https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115361
--- Comment #6 from Arthur O'Dwyer ---
Thanks, that looks much less noisy! (Assuming godbolt.org has updated already.)
I now see this:
// https://godbolt.org/z/WqT6hs8ed
f3, f7, and f9 now all give -Wuninitialized at -O1 and higher (and
false-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116936
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116654
--- Comment #10 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks! Even the generic ones were fixed it looks like. At least on power.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 59267
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59267&action=edit
gcc15-pr116896-wip.patch
Untested WIP patch.
Compared to unpatched compiler, float <=> without -ffast-math ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41045
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116936
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --enable-libsanitizer
--disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r15-4009-20241002101450-gba53ccad554-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.0 20241002 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116875
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=116722
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Simon Martin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3a528386571fffbb41703a238aee950043af3f3c
commit r15-4026-g3a528386571fffbb41703a238aee950043af3f3c
Author: Simon Martin
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116919
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I don't know your extension set or pipeline, but one additional thing that
might improve things further would be to adjust the risc-v expansion code to
alternate between a table lookup and a clmul variant.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52641
--- Comment #28 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5bf78cf0a2a7fe999562fcef7bad0d9631af9742
commit r15-4030-g5bf78cf0a2a7fe999562fcef7bad0d9631af9742
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116585
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Qing Zhao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a344ba9e42224220a7279a4051a08662435b1c60
commit r13-9072-ga344ba9e42224220a7279a4051a08662435b1c60
Author: Richard Biener
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116080
--- Comment #19 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
>Is musttail7.c specifically about testing recursive calls?
It is mainly about testing the frontend.
In the middle end tail recursion is implemented quite differently but
the frontend doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #10 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 59265
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59265&action=edit
Reduced test case
I have reduced the test case.
The bug in calculation of 'k = i & j;'
It have to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116907
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #21)
> > So the TREE_BLOCK (expr) has been free'd.
>
> Right. The TREE_BLOCK for an expression is:
>
> if (IS_EXPR_CODE_CLASS (c))
> return LOCATION_BLOCK (t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116585
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Qing Zhao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e69c03971aa50fda96b3382bfded54da3d087c32
commit r14-10730-ge69c03971aa50fda96b3382bfded54da3d087c32
Author: Richard Biener
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116946
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwerner at chromium dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116947
Bug ID: 116947
Summary: --enable-checking=valgrind ignores failures during
bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116946
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116948
Bug ID: 116948
Summary: bootstrap-ubsan should set UBSAN_OPTIONS to abort on
error
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116947
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116948
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116944
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] |[15 Regression]
|17_i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116946
Bug ID: 116946
Summary: LTO gets confused about code path and incorrectly
triggers build-time assertion
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
When bootstrapping with Valgrind (--enable-checking=valgrind), I see some
others as well:
../../xgcc -B../../ -c -Og -ggdb3 -fdiagnostics-color=always -W -Wall
-gnatpg -gnata -I- -I../rts -I. -I/home/sam/g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116946
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
IIRC you can't use __builtin_constant_p in this way ever even without LTO.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116947
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
I'm not sure if we actually want --exit-on-first-error=yes. It might be
annoying with --enable-checking=valgrind. I'll drop it from my patches unless
someone wants it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111276
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
So the reason why the patch for PR111422 used to work is because before we had:
_43 = _42 + 18446744073709551615;
_44 = &g + _43;
*_44 = 8;
But with the change here we get:
_9 = (unsigned long) &g;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116949
Bug ID: 116949
Summary: walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops has extra code to handle
comparisons in there
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116613
--- Comment #16 from Kamil Dudka ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #15)
> (In reply to Kamil Dudka from comment #14)
> > 1. Will `file=` work with absolute paths?
>
> Yes. There might be some issues with expressing paths/filenames co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52641
--- Comment #27 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:875a1df8130342baf985650c5de1914cf37eb774
commit r15-4029-g875a1df8130342baf985650c5de1914cf37eb774
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116490
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116585
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Qing Zhao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e5bd9b4b38f5b4fbd2a95d8f61168d9eeea97d3
commit r12-10739-g8e5bd9b4b38f5b4fbd2a95d8f61168d9eeea97d3
Author: Richard Biener
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116583
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116301
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:caef7002b74af612fabbf049763862f9b1489579
commit r15-4035-gcaef7002b74af612fabbf049763862f9b1489579
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116929
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.3.1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116929
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in |[14 regression] ICE in
|w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116301
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-10-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116301
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Also, perhaps sarif-output.exp could have a loop to run all tests
per-sarif-version, rather than just for 2.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116616
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116878
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116616
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
*** Bug 116878 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116950
Bug ID: 116950
Summary: IVopts missed unification of duplicate IVs
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116951
Bug ID: 116951
Summary: Use -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS for --enable-checking=yes
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116952
Bug ID: 116952
Summary: Error on lambda NTTP argument to type constraint in
template parameter list of generic lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116952
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116831
Jennifer Schmitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109967
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116947
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
ht
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116951
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
=extra would work for me as well if we really don't want to put it in 'yes'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110141
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|12.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116952
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note even this works:
```
template
concept A = true;
constexpr auto t = [] {};
auto b = []> {};
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116950
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
> p.s. even though -ffinite-loops seems to be default at -O2
It is enabled for C++ yes but NOT C by default. That might be the difference
you saw when reducing the code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116950
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
CC|
101 - 155 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
