https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113194
--- Comment #4 from Paul Hua ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Works for me with r14-6875-g3a7dd24eadeb91 on x86_64:
> ./cc1plus tmp/ExtractAPIConsumer.cpp.ii -quiet -Og -fPIC
> -fno-semantic-interposition -fvisibility-inlines-hi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112457
--- Comment #3 from JuzheZhong ---
Created attachment 56973
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56973&action=edit
min/max reduction approach with index
Hi, Richi.
I have watch all PPT/video of 2023 llvm development meeting.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
--- Comment #24 from Alex Coplan ---
Thanks a lot for the fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113196
Bug ID: 113196
Summary: [14 Regression] Failure to use ushll{,2}
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113196
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rsandifo at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113178
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
Bug ID: 113197
Summary: [14 Regressiion] ICE in in handle_call_arg, at
tree-ssa-structalias.cc:4119
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113198
Bug ID: 113198
Summary: [14 Regression] internal compiler error: 'verify_type'
failed
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
Andrew Stubbs changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ams at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #11)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #7)
> > This seems to happen because the vectorizer decides to use partial vectors
> > to vectorize the loop and th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113194
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |debug
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104028
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110627
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110627
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103370
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113199
Bug ID: 113199
Summary: [14 Regression][GCN] ICE (segfault) when compiling
Newlib
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113114
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #21 from Richard Earnshaw ---
FTR it was this patch that added this code. So 2012!
commit e75b54a2d932929a9b2e940c5aad1ef33a86c008
Author: Richard Earnshaw
Date: Thu Mar 22 17:54:55 2012 +
* lex.c (search_line_fast): Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113140
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 56975
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56975&action=edit
reduced testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113140
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #2)
> Created attachment 56940 [details]
> Preprocessed source from building qt6-declarative with gcc-13
>
> Sure, see attached.
It's also helpful to inclu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113140
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth ---
> It's also helpful to include the cc1plus invocation from g++ -v; that includes
> all you need to reproduce.
The full one is
cc1plus -fpreproce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #22 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #21)
> commit e75b54a2d932929a9b2e940c5aad1ef33a86c008
> Author: Richard Earnshaw
> Date: Thu Mar 22 17:54:55 2012 +
>
> * lex.c (search_line_fast):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113140
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #23 from Andreas Schwab ---
valgrind replaces str/mem functions with its own versions so that it can do
better checking and avoid false positives.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #24 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #22)
> Is the optimization still worthwhile some 12 years later ?
Almost certainly. Vector operations have become much better than they were at
the time the pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113192
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression] ERROR: |[11/12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98390
--- Comment #1 from Stefan Krah ---
The issue can still be reproduced with a gcc-14 snapshot. ibm-clang++ does not
have this problem. The LLVM unwinder has been reworked for AIX:
https://www.mail-archive.com/cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org/msg275024
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113199
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-02
Assignee|unassig
ls with
```
In file included from
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20240102/include/c++/14.0.0/string:42,
from :1:
:22:23: in 'constexpr' expansion of 'S<5>(((const char*)"test"))'
:16:26: in 'constexpr' expansion of
'std::char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113201
Bug ID: 113201
Summary: [14 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check:
expected ssa_name, have integer_cst in
replace_uses_by, at tree-cfg.cc:2058
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113191
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|[10.1/11/12/13/14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112457
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98753
--- Comment #16 from Stefan Krah ---
I have encountered the same issue (gcc emits a false positive warning when
free() is called conditionally) in the mpdecimal project when compiled with
-flto.
Worse, mpdecimal itself as well as a large test su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
Created attachment 56976
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56976&action=edit
reduced test case
reduced test case, still requires another object file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
the ICE goes away, if I also build the conntrack.o object file with -fPIC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113202
Bug ID: 113202
Summary: std::find does not work with the maximum range of
pointers
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113202
--- Comment #1 from Carsten Schmidt ---
Created attachment 56977
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56977&action=edit
A demonstration of the description.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113202
--- Comment #2 from Carsten Schmidt ---
Created attachment 56978
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56978&action=edit
Output of the compilation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113202
--- Comment #3 from Carsten Schmidt ---
Created attachment 56979
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56979&action=edit
Output when executing the program.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #25 from Mark Wielaard ---
Note comment #16 which explains that valgrind seems to translate this large
read into smaller chunks. Which most likely causes memcheck to flag the (last)
8 bytes read as fully invalid. See
--partial-lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113202
--- Comment #4 from Carsten Schmidt ---
NOTE: My .ii file exceeds the size limit, so I attached the originating code
instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #26 from Richard Earnshaw ---
I think it's more likely that this is at the start of the buffer rather than
the end, and related to rounding the address down to a 16-byte alignment. But
it could also occur at the end of the buffer as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #27 from Richard Earnshaw ---
> ==9933==by 0x151D554: search_line_fast (lex.cc:872)
This is the entry code; so the issue is with the initial alignment code (unless
the buffer is smaller than 16 bytes, when we might get both unde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113202
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Why do you think this is a bug?
