there even if just out of caution.

[Bug middle-end/35560] Missing CSE/PRE for memory operations involved in virtual call.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35560 --- Comment #16 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Witold Baryluk from comment #15) > I know this is a pretty old bug, but I was exploring some assembly of gcc > and clang on godbolt, and also stumbled into same issue. > > https://godbolt.org/

[Bug c/107993] ICE: tree check: expected string_cst, have integer_cst in get_target_clone_attr_len, at tree.cc:14872

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107993 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:befd29d5fe15c09638f73eeeb1f8a9e62ce569ee commit r13-5063-gbefd29d5fe15c09638f73eeeb1f8a9e62ce569ee Author: Martin Liska Date: Tue

[Bug c/107993] ICE: tree check: expected string_cst, have integer_cst in get_target_clone_attr_len, at tree.cc:14872

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107993 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c/108296] __builtin_memcpy generating wrong code in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108296 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|DUPLICATE |INVALID --- Comment #5 from Richard Bi

[Bug tree-optimization/101912] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7afecddf1ecbb93ee44517ad6d3e9c1c0d68e722 commit r13-5064-g7afecddf1ecbb93ee44517ad6d3e9c1c0d68e722 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 101912, which changed state. Bug 101912 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug tree-optimization/101912] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/97108] [10/11/12/13 Regression] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97108 Bug 97108 depends on bug 101912, which changed state. Bug 101912 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug libstdc++/77691] [10/11/12/13 regression] experimental/memory_resource/resource_adaptor.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77691 --- Comment #55 from Jonathan Wakely --- Created attachment 54215 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54215&action=edit Generalise special case for malloc not afreeing with max_align_t I think we also want to fix the actual code

[Bug tree-optimization/108306] false-positive -Warray-bounds warning emitted with -fsanitize=shift

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108306 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/108331] [13 Regression] ABI break of std::__c_file and std::fstream for win32 thread model of GCC for windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108331 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- That would be more flexible, but I'm not sure this is a problem that will happen again. This is a particular case where we have a completely unused member variable that just needs a specific layout. It oc

[Bug libstdc++/108331] [13 Regression] ABI break of std::__c_file and std::fstream for win32 thread model of GCC for windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108331 --- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou --- > How's this? This looks good to me, thanks!

[Bug middle-end/69482] Writing through pointers to volatile not always preserved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69482 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug middle-end/69482] Writing through pointers to volatile not always preserved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69482 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.lundin.mail at gmail dot co

[Bug middle-end/108298] Wrong optimization of volatile access from gcc 11 and beyond

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108298 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/108340] New: compiler segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108340 Bug ID: 108340 Summary: compiler segfault Product: gcc Version: 12.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassi

[Bug tree-optimization/108341] New: argument to `__builtin_ctz` should be assumed non-zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108341 Bug ID: 108341 Summary: argument to `__builtin_ctz` should be assumed non-zero Product: gcc Version: 12.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Co

[Bug c/108340] compiler segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108340 --- Comment #1 from Julien --- striped even more : https://godbolt.org/z/YqoPKqoKK

[Bug lto/108330] [13 Regression] ICE in add, at hash-set.h:64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108330 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fb082e3293d45d928ae107d8f351b04be89d1bc2 commit r13-5065-gfb082e3293d45d928ae107d8f351b04be89d1bc2 Author: Martin Liska Date: Mon

[Bug c/108340] compiler segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108340 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug lto/108330] [13 Regression] ICE in add, at hash-set.h:64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108330 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/108341] argument to `__builtin_ctz` should be assumed non-zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108341 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/69482] Writing through pointers to volatile not always preserved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69482 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5a8242153d078f1ebe60f00409415da260a29ee commit r13-5066-ga5a8242153d078f1ebe60f00409415da260a29ee Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug middle-end/69482] Writing through pointers to volatile not always preserved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69482 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||13.0 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biene

[Bug c/108340] compiler segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108340 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/106878] [11/12 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed at -O2 with pointers and bitwise calculation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106878 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||julien.staub at se dot com --- Comment #

[Bug target/107453] [13 Regression] New stdarg tests in r13-3549-g4fe34cdcc80ac2 fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107453 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b1879fb84e78fa2c530e66de43f3dc125820864a commit r13-5067-gb1879fb84e78fa2c530e66de43f3dc125820864a Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: M

[Bug target/107453] [13 Regression] New stdarg tests in r13-3549-g4fe34cdcc80ac2 fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107453 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/108008] [12 Regression] wrong code with -O3 and posix_memalign since r12-4526-gd8edfadfc7a9795b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108008 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 CC|

[Bug c++/108342] New: std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 Bug ID: 108342 Summary: std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field Product: gcc Version: 12.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: no

