https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112760
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 56716
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56716&action=edit
more complex testcase, with less compiler flags
Attached a testcase that needs only -O2 -mavx; might be a diffe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111601
--- Comment #25 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9582538cf07d83d7e80553827de8b0f91e4705d8
commit r14-5955-g9582538cf07d83d7e80553827de8b0f91e4705d8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111601
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112725
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112725
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112725
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Agreed, so like this?
Yes, thanks for the prompt fix! The rs6000 part is OK for trunk!
> 2023-11-29 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR target/112725
> * config/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The #c11 patch regresses gcc.dg/bitint-3{8,9}.c tests (and apparently it is
just the 1st and/or 6th hunk where I've tried to make the XALLOCAVEC
allocations smaller; the rest of the changes seem to work ok.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112728
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:77f713a64aead2bcc68567de8431bdb67cb6b196
commit r14-5959-g77f713a64aead2bcc68567de8431bdb67cb6b196
Author: Rainer Orth
Date: Wed N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112431
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pan Li :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bdad036da32f72b84a96070518e7d75c21706dc2
commit r14-5960-gbdad036da32f72b84a96070518e7d75c21706dc2
Author: Juzhe-Zhong
Date: Wed Nov 29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112560
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70
--- Comment #14 from Costas Argyris ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #13)
> Thanks for the fix. Now it needs to be backported onto the 13 branch.
Just sent email about it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102689
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112760
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55824
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Seems to be working in GCC 7+.
Hmmm! It seems to me to be broken from 7-branch through the current mainline.
Cheers
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #7 from Julian Waters ---
I have a new attribute proposed for asm declarations that fixes this issue, but
I need help from reviews to proceed with fixing up the patch properly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112761
Bug ID: 112761
Summary: Using incomplete array types in function prototypes
doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Yong
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:19da6d2d0048eb6a260a5cf8af707cb455848bfb
commit r13-8107-g19da6d2d0048eb6a260a5cf8af707cb455848bfb
Author: Costas Argyris
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #47 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Yong
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:19da6d2d0048eb6a260a5cf8af707cb455848bfb
commit r13-8107-g19da6d2d0048eb6a260a5cf8af707cb455848bfb
Author: Costas Argyris
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112761
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5c95bf945c632925efba86dd5dceccdb9da8884c
commit r14-5963-g5c95bf945c632925efba86dd5dceccdb9da8884c
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109253
--- Comment #5 from Shung-Hsi Yu ---
any chance we will also have this fix in GCC 13?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
--- Comment #27 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b09b879e4e9cc24a5d2b0344c1930020c218a104
commit r14-5964-gb09b879e4e9cc24a5d2b0344c1930020c218a104
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #32 from Jan Hubicka ---
> /tmp/build/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_algobase.h:437:
> warning: 'void* __builtin_memcpy(void*, const void*, long unsigned int)'
> writing between 2 and 9223372036854775806 bytes into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112762
Bug ID: 112762
Summary: Cannot build crosscompilers for some uclinux targets
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109253
--- Comment #6 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
(In reply to Shung-Hsi Yu from comment #5)
> any chance we will also have this fix in GCC 13?
Yes. We plan to backport this and many other BPF related fixes and
improvements to GCC 10, 11, 12 and 13, on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112763
Bug ID: 112763
Summary: [OpenMP] ICE in gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses, at
gimplify.cc:13238 – with defaultmap(firstprivate) for
C++ member variables
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112697
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 56719
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56719&action=edit
Perf annotate of milc built with r14-4971-g0beb1611754742
commit r14-4971-g0beb1611754742:
$ perf stat taskse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112729
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ee480441eaec87ca6e0b0963fe9aade7edd1e8a
commit r14-5968-g8ee480441eaec87ca6e0b0963fe9aade7edd1e8a
Author: Rainer Orth
Date: Wed N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112697
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 56720
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56720&action=edit
Perf annotate of milc built with r14-4972-g8aa47713701b1f
commit r14-4972-g8aa47713701b1f:
$ perf stat taskse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112729
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112764
Bug ID: 112764
Summary: Associating entity does not have target attribute if
selector has pointer attribute in associate block
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #33 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:302461ad9a04d82fee904bddac69811d13d5bb6a
commit r14-5971-g302461ad9a04d82fee904bddac69811d13d5bb6a
Author: Martin Jambor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112721
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:302461ad9a04d82fee904bddac69811d13d5bb6a
commit r14-5971-g302461ad9a04d82fee904bddac69811d13d5bb6a
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112711
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:302461ad9a04d82fee904bddac69811d13d5bb6a
commit r14-5971-g302461ad9a04d82fee904bddac69811d13d5bb6a
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112721
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112711
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: s...@li-snyder.org
Target Milestone: ---
hi -
With a recent checkout of gcc14 (20231129), on a x86_64-pc-linux-gnu host,
the following source gives a bogus -Wparentheses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112765
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112711
--- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The change also fixes llvm-16.0.6 testsuite for me. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112765
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111922
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:634cf26c94de620e66aa124b8ec4d6c2be4b74b2
commit r14-5973-g634cf26c94de620e66aa124b8ec4d6c2be4b74b2
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111922
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: s...@li-snyder.org
Target Milestone: ---
hi -
With a recent checkout of gcc14 (20231129), on a x86_64-pc-linux-gnu host,
the following source gives a bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112766
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112762
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112762
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112762
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
I'm not really sure what the problem is but I wonder if this would help:
--- a/gcc/config/linux.h
+++ b/gcc/config/linux.h
@@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ see the files COPYING3 and COPYING.RUNTIME respectively.
