https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116965
Bug ID: 116965
Summary: obj-c++.dg/fobjc-std-1.mm test fails after syntax fix
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116966
Bug ID: 116966
Summary: obj-c++.dg/property/dotsyntax-20.mm test fails after
syntax fix
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116965
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>contained a dg-* directive syntax issue which meant a directive was being
>silently ignored.
Yes and that was deliberate, comment from the testcase itself:
/* There is a problem with the testsuite on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116966
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Comment from the testcase:
/* Now test some warnings. */
object.p1; /* This warning does not seem to be produced in C++. dg-warning
"value computed is not used" */
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116965
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
oh, I see. Ugh.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69374
--- Comment #25 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Gerald Pfeifer :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:186be7f37aed3b141af6367e05d28c5bcb0d9330
commit r15-4053-g186be7f37aed3b141af6367e05d28c5bcb0d9330
Author: Gerald Pfeifer
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116967
Bug ID: 116967
Summary: Accepts-invalid missing constinit specifier on
initializing declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116967
--- Comment #1 from Jan Schultke ---
I really like the Clang output by the way, which GCC could copy almost
directly:
> :2:5: warning: 'constinit' specifier missing on initializing
> declaration of 'x' [-Wmissing-constinit]
> 2 | int x;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116967
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.1.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116956
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #371 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #370)
> I can also confirm that Kaz' sh-lra-take3 branch fixes the build of Python
> 3.13 which fails to build with the usual register starving problem from
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28614
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116937
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-10-04
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116949
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Yeah, but note the vectorizer internally (up to recent Tamars patch?) made use
of walk_stmt specifically for pattern stmts so it was(?) still needed.
There's also GENERIC comparison handling in genmatch be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116955
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116956
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116959
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #370 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
I can also confirm that Kaz' sh-lra-take3 branch fixes the build of Python 3.13
which fails to build with the usual register starving problem from PR81426:
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/fe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116968
Bug ID: 116968
Summary: There should be an rtl version of
stmt_unremovable_because_of_non_call_eh_p
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116962
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116369
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4ef6b95d5dabba0a907d9545f901c77f0a5cb42d
commit r14-10742-g4ef6b95d5dabba0a907d9545f901c77f0a5cb42d
Author: Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37475
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.0|14.3
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105769
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59281
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59281&action=edit
Slightly more reduced
Removed iostream. Still need to remove the std::function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116755
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aeb54d0f3a9eb9363157a040beaddd4939bd4774
commit r14-10732-gaeb54d0f3a9eb9363157a040beaddd4939bd4774
Author: Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116857
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1b09baab8c751c6d14c1028dcaf9497a5c39b695
commit r14-10738-g1b09baab8c751c6d14c1028dcaf9497a5c39b695
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90276
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:61584f377ceee868c73a994e4d9d7b7bee5fb443
commit r14-10734-g61584f377ceee868c73a994e4d9d7b7bee5fb443
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37475
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c4253d6a170f40725ce3a11ce7a3e236b6e4842f
commit r14-10737-gc4253d6a170f40725ce3a11ce7a3e236b6e4842f
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116964
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116964
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin ---
This occurred at revision r15-4033-g1f619fe2592.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108770
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116911
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116911
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Nathaniel Shead from comment #9)
> Patch submitted:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-October/664449.html
>
> Sorry about the breakage.
No worries, it's part of the fun and point o
rn Foo<[] {}>();
};
}
int main() {
foo();
}
```
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-snapshot/bin/g++
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk-20241003/configure
--prefix=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-build/staging
--enable-libstdcxx-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105769
--- Comment #21 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59280
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59280&action=edit
Patch which fixes it
This is the patch which is on top of
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-Octo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116962
Bug ID: 116962
Summary: Bad interaction between __attribute__((naked)) and
-fstack-protector-all
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116962
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
maybe naked attribute should imply no_stack_protector attribute (if it is not
already).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116963
Bug ID: 116963
Summary: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++2011/parallel_mode.cc
(test for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116964
Bug ID: 116964
Summary: FAIL: 18_support/comparisons/algorithms/fallback.cc
-std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116944
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116963
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116954
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116954
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-10-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116954
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116853#c0
Nice catch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116961
Bug ID: 116961
Summary: Valgrind reports uninitialized memory use in dstruct.d
(dmd.dstruct._isZeroInit(dmd.expression.Expression)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116961
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116954
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116961
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/commit/0b677d90ee8703a1aad7adb6c7f7f7c892e3cc78 is
the only big change I can spot to that, but I've no idea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116951
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
"std" for checking the components in namespace std?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116755
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7ea30d4a5b211cc8ddda8f7f33bb2308b681be74
commit r13-9074-g7ea30d4a5b211cc8ddda8f7f33bb2308b681be74
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116857
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:24e2b4cf7902fbdc6c921cfaf9674f844146b3e1
commit r13-9075-g24e2b4cf7902fbdc6c921cfaf9674f844146b3e1
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116857
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed for 14.3 and 13.4 too
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116755
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||13.3.0, 14.2.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #369 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #346)
>
> ... I've noticed that this is the same as the existing
> MAYBE_BASE_REGISTER_RTX_P.
