https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 57444
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57444&action=edit
Preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note next time also attach the preprocessed source.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reducing ...
as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r14-9043-20240217001708-gd70f155b074-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.1 20240217 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113967
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113967
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely r14-3381-g27de9aa152141e ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113967
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113967
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression] ICE: in |[14 Regression] ICE: in
-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.1 20240217 (experimental) (GCC)
nux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r14-9043-20240217001708-gd70f155b074-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.1 20240217 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113967
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113969
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 57449
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57449&action=edit
very similar testcase, ICEing in build_enumerator instead
$ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc testcase2.C -wrapper valgri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113728
--- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer ---
This has been worked around in glibc. Should we close this issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110893
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 110893, which changed state.
Bug 110893 Summary: [modules] ICE Segmentation fault during GIMPLE pass modref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110893
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112294
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin21 |x86_64-apple-darwin*
Build|x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113970
Bug ID: 113970
Summary: [14 Regression] pch/system-{1,2}.C fails on darwin
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs-bisection, wrong-code
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113970
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-17
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113971
Bug ID: 113971
Summary: failure to build on arm64 musl (#error "Unsupported
AArch64 platform for heap trampolines")
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113911
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:76aac40f5ecbc9cfb3b8734d181599e1b5a24bdf
commit r14-9045-g76aac40f5ecbc9cfb3b8734d181599e1b5a24bdf
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113158
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:876fa432ef4074053fa65b1855e7d43320515576
commit r14-9047-g876fa432ef4074053fa65b1855e7d43320515576
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113158
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113968
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-17
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113969
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|Internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113972
Bug ID: 113972
Summary: ICE on container map for aggregate.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
/* Check any placeholder constraints against the deduced type. */
if (processing_template_decl && context == adc_unify)
/* Constraints will be checked after deduction. */;
else if (tree constr = N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113973
Bug ID: 113973
Summary: Pleas issue a warning when using plain character
values in bitwise operations
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107068
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jerry DeLisle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fccfe6625121512f247cb59888e50eb9dcc84409
commit r14-9048-gfccfe6625121512f247cb59888e50eb9dcc84409
Author: Jerry DeLisle
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96360
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96496
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-08-06 00:00:00 |2024-2-17
--- Comment #5 from Marek Pola
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113969
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113503
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:296284a9dbb7df4485cc5f1d3e975fdb4b8a10b8
commit r14-9049-g296284a9dbb7df4485cc5f1d3e975fdb4b8a10b8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113974
Bug ID: 113974
Summary: Attribute common ignored
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113503
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113969
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113336
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105473
--- Comment #27 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jerry DeLisle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a71d87431d0c4e04a402ef6566be090c470b2b53
commit r14-9050-ga71d87431d0c4e04a402ef6566be090c470b2b53
Author: Jerry DeLisle
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 57452
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57452&action=edit
semi reduced testcase
Reduced somewhat. There is some more to go but I will leave that for someone
else. Some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113862
--- Comment #2 from Pascal Pignard ---
Nevertheless, theses examples of code come from AARM Ada 2022:
11.3 Raise Statements and Raise Expressions
...
All of the following are legal, no additional parens are needed:
2.a.10/4Pre : Boolean
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83282
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
With -std=f95 we get:
$ gfc -std=f95 pr83282.f90
pr83282.f90:1:13:
1 |write(*,'(aa)') "ab", "bc"
| 1
Error: GNU Extension: Missing comma at (1)
pr83282.f90:2:17:
2 |write
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83282
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
$ gfc -Wall -Werror -pedantic pr83282.f90
pr83282.f90:1:4:
1 |write(*,'(aa)') "ab", "bc"
|1
Error: Unclassifiable statement at (1)
This is not very useful either. :o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113975
Bug ID: 113975
Summary: function returning array is not fully evaluated before
assignement
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113970
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|pch |c++
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109358
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=113911
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113975
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113892
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||comptes at ugo235 dot fr
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113892
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-17
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113897
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=113976
Bug ID: 113976
Summary: explicit instantiation of const variable template
following implicit instantiation is assembled in
.rodata instead of .bss
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113976
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|explicit instantiation of |[11/12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113970
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113971
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|failure to bui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113862
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
Well, this is very irregular if it happens to be legal, since it would be
illegal if the raise was replaced by anything else. More of a bug in the
language than in the compiler if you ask me...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113974
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |middle-end
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113971
--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
the intent was not to enable this feature for platforms we could not test.
