https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111432
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b18d1cabe2f90cad697e1e0bfd2abebb85f9
commit r14-4686-gb18d1cabe2f90cad697e1e0bfd2abebb85f9
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111432
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50502
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55119
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111808
--- Comment #6 from Martin Uecker ---
Adding a note is a good idea, but it doesn't really solve the issue. The
problem I see is that somebody developing on x86-64 does not get a warning that
the code is not strictly conforming and then it fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111785
--- Comment #2 from Luis Caro Campos ---
Thanks Patrick for looking into this. I think your message got cut off?
I've removed the calls to the GCC optimize pragmas, and still get an ICE:
src/fmt.cc:71:8: internal compiler error: in insert, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111837
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5ac63ec5da2e93226457bea4dbb3a4f78d5d82c2
commit r14-4688-g5ac63ec5da2e93226457bea4dbb3a4f78d5d82c2
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111785
--- Comment #3 from Luis Caro Campos ---
now that I've removed the GCC optimize pragmas - the file does compile with
both gcc 12 and 13 (Ubuntu-provided), but not with the gcc 14 snapshots. Makes
me wonder if there has been a regression somewher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89038
argothiel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||argothiel at interia dot pl
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111708
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Uecker :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1f186f64b8602d74769af4a6250255e51227f744
commit r14-4689-g1f186f64b8602d74769af4a6250255e51227f744
Author: Martin Uecker
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111812
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111785
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111850
Bug ID: 111850
Summary: [14 regression]
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111808
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I think it's reasonable for such a portability issue to be detected only
when building for i386, much like a portability issue from code that
assumes long is 64-bit would only be detected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111851
Bug ID: 111851
Summary: f951: Segmentation fault at gfc_delete_symtree
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111851
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111850
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110831
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111660
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:765c3b8f82d50961008c214ac2113f35e7532aa9
commit r14-4693-g765c3b8f82d50961008c214ac2113f35e7532aa9
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111852
Bug ID: 111852
Summary: [14 regression] r14-4339-geaa41a6dc127d8 breaks
building with gcc 4.8.5
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111660
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 111660, which changed state.
Bug 111660 Summary: [14 Regression] Compilation of constexpr function returning
enum takes exponential time with -std=c++2a since r14-4140-g6851e3423c2b5e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111840
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1fbb7d75abbb050f790d8b43422602ee4b152608
commit r14-4694-g1fbb7d75abbb050f790d8b43422602ee4b152608
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111840
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111853
Bug ID: 111853
Summary: f951: Segmentation fault at gfc_expression_rank
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
Bug ID: 111854
Summary: new align_val_t usual deallocation
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't see any issues with this program at compile time (runtime it would be
undefined though).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The reason why is you are using the global operator new here rather than trying
the one inside T.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
--- Comment #4 from Barry Revzin ---
The standard says this should be ill-formed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Why? as there is:
void operator delete(void*, std::size_t, std::align_val_t)
noexcept __attribute__((__externally_visible__));
void operator delete[](void*, std::size_t, std::align_val_t)
noexcept __attr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
You are mixing up 2 different things.
First this is about if the operator new is valid and it is because there is a
corresponding placement delete operator (this would be rejected at compile
time).
Second i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110817
--- Comment #23 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5e4abf4233cd34212680cca700d6438445e6a16a
commit r14-4695-g5e4abf4233cd34212680cca700d6438445e6a16a
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110817
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88670
Bug 88670 depends on bug 110817, which changed state.
Bug 110817 Summary: [14 Regression] wrong code with vector compares and vector
lowering
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110817
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111828
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Jan Wassenberg from comment #4)
> I understand the slippery slope concern. But the empty asm string is a
> special case, we and others use it (with +r output and memory clobber) to
> prevent opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111842
--- Comment #13 from n.deshmukh at samsung dot com ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #12)
> (In reply to n.deshm...@samsung.com from comment #5)
> > The warning is valid but I wish to suppress it like the other
> > conversion warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111842
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
_Float16 was added in GCC 12 not as an extended floating point type but rather
some target specific type which had its own rules and such. GCC 13 was the
first release where _Float16 became a real C++23 ext
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111828
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #3)
> The motivation of this request is to try our best to make power10 attributed
> code inline more power8/power9 attribute code which likely includes some
> inline asm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111828
--- Comment #7 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #6)
> That said, I think nearly all (all?) HTM usage on Power uses our HTM
> built-in functions. Maybe we could remove OPTION_MASK_HTM from the
> power8/power9 defaul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110986
--- Comment #21 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 56134
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56134&action=edit
the scalar patterns
This adds the scalar patterns which I had talked about before.
I have not tested this pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111832
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pan Li :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cf7739d4a6ba0b88068877d14439436c22b57630
commit r14-4700-gcf7739d4a6ba0b88068877d14439436c22b57630
Author: Juzhe-Zhong
Date: Tue Oct 17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111832
JuzheZhong changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105467
Ben Boeckel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugzilla.gcc at me dot
benboeckel.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111756
--- Comment #8 from Gaius Mulley ---
Created attachment 56135
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56135&action=edit
Proposed fix for gcc-13
This is a patch for gcc-13 adding dependency checking within
gcc/m2/Make-lang.in. This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111756
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bdf4b6f9f2847b7abba5392e271e30f55541935e
commit r13-7960-gbdf4b6f9f2847b7abba5392e271e30f55541935e
Author: Gaius Mulley
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111756
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111854
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from TC --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111828
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
(In r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111855
Bug ID: 111855
Summary: GCC: 14: internal compiler error: tree check: expected
class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in
useless_type_conversion_p, at gimple-expr.cc:265
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100532
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||141242068 at smail dot
nju.edu.cn
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111720
--- Comment #14 from Li Pan ---
Looks like option -fmerge-all-constants doesn't work for this case, as well as
RISC-V.
For RISC-V, the CLOBBER exists after tree gimple.
void test (vuint8m1_t *out) {
uint8_t arr[32] = {1, 2, 7, 1, 3, 4, 5, 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111856
Bug ID: 111856
Summary: GCC: 14: internal compiler error: in as_a, at
machmode.h:381
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111853
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111856
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
Summary|GCC: 14:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111856
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111857
Bug ID: 111857
Summary: RISC-V: Failed to vectorize small GNU vector if
zvl4096b with fixed-vlmax
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111857
--- Comment #1 from JuzheZhong ---
We need to enable VLS modes in fixed-vlmax that size are smaller than minimum
VLA modes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111858
Bug ID: 111858
Summary: [14 Regression] ICE: in vectorizable_simd_clone_call,
at tree-vect-stmts.cc:4263
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111849
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111852
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sayle at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111808
--- Comment #8 from Martin Uecker ---
There are certainly other similar portability issues, e.g.:
enum : long { X = 0xUL };
https://godbolt.org/z/hKsqPe9c1
BTW: Are there better examples where we have similar build failures also in
p
101 - 164 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