[Bug libstdc++/108221] Building cross compiler for H8 family fails at libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108221 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > /tmp/ccC7KXoL.s: Assembler messages: > /tmp/ccC7KXoL.s:82719: Error: value of 0001254e too large for field of 2 > bytes at 0002 I still see these error

[Bug tree-optimization/108199] Bitfields, unions and SRA and storage_order_attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108199 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comme

[Bug testsuite/108204] pr84973-2.C fails with wrong error on mingw

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108204 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |testsuite --- Comment #3 from Richard

[Bug c++/108206] [12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl minimal' structure, have 'error_mark' in merge_default_template_args, at cp/decl.cc:1563 since r12-7562-gfe548eb8436

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108206 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||13.0 Priority|P3

[Bug testsuite/108204] pr84973-2.C fails with wrong error on mingw

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108204 --- Comment #4 from nightstrike --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > I'd suggest to add a dg-additional-options -fno-ms-extensions to the test > then. We certainly can (well, Jon can :P), but shouldn't the ms extensions ultimately

[Bug middle-end/108209] goof in genmatch.cc:commutative_op

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108209 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/108215] Does not optimize trivial case with bit operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108215 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- It's something for if-conversion / if-combine. We have [local count: 1073741824]: src_6 = MEM[(const uint32_t *)data_5(D)]; _1 = src_6 & 4294967040; if (_1 == 287453952) goto ; [20.97%] els

[Bug c++/108218] [12/13 Regression] Constant arguments in the new expression is not checked in unevaluated operand since r12-5253-g4df7f8c79835d569

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108218 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug c++/108219] [12/13 Regression] requirement fails on a valid expression since r12-5253-g4df7f8c79835d569

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108219 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug c/108340] compiler segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108340 --- Comment #4 from Julien --- Thank you. Can you please confirm if this will be fixed in 12.2.x or only in 13.0 ? Are fixes ported to 12.x along the way or are patches chosen just before release ?

[Bug middle-end/108298] Wrong optimization of volatile access from gcc 11 and beyond

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108298 --- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool --- It cannot be a duplicate: this bug was introduced much later than when PR69482 was filed! But glad the same patch seems to have fixed both, sure :-)

[Bug ipa/108226] __restrict on inlined function parameters does not function as expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108226 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org Ever co

[Bug middle-end/108298] Wrong optimization of volatile access from gcc 11 and beyond

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108298 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 9 Jan 2023, segher at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108298 > > --- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool --- > It cannot be a duplicate: this bug w

[Bug sanitizer/108343] New: ASAN at -O3 misses a heap-use-after-free

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108343 Bug ID: 108343 Summary: ASAN at -O3 misses a heap-use-after-free Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: sanitiz

[Bug tree-optimization/108227] Unnecessary division when looping over array with size of elements not a power of two

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108227 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- it boils down to IVOPTs

[Bug target/108240] [13 Regression] ICE in emit_library_call_value_1 at gcc/calls.cc:4181 since r13-4894-gacc727cf02a144

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|ICE in |[13 Regression] ICE in

[Bug rtl-optimization/108241] [12/13 Regression] ICE in lra_eliminate_regs_1, at lra-eliminations.cc:658

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108241 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.3 Priority|P3

[Bug c++/108242] [10/11/12/13 Regression] '__FUNCTION__' was not declared when used inside a generic (templated) lambda declared inside a template function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108242 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug c++/108243] [10/11/12/13 Regression] Missed optimization for static const std::string_view(const char*)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108243 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.5

[Bug preprocessor/108244] [13 Regression] `pragma GCC diagnostic` and -E -fdirectives-only causes the preprocessor to become confused since r13-1544-ge46f4d7430c52104

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108244 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug middle-end/108209] goof in genmatch.cc:commutative_op

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108209 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:46034c46f82dec169fe7fc7c2d82d8321d9a9512 commit r13-5068-g46034c46f82dec169fe7fc7c2d82d8321d9a9512 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug middle-end/108209] goof in genmatch.cc:commutative_op

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108209 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug ipa/108250] [12/13 regression] llvm-tblgen miscompiled on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu since r12-5383-g22c242342e38eb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108250 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.3

[Bug target/108240] [13 Regression] ICE in emit_library_call_value_1 at gcc/calls.cc:4181 since r13-4894-gacc727cf02a144

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240 --- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #3) > With the culprit commit r13-4894, we always implicitly enable powerpc64 for > both explicit and implicit 64 bit, it's the same as before for the explicit > 64 b

[Bug target/108274] [13 Regression] ICE in df_refs_verify during arm_reorg pass with -fipa-icf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108274 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.0

[Bug middle-end/35560] Missing CSE/PRE for memory operations involved in virtual call.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35560 m.cencora at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m.cencora at gmail dot com -

[Bug c/108340] compiler segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108340 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- The trunk change caused various regressions and needed multiple follow-ups, I'm afraid it is not a good idea to backport that. r13-2658, r13-2709, r13-2891 at least. Perhaps backporting the 2 match.pd hunks

[Bug sanitizer/108343] ASAN at -O3 misses a heap-use-after-free

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108343 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/108008] [12 Regression] wrong code with -O3 and posix_memalign since r12-4526-gd8edfadfc7a9795b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108008 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | --- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---

[Bug modula2/108182] gm2 driver mishandles target and multilib options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108182 --- Comment #10 from Gaius Mulley --- here is version 4 of the bugfix which enables the driver to link against shared libraries.