but libgcc/config.host has "aarch64*-*-linux*" so we have inadvertently enabled
it for aarch64-linux-musl.
assuming linux-musl defin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113974
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note clang since 4.0 has the same behavior as GCC here ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113889
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
Created attachment 57453
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57453&action=edit
Proposed fix
Here is a proposed patch and associated testcases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
Bug ID: 113977
Summary: debug info for alignment of structure is unspecified
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113576
--- Comment #57 from Hongtao Liu ---
> For dg-do run testcases I really think we should avoid those -march=
> options, because it means a lot of other stuff, BMI, LZCNT, ...
Make sense.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108192
jyong at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jyong at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This seems like a bug in gdb really.
GCC produces:
```
.uleb128 0x3# (DIE (0x2e) DW_TAG_structure_type)
.ascii "s7\0" # DW_AT_name
.byte 0x7 # DW_AT_byte_size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|debug |libcc1
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
For me with the trunk GCC we get:
```
(gdb) expr z[0]._[0] = 1
gdb command line:1:1: error: size of array element is not a multiple of its
alignment
Compilation failed.
(gdb) expr y[0]._[0] = 1
(gdb) expr x[
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
--- Comment #4 from Tan Senqi ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> For me with the trunk GCC we get:
> ```
> (gdb) expr z[0]._[0] = 1
> gdb command line:1:1: error: size of array element is not a multiple of its
> alignment
> Compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Tan Senqi from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> I think gcc can generate a DW_AT_alignment for my struct to solve this
> problem. But why the alignment is considered a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
trunk gdb fails too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113977
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
>(which is likely inherited from the default structure alignment requirement on
>the platform)
That is wrong assumption really. Since the ABI (the platform) says the
alignment is type depedent and in this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109885
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao Liu ---
int sum() {
int ret = 0;
for (int i=0; i<8; ++i) ret +=(0==v[i]);
return ret;
}
int sum2() {
int ret = 0;
auto m = v==0;
for (int i=0; i<8; ++i) ret += m[i];
return ret;
}
For sum, gcc t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
Bug ID: 113978
Summary: Misoptimize for long vector load operation
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
>GCC generates extra stack operation
That is basically to realign the stack just in case there was a spill, this
happens more on mingw compiling than linux really.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
--- Comment #4 from 严 逍宇 ---
I find an example without abi problem:
===
Source Code
===
using v [[using gnu: vector_size(128)]] = char;
void f(v *pa, v *pb) noexcept
{
v a{*pa}, b{*pb};
*pa = b;
*pb = a;
}
===
Command
===
g++ test.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to 严 逍宇 from comment #4)
> I find an example without abi problem:
As I mentioned, that works on linux just fine:
```
vmovdqa64 (%rdi), %zmm1
vmovdqa64 64(%rdi), %zmm0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
--- Comment #6 from 严 逍宇 ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> As I mentioned, that works on linux just fine:
Thank you for your time. And when can I use this feature on mingw? I think the
behavior of swap two long vectors should b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113976
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43613
--- Comment #10 from nightstrike ---
Patch thread started here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/644674.html
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/4700e066-1b50-4e7b-92f7-d8c33a330...@gmail.com/
and ended with this sol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113978
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108644
nightstrike changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nightstrike at gmail dot com
--- Comment
83 matches
Mail list logo
