https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111969
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail
--- Comment #1 from Andr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111923
--- Comment #9 from Richard Smith ---
I don't think we intended for default arguments of class-scope lambdas to get
the same complete-class context treatment as default argument of member
functions, but the standard wording does currently seem t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111923
--- Comment #10 from Stas Sergeev ---
OMG, not what I intended to get. :(
All I need is to use offsetof() in templates.
Last time I started to use reinterpret_cast
for that, you disallowed reinterpret_cast in
constexpr context. Now this...
Why i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111957
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 56196
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56196&action=edit
patch which I am testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111895
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6fa7284e2824310bb7204d41b5243c677ecb62d3
commit r14-4902-g6fa7284e2824310bb7204d41b5243c677ecb62d3
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111959
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111923
--- Comment #11 from Stas Sergeev ---
So if I understand correctly, before
your proposal the following code was
conforming:
template
struct B {
static constexpr int off = O();
};
struct A {
char a;
B<[]() static constexpr ->int {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
Bug ID: 111970
Summary: [tree-optimization] SLP for non-IFN gathers result in
RISC-V test failure on gather
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
--- Comment #1 from Li Pan ---
Created attachment 56198
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56198&action=edit
Without this commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111971
Bug ID: 111971
Summary: ICE: maximum number of generated reload insns per insn
achieved (90)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111971
--- Comment #1 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
This issue can be reproduced on 'ppc64' BE machine with -m32.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111971
--- Comment #2 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
It seems gcc11 is ok.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108220
Jiu Fu Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111971
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
D should be a pair of registers, r0 and r1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111971
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
But r1 is the argument register.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
--- Comment #2 from Li Pan ---
Add more information about how to build and run the test cases.
Build:
../__RISC-V_INSTALL___RV64/bin/riscv64-unknown-elf-gcc -march=rv64imafdcv
-mabi=lp64d -ftree-vectorize -O3 --param riscv-autovec-preference=f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 80776, which changed state.
Bug 80776 Summary: -Wformat-overflow false positive for %d on integer bounded
by __builtin_unreachable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|13.0|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111957
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111959
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111906
--- Comment #5 from Rimvydas (RJ) ---
ICE reproducible again outside check-gcc-c testing with gcc-14-4902 build:
However it still passes with "-O1 -std=gnu2x" this time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111955
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-10-25
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111955
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
Created attachment 56199
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56199&action=edit
Proposed fix
Here is the proposed patch with a tiny regression test module. It will be
applied once / if the c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111955
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #56199|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96503
Martin Uecker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||muecker at gwdg dot de
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96503
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/systemd/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111725
Lehua Ding changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110665
Lehua Ding changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111249
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111249
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> Bisecting from 11 (good) -> 12 (bad) gave r12-4871-g502ffb1f389011 as the
> breaking commit.
>
> Bisecting from 13 (bad) -> 14 (good) gave r14-2926-gee20be8325f7f2 as t
101 - 132 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