If no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112764
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112762
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Part of the problem is *-uclinux is not matched in config.gcc where
linux-protos.h/linux.o gets added:
```
*-*-linux* | frv-*-*linux* | *-*-kfreebsd*-gnu | *-*-gnu* |
*-*-kopensolaris*-gnu | *-*-uclinuxfdpic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112758
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112725
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:259bb7a45a26b76cbde2131a62926d4419c1cc1b
commit r14-5974-g259bb7a45a26b76cbde2131a62926d4419c1cc1b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: s...@li-snyder.org
Target Milestone: ---
With a recent checkout of gcc14 (20231129), on a x86_64-pc-linux-gnu host,
the following source gives a seemingly bogus -Waggressive-loop-optimizations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112767
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-11-29
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106818
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100604
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pangbw at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100604
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112762
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The *-uclinux* targets are generally for systems without an MMU and a
corresponding ABI (FLAT, FDPIC, etc.), whereas *-linux-uclibc* targets are
for systems with an MMU and an associated c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #17 from Zeb Figura ---
Actually, for that matter, what is the intended purpose of -mstackrealign? How
is it supposed to differ from -mincoming-stack-boundary and
-mpreferred-stack-boundary? The documentation is kind of unclear; it "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112656
--- Comment #7 from Indu Bhagat ---
Currently generating everything at finish () when -mco-re is in effect is
sufficient for BPF needs. BTF is generated late for -mco-re because of CO-RE
relocations: these are strings which record indexes into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112768
Bug ID: 112768
Summary: btf: fix asm comment output for BTF_KIND_FUNC* kinds
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112768
Indu Bhagat changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112769
Bug ID: 112769
Summary: ICE on valid code related to requires-expression
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
dcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r14-5974-20231129191907-g259bb7a45a2-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20231129 (experimental) (GCC)
//binary-trunk-r14-5974-20231129191907-g259bb7a45a2-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20231129 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112764
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112764
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112764
--- Comment #4 from martin ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #1)
> Confirmed.
>
> F2018:11.1.3.3 has:
>
> "The associating entity does not have the ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attributes;
> it has the TARGET attribute if and only if the selector
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112764
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to martin from comment #4)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #1)
> > Confirmed.
> >
> > F2018:11.1.3.3 has:
> >
> > "The associating entity does not have the ALLOCATABLE or POINTER at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112764
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112772
Bug ID: 112772
Summary: Some issues with OPTIONAL, ALLOCATABLE dummy arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112765
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:220fe41fd4085e91a49e62dd815628ec4883a4ea
commit r14-5976-g220fe41fd4085e91a49e62dd815628ec4883a4ea
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96341
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/mpta5qwk1dq@arm.com/T/#md361994bae652d68136f3075a557cad834798611
fix this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112765
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0b242afffdddc251eca96b37c59802aa66197be7
commit r14-5977-g0b242afffdddc251eca96b37c59802aa66197be7
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112765
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112767
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106650
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:99d114c15523e0bfe7a89ef1947f82eb5ff0260b
commit r14-5979-g99d114c15523e0bfe7a89ef1947f82eb5ff0260b
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112759
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13 regression] mips|[13/14 regression] mips
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106650
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940
Bug 98940 depends on bug 106650, which changed state.
Bug 106650 Summary: [C++23] P2280 - Using unknown references in constant
expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106650
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111922
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112734
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mileston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112740
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does this work post:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2023-November/394162.html
?
If so I will commit a testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112431
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pan Li :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62685890d8861b72f812bfe171a20332df08bd49
commit r14-5982-g62685890d8861b72f812bfe171a20332df08bd49
Author: Juzhe-Zhong
Date: Wed Nov 29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109253
--- Comment #7 from Shung-Hsi Yu ---
(In reply to Jose E. Marchesi from comment #6)
> Yes. We plan to backport this and many other BPF related fixes and
> improvements to GCC 10, 11, 12 and 13, once the port is capable of building
> all the ker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112411
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
yeah, its intended use case is for debugging -fcompare-debug fails, reducing
superfluous differences between rtl dumps.
In theory GCC may overflow insn uids regardless of this param, and if guarding
again
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112431
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Lehua Ding :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8614cbb253484e28c3eb20cde4d1067aad56de58
commit r14-5984-g8614cbb253484e28c3eb20cde4d1067aad56de58
Author: Juzhe-Zhong
Date: Thu Nov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112773
Bug ID: 112773
Summary: [14 Regression] RISC-V ICE: in
force_align_down_and_div, at poly-int.h:1828 on
rv32gcv_zvl256b
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Sta
89 matches
Mail list logo