>
> I've inserted a patch into the stash to tighten all the existing memory
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116913
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116960
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||c++-lambda
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116960
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116911
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |critical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116914
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116951
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
The approach is fine with me, I'll wait a few days for bikeshedding on name and
then submit something. I agree there's no harm in yet another option and we can
just include it in yes later if things go OK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #16 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> Created attachment 59272 [details]
> gcc15-pr116896-inc.patch
>
> Incremental patch which performs the subtraction in QImode and then
> sign-extends.
> Though,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #17 from Uroš Bizjak ---
e.g.:
float case:
xorl%eax,%eax
comiss %xmm1, %xmm0
jp .L2
seta%al
sbbl$0, %eax
ret
.L2:
movl$2, %eax
ret
This is *reall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #18 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #17)
> e.g.:
>
> float case:
> xorl%eax,%eax
> comiss %xmm1, %xmm0
> jp .L2
> seta%al
> sbbl$0, %eax
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116944
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116943
--- Comment #3 from mauro russo ---
may I suppose that the following text from [temp.inst]:
The implicit instantiation of a class template specialization causes
- the implicit instantiation of the declarations, but not of the definitions,
of th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 59273
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59273&action=edit
gcc15-pr116896-inc2.patch
I've tried to improve the signed int <=> case (the only one which doesn't use
sbb a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116955
Bug ID: 116955
Summary: [15 Regression] GCN '-march=gfx1100':
[-PASS:-]{+FAIL:+} gcc.dg/vect/pr81740-2.c execution
test
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116956
Bug ID: 116956
Summary: ICE when building PALM with gfortran: in
vect_analyze_loop_1, at tree-vect-loop.cc:3510
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116654
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #10)
> Thanks! Even the generic ones were fixed it looks like. At least on power.
Confirmed for powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #17)
> e.g.:
>
> float case:
> xorl%eax,%eax
> comiss %xmm1, %xmm0
> jp .L2
> seta%al
> sbbl$0, %eax
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116571
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116578
Bug 116578 depends on bug 116571, which changed state.
Bug 116571 Summary: [15 Regression] GCN vs. "lower SLP load permutation to
interleaving"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116571
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116855
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot
gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116956
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Summary|IC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #3 from Mark Wielaard ---
What code is generated for that call to 'Valid in "if
Indexed_Assoc.Gen_Id'Valid then". Does that conditional really depend on
uninitialized data?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #21 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> Created attachment 59273 [details]
> gcc15-pr116896-inc2.patch
>
> I've tried to improve the signed int <=> case (the only one which doesn't
> use sbb and so ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116944
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7754a8b7b4978ad82aef3ad456c5f60460b47393
commit r15-4040-g7754a8b7b4978ad82aef3ad456c5f60460b47393
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #4 from Mark Wielaard ---
Also does running valgrind memcheck with --expensive-definedness-checks=yes
help?
--expensive-definedness-checks= [default: auto]
Controls whether Memcheck should employ more precise but also more
exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #22 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> > Created attachment 59273 [details]
> > gcc15-pr116896-inc2.patch
> >
> > I've tried to improve the signed int <=>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116944
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 59274
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59274&action=edit
gcc15-pr116896-peep2.patch
Peephole2 for the signed int <=> case (if the comparison is done in SImode).
With
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #22)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> > > Created attachment 59273 [details]
> > > gcc15-pr116896-inc2.pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #25 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #22)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> > > Created attachment 59273 [details]
> > > gcc15-pr116896-inc2.patc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116942
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #26 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #24)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #22)
> > (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> > > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> > > > Created atta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116942
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The modified ECMAScript grammar in the C++ standard says:
"If the CV of a UnicodeEscapeSequence is greater than the largest value that
can be held in an object of type charT the translator shall throw an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116951
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116951
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Not "stl" though please.
STL != the C++ standard library
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> What code is generated for that call to 'Valid in "if
> Indexed_Assoc.Gen_Id'Valid then". Does that conditional really depend on
> uninitialized data?
Yes, as explained in the comment, Indexed_Assoc.Gen_I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5)
> > What code is generated for that call to 'Valid in "if
> > Indexed_Assoc.Gen_Id'Valid then". Does that conditional really depend on
> > uninitialized data?
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Sure. But I assume the unitialized part isn't accessed when resolving the
> 'Valid attribute. Does checking for the 'Valid attribute depend on any
> uninitialized bits?
Testing 'Valid means comparing the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #8 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #7)
> > Sure. But I assume the unitialized part isn't accessed when resolving the
> > 'Valid attribute. Does checking for the 'Valid attribute depend on any
> > uninit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116948
--- Comment #5 from Filip Kastl ---
We run the ubsan bootstrap roughly every week. We also have a simple script
that searches the logs for errors. It looks like this
find gcc/testsuite -name "*.log" | xargs cat | ...
here we pipe output thro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116519
--- Comment #3 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The warning disappears after adding -fno-thread-jumps.
looks like similar issue as PR109071
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59267|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112398
Alexey Merzlyakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexey.merzlyakov at samsung
dot c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116913
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
--- Comment #28 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Comment on attachment 59275
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59275
gcc15-pr116896.patch
>+ rtx zero = NULL_RTX;
>+ if (op2 != const0_rtx && TARGET_IEEE_FP && GET_MODE (dest) == SImode)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116940
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116957
Bug ID: 116957
Summary: Creation of pre-compiled header (-x c-header, -x
c++-header) confused by linker options (eg -Wl,-g)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIR
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
