https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119119
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119134
Bug ID: 119134
Summary: ICE segfault on capturing lambda in fold expression in
requires clause
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
--- Comment #1 from chenglulu ---
This patch can fix the problem.
However, there are some parts that I haven't quite understood yet.
```
diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.md
b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.md
index 90c475ef0c0..80b2f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao ---
It happens at:
trying to combine definition of r94 in:
15: r94:DI=r92:DI<<0x2&0xfffc
REG_DEAD r92:DI
into:
17: r96:DI=sign_extend(r87:SI+r94:DI#0)
REG_DEAD r94:DI
REG_DEAD r87:SI
i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119119
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60664
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60664&action=edit
Semi reduced
I am still trying to reduce it further.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119119
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60665
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60665&action=edit
reduced
Finally was able to remove all of the lambdas and indirections.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119131
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 60666
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60666&action=edit
auto-reduced testcase showing a similar issues with +Int
The other (cvise-reduced) testcase shows a similar iss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119119
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119133
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-06
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115842
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao Liu ---
I noticed some double-counting of cost in group-candidate (regarding loop
invariant expressions), this modification reduces the number of instructions
executed by ~8% for exchange_r binary compiled with -marc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119119
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.1.0, 9.1.0
Summary|ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
--- Comment #7 from chenglulu ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #5)
> (In reply to chenglulu from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3)
> > > It happens at:
> > >
> > > trying to combine definition of r94 in:
> > >1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119131
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
But e.g. 0.0e-12df shouldn't be treated like that.
As can be seen on
_Decimal32 a = 0.0e-12df;
_Decimal32 b = 0.0e-98df;
_Decimal32 c = 0.0e-99df;
_Decimal32 d = 0.0e-100df;
_Decimal32 e = 0.0e-101df;
_Decim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
--- Comment #4 from chenglulu ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3)
> It happens at:
>
> trying to combine definition of r94 in:
>15: r94:DI=r92:DI<<0x2&0xfffc
> REG_DEAD r92:DI
> into:
>17: r96:DI=sign_extend(r87:SI+r9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
--- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to chenglulu from comment #4)
> (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3)
> > It happens at:
> >
> > trying to combine definition of r94 in:
> >15: r94:DI=r92:DI<<0x2&0xfffc
> > REG_DEAD
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
--- Comment #6 from Xi Ruoyao ---
More simplified test case:
int x;
struct Type {
unsigned SubclassData : 24;
} y;
void test(void) {
x = y.SubclassData * 37;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
Kees Cook changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119084
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:43d777078387ab2c4aabe526f6ee0ff13055e0b6
commit r14-11389-g43d777078387ab2c4aabe526f6ee0ff13055e0b6
Author: Xi Ruoyao
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119084
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
ch64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.1 20250305 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104684
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #9 from Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104684
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97323
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:556e25f0e9abc720c940994bd9a1491062933d49
commit r15-7829-g556e25f0e9abc720c940994bd9a1491062933d49
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97323
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||14.2.1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119121
Bug ID: 119121
Summary: subrange conversion to tuple-like does not work
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119121
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.3.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119121
--- Comment #1 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
Introduced in g:65b4cba9d6a9ffe9b4d4bdff90727a7064cc0e3b
The `is_reference_v<_Vp>` should use `_Tp` instead.
