https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109209
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109206
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109221
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109227
Bug ID: 109227
Summary: coroutines: ICE in tree check: expected record_type or
union_type or qual_union_type, have array_type in
build_special_member_call, at cp/call.cc:11067
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109227
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109215
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109216
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109217
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109227
--- Comment #1 from Avi Kivity ---
Did you forget to attach bad.cc?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109219
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109217
--- Comment #4 from Stas Sergeev ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> -static-pie is now marked as the negative of -shared, so it works with that
> (the later cancelling out the earlier). It isn't handled that way for
> -static vs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109170
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109170
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5f413dc41ee4f8bc3a0fc295f98b75dceae52fa8
commit r13-6773-g5f413dc41ee4f8bc3a0fc295f98b75dceae52fa8
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104075
Bug 104075 depends on bug 109170, which changed state.
Bug 109170 Summary: [13 Regression] New glibc warning: open_catalog.c:86:16:
error: pointer ‘old_buf’ may be used after ‘realloc’ [-Werror=use-after-free]
since r13-6707-g0a07bfad12530bca
h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109227
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 54717
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54717&action=edit
test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109213
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109228
Bug ID: 109228
Summary: warning: implicit declaration of function
'__riscv_vlenb'
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109229
Bug ID: 109229
Summary: std::exclusive_scan narrows to initial value
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109176
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase:
#pragma GCC aarch64 "arm_sve.h"
svbool_t
foo (svint8_t a, svint8_t b, svbool_t c)
{
svbool_t d = svcmplt_s8 (svptrue_pat_b8 (SV_ALL), a, b);
return svsel_b (d, c, d);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55295
Luke Benstead changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kazade at gmail dot com
--- Comment #14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55295
--- Comment #15 from Oleg Endo ---
It's been too long since I've looked into it. Maybe some middle-end parts got
more suitable over the time, but it was difficult to make it generate the fipr
instruction automatically due to the reasons stated a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109176
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Before veclower2 we had/have
> _7 = ba_5(D) < a_6(D);
> _8 = svnand_b_z (_7, _7, _7);
> _9 = VEC_COND_EXPR <_7, _8, _7>;
> where _7/_8/_9 are all __SVBool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109215
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:03041e0361cbdd7f541f2f39060759aad866ed58
commit r13-6782-g03041e0361cbdd7f541f2f39060759aad866ed58
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109215
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109206
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
> This was plain carelessness on my part.
Heh, I would call it a natural fallout of software development. Anyway, thanks
for the fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43144
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109212
--- Comment #3 from Vishaal Awasthi ---
Thanks for the quick check. Do I need to do anything on this bug report to
close it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109216
Raoul Hidalgo Charman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109229
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is how all standard algorithms that take an initial value work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109228
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kito at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109176
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-generic.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-generic.cc
> @@ -1040,6 +1040,10 @@ expand_vector_condition (gimple_stmt_iterator *gsi,
> bitmap dce_ssa_na
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109125
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
> The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f231bca93ca92f6fd55de6fbe4bf8935f9ec558a
>
> commit r13-6719-gf2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109192
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #7)
> Created attachment 54716 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> This is due to the latter part of the specified patch. We normally
> terminate outgoing range calcula
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109229
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Ribizel ---
I agree, but that doesn't make it less bug-prone IMO, with the narrowing
conversion happening deep inside the exclusive_scan implementation (-Wnarrowing
doesn't pick it up). Something similar like common_ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109176
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Oh, and one more thing, why the second hunk isn't inside of the if (assign && )
body, but after it?
If we haven't updated code, then it will never succeed with code = SSA_NAME
unless the first hunk already r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109229
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
e.g. https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/accumulate is clear that the
accumulator has the same type as the init parameter, and there's even a caveat
about it:
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109229
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Maybe we could do this:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/numeric
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/numeric
@@ -483,12 +483,16 @@ namespace __detail
_OutputIterator __result, _Tp __init,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109219
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13 Regression] csmith: |[12/13 Regression] csmith:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109229
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Tobias Ribizel from comment #2)
> Something similar like common_type invoke_result> would be much safer.
No, there's no requirement that those types have a common type.
You can have two type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109176
--- Comment #10 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For the testcase, having it in gcc.target/aarch64/sve as
/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
#include
svbool_t
foo (svint8_t a, svint8_t b, svbool_t c)
{
svbool_t d = svcmplt_s8 (svptrue_pat_b8 (SV
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109229
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ah yes, this issue is the subject of
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p0571r2.html#intermediate_unordered
which is waiting for a new revision from the author.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109228
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
For later reference:
* https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/pull/216/files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81323
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> > Or the ranger could do it itself, similarly to how it handles .ASSUME, but
> > without actually querying anythin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
Bug ID: 109230
Summary: [13 Regression] Maybe wrong code for opus package on
aarch64 since r13-4122-g1bc7efa948f751
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109219
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> I will have a look - the representative looks out-of sync:
>
> t.c:4:1: note: node 0x41d6f00 (max_nunits=8, refcnt=1) vector(8) unsigned
> short
> t.c:4:1: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
--- Comment #1 from Tamar Christina ---
That patch only fixed the bootstrap, in any case I'm on holidays so have asked
someone else to look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
And the same happens for glm package:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:ARM/glm/standard/aarch64
[ 95s] The following tests FAILED:
[ 95s]168 - test-gtx_dual_quat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55295
--- Comment #16 from Luke Benstead ---
OK so perhaps adding __builtin_sh_fipr is a good first step?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55295
--- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Luke Benstead from comment #16)
> OK so perhaps adding __builtin_sh_fipr is a good first step?
