[Bug fortran/96024] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE in mio_name_expr_t, at fortran/module.c:2159

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96024 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.

[Bug fortran/96024] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE in mio_name_expr_t, at fortran/module.c:2159

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96024 --- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2023-February/058949.html

[Bug fortran/108878] New: Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 Bug ID: 108878 Summary: Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent. Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug fortran/108878] Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-02-21 Ever confirmed

[Bug middle-end/108878] Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|fortran |middle-end Severity|normal

[Bug middle-end/108878] Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- So the right way of fixing this is to have a builtin versions of "frexp" which return a complex type and that is pure for -fno-math-errno and such. And gets expanded to frexp correctly.

[Bug middle-end/108878] Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > So the right way of fixing this is to have a builtin versions of "frexp" > which return a complex type and that is pure for -fno-math-errno and such. > And gets

[Bug target/108876] return address clobbered in sibcalls resulting in gfortran tests failing on xtensa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108876 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Max Filippov : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2ef02e8cbbaf95fee98be255f697f47193960ec commit r13-6266-gb2ef02e8cbbaf95fee98be255f697f47193960ec Author: Max Filippov Date: Tue

[Bug target/108876] return address clobbered in sibcalls resulting in gfortran tests failing on xtensa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108876 jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|U

[Bug analyzer/104224] Testcases for analyzer "uninit" from fedora-devel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104224 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8f6369157917a4371b5d66dfe82b84aded3b8268 commit r13-6267-g8f6369157917a4371b5d66dfe82b84aded3b8268 Author: David Malcolm Date: T

[Bug analyzer/108830] Excess warnings from -Wanalyzer-null-dereference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108830 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8f6369157917a4371b5d66dfe82b84aded3b8268 commit r13-6267-g8f6369157917a4371b5d66dfe82b84aded3b8268 Author: David Malcolm Date: T

[Bug tree-optimization/108419] [13 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O2 since r13-440-g98e475a8f58

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108419 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm, the first difference between the trunk and GCC 12.2.0 is inside IV-OPTs. But I don't see why that would make a difference ...

[Bug middle-end/108878] Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 09:49:38PM +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 > > --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- > So the right way of fixing this i

[Bug middle-end/108878] Mis-optimization with splitting floating point into a significand and exponent.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108878 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug tree-optimization/105834] [13 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O2 (trunk vs. 12.1.0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105834 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- c_5 : int [0, 0][3, 3] vs c_5 : [irange] int [0, 3] NONZERO 0x3 Obvious the first range is more correct, c_5 can only be either 0 or 3.

[Bug analyzer/104224] Testcases for analyzer "uninit" from fedora-devel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104224 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- Given the above patch, we now need -fno-analyzer-suppress-followups if you want to see all the warnings in the testcase (rather than just stopping after the first).

[Bug analyzer/108830] Excess warnings from -Wanalyzer-null-dereference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108830 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/108562] [meta-bug] tracker bug for issues with -Wanalyzer-null-dereference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108562 Bug 108562 depends on bug 108830, which changed state. Bug 108830 Summary: Excess warnings from -Wanalyzer-null-dereference https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108830 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug analyzer/108879] New: -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak false positive stl string in try catch block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108879 Bug ID: 108879 Summary: -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak false positive stl string in try catch block Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/108869] compiling an intrinsic wrapper : gives internal compiler error: in dwarf2out_register_main_translation_unit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108869 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/108853] Add new -mcpu=e500 alias for -mcpu=8540

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108853 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Does anyone still use the e500 core? I thought the last SoC that had that core was years ago and even no longer supported by FreeScale/NXP.

[Bug target/108853] Add new -mcpu=e500 alias for -mcpu=8540

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108853 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- e500 support was mostly removed out of GCC too.

[Bug target/108853] Add new -mcpu=e500 alias for -mcpu=8540

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108853 --- Comment #3 from Pali Rohár --- I'm still using processors with e500 cores with recent Linux kernel versions and I know also other people who also still using them. Note that NXP still supports some QorIQ processors which have integrated e50

[Bug target/108853] Add new -mcpu=e500 alias for -mcpu=8540

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108853 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Pali Rohár from comment #3) > And due to this removal, LLVM and clang recently gained some usable e500v2 > implementation. I was told that it was heavily tested on FreeBSD with > desktop applica

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108261 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #54461|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug sanitizer/106998] [10/11/12/13 Regression] libsanitizer PATH_MAX not defined for linux new targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106998 --- Comment #4 from cqwrteur --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > I don't see linux/limits.h included still, but limits.h is - should musl > include linux/limits.h by itself? > > Please link to upstream generated issues. musl doe

[Bug target/108248] Some insns in the risc-v backend do not have mappings to functional units

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108248 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So a datapoint in this effort. For the Veyron V1, all the bitmanip instructions except clmul and cpop are single cycle and can be handled by any of the 4 standard ALUs. clmul, cpop are 4c and use the shar

[Bug target/108764] [RISCV] Cost model for RVB is too aggressive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108764 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug target/108567] gccrs bootstrap comparison failure on mipsel-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108567 --- Comment #2 from YunQiang Su --- It's due to `-mfix-loongson3-llsc` of binutils again. I fixed a problem several years ago. commit dec7b24be89fe0496f9442232bcbfcb16e030742 Author: YunQiang Su Date: Fri Feb 28 15:58:13 2020 +0800

[Bug target/108567] gccrs bootstrap comparison failure on mipsel-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108567 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Can you file a bug to sourceware against binutils and close this bug as moved then with a link to that bug?

[Bug target/108567] gccrs bootstrap comparison failure on mipsel-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108567 --- Comment #4 from YunQiang Su --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Can you file a bug to sourceware against binutils and close this bug as > moved then with a link to that bug? Sure. https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?

[Bug target/108567] gccrs bootstrap comparison failure on mipsel-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108567 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED See Also|

[Bug sanitizer/108880] New: slow compilation with "-fsanitize=undefined"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108880 Bug ID: 108880 Summary: slow compilation with "-fsanitize=undefined" Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/108248] Some insns in the risc-v backend do not have mappings to functional units

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108248 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #5) > So a datapoint in this effort. > > For the Veyron V1, all the bitmanip instructions except clmul and cpop are > single cycle and can be handled by any of the 4

[Bug sanitizer/108880] [11/12/13 Regression] slow compilation with "-fsanitize=undefined"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108880 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.5 Summary|slow compilatio

[Bug sanitizer/108880] [11/12/13 Regression] slow compilation with "-fsanitize=undefined"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108880 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|slow compilation with |[11/12/13 Regression] slow

[Bug sanitizer/108880] [11/12/13 Regression] slow compilation with "-fsanitize=undefined"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108880 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- phase parsing : 7.10 (100%) 0.02 (100%) 7.32 ( 99%) 216k ( 11%)

[Bug sanitizer/108880] [11/12/13 Regression] slow compilation with "-fsanitize=undefined"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108880 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- It is still fast with the C++ front-end. It is also still fast with -std=gnu90 in GCC 11+.

<    1   2