```
template
concept __pair_like_convertible_from
- = !range<_Tp> && __pair_l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119121
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-05
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119114
Li Pan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pan2.li at intel dot com
--- Comment #1 from L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116740
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Simon Martin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b3d078220d202094a2b4eaef9b4a5ad1b84d30e6
commit r15-7825-gb3d078220d202094a2b4eaef9b4a5ad1b84d30e6
Author: Simon Martin
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116740
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|15.0|
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116238
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:995f0e76f01abcbbb29c47d9019418d253c41a43
commit r13-9410-g995f0e76f01abcbbb29c47d9019418d253c41a43
Author: Richard Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117045
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:591e34c1f7bbaa6ac1046ec45f7d162fdb33a1de
commit r13-9411-g591e34c1f7bbaa6ac1046ec45f7d162fdb33a1de
Author: Richard San
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116999
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:591e34c1f7bbaa6ac1046ec45f7d162fdb33a1de
commit r13-9411-g591e34c1f7bbaa6ac1046ec45f7d162fdb33a1de
Author: Richard San
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118976
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7995713012fcc0e0e098157d87fe5ff9d85c820b
commit r13-9412-g7995713012fcc0e0e098157d87fe5ff9d85c820b
Author: Richard Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104684
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:705ae582d519f1230de3ec0d75a75e72341a674e
commit r15-7826-g705ae582d519f1230de3ec0d75a75e72341a674e
Author: Andre Vehreschild
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119108
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
Ok, now really confirmed :)
Interestingly the behavior on other uarches suggests this may be cost
modelling.
On Neoverse-V1 we get (without LTO):
BM_UFlat/0/1 -4.60251
BM_UFlat/0/2 -2.34742
BM_UFlat/3/1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97986
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98294
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.2.0, 15.0, 9.3.1
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119108
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina ---
Ah... It looks like somehow the built for
/data/gcc/gcc-with-68326d5d1a5-install/ failed and it was silently picking up
the distro compiler instead.
Hence the difference in memmove only!
I'll clean every
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119117
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118874
--- Comment #18 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #16)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> > Created attachment 60651 [details]
> > gcc15-pr118874.patch
> >
> > This seems to work for me for both PRs. Unte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119122
Bug ID: 119122
Summary: Zca does not imply C extension when it is possible
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71684
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, that firces the use of pthread_mutex_create and pthread_mutex_destroy,
which gives the OS a chance to free memory on destroy.
I don't recall what happened with FreeBSD, I think they moved away from
al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71684
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> Yes, that firces
*forces
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119099
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #3)
> Bi-directional dataflow is notoriously hard to get correct and I have zero
> confidence this code handles that reasonably. I thought I had some checks
> for t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119108
--- Comment #3 from Matthew Malcomson ---
I only looked into VecSource/5/2, and unfortunately I looked into it on an
internal setup that compiles slightly differently.
In that slightly different compilation I noticed that `FindMatchLengthPlain`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71684
--- Comment #7 from Christian Prochaska
---
Bug 57440 solved the problem for mingw32 by defining
_GTHREAD_USE_MUTEX_INIT_FUNC in os_defines.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100529
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-stdcheck
--- Comment #9 from Ric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119121
--- Comment #2 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
Committed to master as r15-7830-g95b2f8d8fb3131
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71684
--- Comment #10 from Christian Prochaska
---
std::__condvar always calls __gthread_cond_destroy() even if
__GTHREAD_COND_INIT is used. So, it's handled differently there than in
std::__mutex_base.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118076
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110352
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Also:
Fix submdspan for C++26 https://wg21.link/P3355R1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118320
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110357
--- Comment #1 from Giuseppe D'Angelo ---
I have posted a preliminary patch, but it needs a rebase and more work
(basically some implementation design choice).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119125
Bug ID: 119125
Summary: [C++26] P2548R6 copyable_function
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119126
Bug ID: 119126
Summary: [C++26] P0792R14 function_ref: a type-erased callable
reference
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115402
Giuseppe D'Angelo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dangelog at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118320
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a4f1e5f91a69434f2ec0d95c91bad2c928dcff3
commit r14-11386-g1a4f1e5f91a69434f2ec0d95c91bad2c928dcff3
Author: Richard Sandifo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71684
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes but for std::mutex we currently have no user-provided destructor if the
INIT macro is supported. If we add a ~__mutex_base() that unconditionally uses