I suspect this is due to `ptr-ptr` returns a signed value and max is (void*)-1
so it that returns a negative value and things just don't work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113200
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||55004
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113200
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |libstdc++
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113200
--- Comment #3 from Peter Dimov ---
I think that the compiler is correct; string literal address comparisons aren't
constant expressions. Clang gives the same error:
https://godbolt.org/z/xPWEf4z63.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113200
--- Comment #4 from Peter Dimov ---
I didn't notice your subsequent comment, sorry. :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113203
Bug ID: 113203
Summary: __attribute__ ((always_inline)) fails with
C99/LTO/-Og.
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113175
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113175
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka ---
> When r14-205 fixed that, the total number of loop iterations increased by
> approximately 4x (2x due to symmetry with unsigned, 2x due to the loop range
> being -limit...limit instead of 0...limit) which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113045
--- Comment #28 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #5)
> No idea. I know the gcc project is over 30 years old and it is not
> feasible for me to download the entire history, it is too large.
>
> I have the last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113199
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 56980
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56980&action=edit
submitted-patch.patch
Have submitted this to list. thanks for report!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111485
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
Created attachment 56981
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56981&action=edit
reduced test case
reduced test case, without object files.
the compiler is configured with --enable-pie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113191
--- Comment #2 from waffl3x ---
> Looking at the above commit, joust already takes care to check
> more_constrained for non-template functions, and only if their function
> parameters match according to cand_parms_match. But here cand_parms_mat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113141
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=113204
Bug ID: 113204
Summary: [14 Regression] lto1: error: qsort comparator
non-negative on sorted output: 64
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82407
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113204
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The comparison function in question:
```
static int
cmp_symbol_files (const void *pn1, const void *pn2, void *id_map_)
{
const symtab_node *n1 = *(const symtab_node * const *)pn1;
const symtab_node *n2 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113205
Bug ID: 113205
Summary: [14 Regression] internal compiler error: in
backward_pass, at tree-vect-slp.cc:5346
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113206
Bug ID: 113206
Summary: [14] RISC-V rv64gcv vector: Runtime mismatch with
rv64gc
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113207
Bug ID: 113207
Summary: [14 Regression] error: type variant has different
'TREE_TYPE'
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113207
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
this is from the ecl package build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113208
Bug ID: 113208
Summary: [14 Regression] lto1: error: Alias and target's comdat
groups differs
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113208
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
also seen in the pbcopper package
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113205
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
also in package qt6-quick3dphysics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113208
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
also in package s2geometry
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110603
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113207
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression] error: type |[11/12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89075
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113207
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
--- Comment #10 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #9)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #8)
> > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> > > This PR is for the sysv ABI,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113158
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113201
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113201
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113209
Bug ID: 113209
Summary: [14] RISC-V rv64gcv_zvl256b vector: Runtime mismatch
with rv64gc
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113198
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113206
--- Comment #1 from JuzheZhong ---
Do you use the latest upstream GCC ?
I tried it, but didn't reproduce the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113206
--- Comment #2 from Patrick O'Neill ---
This was with (In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #1)
> Do you use the latest upstream GCC ?
>
> I tried it, but didn't reproduce the issue.
I tested with r14-6884-g046cea56fd1. Since it's to be overwri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
Bug ID: 113210
Summary: [14] RISC-V vector ICE: tree check: expected
integer_cst, have cond_expr in get_len, at tree.h:6481
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
--- Comment #1 from JuzheZhong ---
This is not RISC-V issues, it's middle-end issue.
Plz change the title and CC Richard.
https://godbolt.org/z/1bj9xaYTa
ARM SVE has the same issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
--- Comment #2 from Patrick O'Neill ---
On 1/2/24 15:38, juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
>
> --- Comment #1 from JuzheZhong ---
> This is not RISC-V issues, it's middle-end issue.
> Plz c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113206
--- Comment #3 from JuzheZhong ---
Ok. I saw the bug in assembly.
It's odd that I can't reproduce the run FAIL in simulator.
I will fix it soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
is executed at most (short unsigned int) (a.0_1 + 255) + 1 <= 256 ? 0 :
~(short unsigned int) (a.0_1 + 255) (bounded by 65279) + 1 times in loop 1.
Though that is the same niter as in GCC 13 ...
The code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113159
--- Comment #7 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Generally I hate the idea to punish innocent programs (making them slower) just
to satisfy buggy programs. If it's due to Hyrum's rule then fine, but here
Hyrum rule does not apply.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113210
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Better/slightly more reduced testcase:
```
unsigned char a, c;
unsigned short b;
void d() {
c = a - 1;
b = c;
while (++b > 256)
;
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113190
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113203
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I thought there was another bug related to using always_inline and LTO.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113203
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am not 100% sure if this is a bug here since you are requesting across TU
always_inline but at -Og, that is basically not enabled.
Maybe not use always_inline for -O0 and -Og builds?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112534
--- Comment #11 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Did it work?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113175
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a138b99646a5551c53b860648521adb5bfe8c2fa
commit r14-6888-ga138b99646a5551c53b860648521adb5bfe8c2fa
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105401
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
putting the words "computed gotos" here for easier searchability
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113211
Bug ID: 113211
Summary: Trying to initialize the tripwire database ends up
with a SEGV if a uid cannot be found
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113211
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-03
Status|UNCONFIRM
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