[Bug modula2/108261] modula-2 module registration process seems to fail with shared libraries.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108261 --- Comment #7 from Gaius Mulley --- Created attachment 54218 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54218&action=edit Potential fix for target multilib_dir handling (version 4) shared lib fix

[Bug modula2/108344] New: Many tests time out: isatty called in a tight loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108344 Bug ID: 108344 Summary: Many tests time out: isatty called in a tight loop Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug modula2/108344] Many tests time out: isatty called in a tight loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108344 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.0

[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #7 from Jonny Grant --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #5) > > Re the patches, I recall I did email them, but pasted here too as another > > developer was doing that. I'll have a

[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- Has it been reviewed and approved? I can't do that for patches outside the libstdc++-v3 dir.

[Bug tree-optimization/107608] [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c and pr95115.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107608 --- Comment #12 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #0) > > ... but then > > comes dom2 and happily replaces > > _1 = 3.4028234663852885981170418348451692544e+38 * 2.0e

[Bug fortran/108329] IEEE_SET_ROUNDING_MODE ineffective with common subexpression elimination

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108329 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|tkoenig at gcc d

[Bug web/88860] Clarify gcc online manual 6.38 Attribute Syntax

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88860 --- Comment #9 from Jonny Grant --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > Has it been reviewed and approved? I can't do that for patches outside the > libstdc++-v3 dir. I've not yet received a reply to it on gcc-patches list. https://

[Bug c++/107616] c++tools: select not found breaks build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107616 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by John David Anglin : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0925a9772960c946440833033423bff41c330154 commit r13-5072-g0925a9772960c946440833033423bff41c330154 Author: John David Anglin D

[Bug tree-optimization/108341] argument to `__builtin_ctz` should be assumed non-zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108341 --- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1) > May be an opportunity for Ranger? Hmmm... I don't think so: : value.0_1 = (unsigned int) value_4(D); _2 = __builtin_ctz (value.0_1); r = _2;

[Bug c++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >The C++ standard even carves out a guarantee than `_Complex [float|double]` is >memory-layout-compatible with `std::complex<[float|double]>`. I know about _Atomic and std::atomic but not std::complex and

[Bug libstdc++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm: diff.cpp03.numerics

[Bug libstdc++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 --- Comment #3 from Rui Oliveira --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > I know about _Atomic and std::atomic but not std::complex and _Complex. > Because std::complex was part of C++98 which was done before C99's _Complex > ... [c

[Bug libstdc++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 --- Comment #4 from Rui Oliveira --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Hmm: diff.cpp03.numerics I saw you moved the bug to libstdc++ but is the problem libstdc++, or should g++ just accept packing when it encounters it?

[Bug libstdc++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- I don't think there's anything the library can do here. The layout of std::complex is fixed, as stated above. And the fact it's a non-POD is also fixed. If the front-end warns about trying to pack a non-P

[Bug c++/107616] c++tools: select not found breaks build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107616 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/108341] argument to `__builtin_ctz` should be assumed non-zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108341 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Not always. It depends on the definition of CTZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO. /* The value at zero is only defined for the BMI instructions LZCNT and TZCNT, not the BSR/BSF insns in the original isa. */ #defin

[Bug c++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|libstdc++ |c++ --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug c++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5) > I don't know whether clang allows packing non-PODs, or just doesn't ever > warn for them, or has a special case for std::complex, or does something > smarter l

[Bug modula2/108261] modula-2 module registration process seems to fail with shared libraries.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108261 --- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe --- This is good in that it removes the extra -Ls, but ... 1. This will not work in general for targets with spec substitution for library names - the library names *do* need to be on the driver line, 2. It will

[Bug c++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug tree-optimization/108341] argument to `__builtin_ctz` should be assumed non-zero when CTZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO says it is undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108341 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug c++/108342] std::complex: ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108342 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/107991] [10/11/12/13 Regression] Extra mov instructions with ternary on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107991 Roger Sayle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot com --- Co

[Bug target/108339] [10 only] riscv64-linux-gnu: fails to link libgcc_s.so on the GCC 10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108339 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.5

  1   2   >