__gthread_mutex_destroy that might be an ABI chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101533
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
Bug ID: 119123
Summary: ICE when building llvm-20.1.0 with -g
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117600
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw ---
libgcc should only be built with the current compiler, so I don't think it's
unreasonable to expect -Werror to be always enabled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 60659
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60659&action=edit
backtrace.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 60657
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60657&action=edit
LSUnit.cpp.ii.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117600
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
IME, this stuff ends up being a time bomb on unusual configurations and I've
had to sed this out in libatomic before, but I won't argue further.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115218
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:81c6c99efa6a7afd3082785a9ab7fb64d2c93e1d
commit r15-7835-g81c6c99efa6a7afd3082785a9ab7fb64d2c93e1d
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115215
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:81c6c99efa6a7afd3082785a9ab7fb64d2c93e1d
commit r15-7835-g81c6c99efa6a7afd3082785a9ab7fb64d2c93e1d
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100589
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7439febd94368f42bc46885224e22d2f135fedb2
commit r15-7834-g7439febd94368f42bc46885224e22d2f135fedb2
Author: Da Xie
Date: Sun Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100589
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118942
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4d0a333ef13e2da140cd44c4941b20f48a80dc0f
commit r15-7836-g4d0a333ef13e2da140cd44c4941b20f48a80dc0f
Author: Hannes Braun
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115215
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115218
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118795
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116507
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116463
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
```
struct MCSchedModel {
template void computeInstrLatency(int = [] {}) const;
};
struct LSUnitBase {
LSUnitBase(const MCSchedModel &);
};
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115218
--- Comment #10 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to 康桓瑋 from comment #9)
> (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #8)
> > Fixed, thanks!
>
> The fix for LWG 4082 is the missing viewable_range constraint for one pack
> case.
Where does that con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115218
--- Comment #11 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #10)
> (In reply to 康桓瑋 from comment #9)
> > (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #8)
> > > Fixed, thanks!
> >
> > The fix for LWG 4082 is the missing viewable_ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117364
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7e576d5b64ae92432fc2749b8f66105cee8db356
commit r15-7837-g7e576d5b64ae92432fc2749b8f66105cee8db356
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111551
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
>From gcov dump, the normal train run exercises loop:
742632: 2953: switch ( method ) {
742632: 2954:case ConvolveMorphology:
-: 2955:/* Weighted Average of pixels using r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119099
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Sorry my bad. Conflated bi-direction dataflow with the sets
expanding/contracting. We don't do bi-directional dataflow in here.
In this case it's the dataflow sets contracting and expanding and never
con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-05
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
Bug ID: 119127
Summary: ICE in decompose, at rtl.h:2312 during RTL pass:
late_combine
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119128
Bug ID: 119128
Summary: [C++26] Implement P1673R13 A free function linear
algebra interface based on the BLAS
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118874
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97986
--- Comment #10 from Joseph S. Myers ---
I think my previous comment still applies: when an array type is passed to
va_arg, evaluate side effects of the arguments, warn and (except for non-VLAs
in C90 mode) generate a call to __builtin_trap that'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118874
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7e576d5b64ae92432fc2749b8f66105cee8db356
commit r15-7837-g7e576d5b64ae92432fc2749b8f66105cee8db356
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113310
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-05
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119124
Bug ID: 119124
Summary: ICE: verify_flow_info failed
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118076
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In the RISCV case it is optimized because the copying of the structure into the
argument area is done using 4 DImode loads + stores rather than 2 TImode loads
+ stores.
And in that case it is actually cse1 w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 119123 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It doesn't have to be a ctor in which the first class is referenced, e.g.
struct S {
template void foo (int = [] {}) const;
};
struct T {
static void bar (const S &);
};
ICEs too. But method/static mem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Summary|ICE when building
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
Better reduced testcase from dup PR 119123.
```
struct MCSchedModel {
template void computeInstrLatency(int = [] {}) const;
};
struct LSUnitBase {
LSUnitBase(const MCSchedModel &);
};
```
=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-snapshot/bin/g++
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk-20250305/configure
--prefix=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-build/staging
--enable-libstdcxx-backtrace=yes --build=x86_64-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnu --disable-bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119129
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
1 - 100 of 203 matches
Mail list logo