Yeah, you can try and see if it produces any useful results for you.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29776
--- Comment #25 from Adam Warner ---
Documenting a workaround I've found for the unnecessary sign extension. I'm
still perplexed at the improbability of this appearing to work!
workaround_bsr_sign_extension.c:
#include
uint64_t bsr_u64(uint64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109223
--- Comment #4 from urbanjost at comcast dot net ---
User-defined types work and as I read the ISO standard are supported, and
TYPE(REAL) works; it is only when a parameter is added that it fails; nvfortran
fails for user-defined type declared be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108178
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109176
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 54718
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54718&action=edit
gcc13-pr109176.patch
Full untested patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109176
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> Created attachment 54718 [details]
> gcc13-pr109176.patch
>
> Full untested patch.
LGTM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108898
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b49aedf6aed4911c8473738a88e839703f51386d
commit r13-6784-gb49aedf6aed4911c8473738a88e839703f51386d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108898
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109184
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Testcase with just the essential stuff.
static int g_1731[7] = { 42, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 42 };
void __attribute__((noipa)) foo ()
{
int l_1930[5] = { 0, };
for (int i = 0; i < 15; ++i)
for (int j = 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
Bug ID: 109231
Summary: [13 regression] Comparison failure in
libphobos/libdruntime/rt/util/typeinfo.o
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108898
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:49a8bce43cdc1d1b48efa5eeb2a4097cfca1dc22
commit r13-6785-g49a8bce43cdc1d1b48efa5eeb2a4097cfca1dc22
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Is that with -g vs. non--g?
> Could be NEXT_INSN vs. next_nondebug_insn in combine_reload_insn.
No, it's just -fno-checking in stage 2 vs -fch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109219
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26adc870e3675591050f37edab46850b97a3c122
commit r13-6786-g26adc870e3675591050f37edab46850b97a3c122
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109232
Bug ID: 109232
Summary: Using deduced return type in an unevaluated context
leads to codegen
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109232
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||link-failure
--- Comment #1 from Richa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109213
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109233
Bug ID: 109233
Summary: warning: array subscript 5 is above array bounds of
‘struct tg3_napi[5]’
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109233
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 54719
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54719&action=edit
Preprocessed file
-O2 -Warray-bounds:
In function ‘tg3_init_one’,
inlined from ‘tg3_init_one’ at
drivers/ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Can you find out the gdc and d21 invocation lines for those 2 cases?
I've tried to test it using a cross-compiler:
/usr/src/gcc/objs4/gcc/d21 ../../../../libphobos/libdruntime/rt/util/typeinfo.d
-quiet -dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109233
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
As can be seen from the preprocessed file, tp->irq_max is set to:
tp->irq_max = 1;
or
tp->irq_max = (4 + 1);
and the compilation warns in tg3_init_one at:
for (i = 0; i < tp->irq_max; i++) {
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109192
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0963cb5fde158cce986523a90fa9edc51c881f31
commit r13-6787-g0963cb5fde158cce986523a90fa9edc51c881f31
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109192
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109192
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> On a fast machine compile eventually finishes and a time-report looks like
>
> dominator optimization : 156.84 ( 52%) 0.00 ( 0%) 156.86 (
> 5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109234
Bug ID: 109234
Summary: gcc refuses compilation with implausible error when
using -fprofile-arcs
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109234
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
"jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" writes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
>
> --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Can you find out the gdc and d21 invocation lines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109234
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Are you sure this isn't some Ubuntu customization?
Can't reproduce with 12.2.1 20230320 nor 12.1.1 20220507 (Red Hat 12.1.1-1).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109232
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang does not emit the function but does emit the warning ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
avieira at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||avieira at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109137
--- Comment #15 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I've reproduced hanging up but for the particular commit. I also reproduced
internal compiler error on the current master.
I'll try to fix the both problems on this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109223
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to urbanjost from comment #4)
> User-defined types work and as I read the ISO standard are supported, and
> TYPE(REAL) works; it is only when a parameter is added that it fails;
> nvfortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106890
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:041a164ec9b467f9ac2f15980f83f17e3f8ea150
commit r13-6788-g041a164ec9b467f9ac2f15980f83f17e3f8ea150
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #4)
> It might be that this is hard to reproduce in a cross: as I mentioned,
> the failure only happens with gas natively and I'm uncertain if the
> co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #6 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 54720
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54720&action=edit
sparc-sun-solaris2.11 auto-host.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109235
Bug ID: 109235
Summary: nodiscard attribute ignored with deduction guide
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109236
Bug ID: 109236
Summary: [avr] Invalid code of signed 16-bit compare
optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109235
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 54721
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54721&action=edit
Full testcase with -std=c++20
Please attach the testcase next time or put it inline and not just a link to
god
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109235
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Steps to reproduce:
$ wget https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/opus/opus-1.3.1.tar.gz
$ tar xvzf opus-1.3.1.tar.gz
$ cd opus-1.3.1/
$ ./configure
$ make -j32 && make -j32 check
So it fails even with default opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109235
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|nodiscard attribute ignored |nodiscard attribute on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109235
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> If we move the nodiscard to the constructor, GCC errors out correctly.
That is true even on the original testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95454
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85973
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||johelegp at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109235
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85973
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||t...@bang-olufsen.dk
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85973
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-03-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109230
--- Comment #6 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks!
My initial investigation has lead me to think the change is being caused at
vrp2, which is the only time the pattern gets triggered with -O2, the tree
before the pass (at the place where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
No luck reproducing this using a cross.
So, could you please attach -fdump-tree-optimized -da dumps from both runs?
Also, check if you are using the same d21 binary, another possibility might be
miscompiled
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
