https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118320
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org|acoplan at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119121
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119121
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:750d691077d96879068312dd4b25a51c1d6958c5
commit r14-11384-g750d691077d96879068312dd4b25a51c1d6958c5
Author: Tomasz KamiÅ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101533
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71684
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
As suggested in comment 5, we might want to make the use of
__gthread_mutex_destroy platform-specific, i.e. have a new config macro that
says we need the destroy even when we use INIT. That way the change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118953
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 regression] |[14 regression] Miscompile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101625
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2025-01-29 00:00:00 |2025-3-5
--- Comment #8 from Richard B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118739
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107143
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119108
--- Comment #7 from Matthew Malcomson ---
FWIW I have managed to figure out what the difference between my internal build
and the upstream one was -- my reproduction script has the line
`-DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release` in it and the local build that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119115
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119108
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119110
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119115
--- Comment #5 from Robin Dapp ---
The problematic vsetvl is
vsetvli zero,a3,e16,m1,ta,ma
which was a
vsetvli a4,a3,e8,mf2,ta,ma
vsetvli t1,a3,e8,mf2,ta,ma
with the simple strategy.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119059
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117932
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117706
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117270
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117088
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116901
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118351
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118318
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117600
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117705
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116998
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117207
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117092
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116761
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119071
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9496f5088111d9330bba2659b024f7e7a2175b4b
commit r12-10977-g9496f5088111d9330bba2659b024f7e7a2175b4b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118739
--- Comment #22 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:77172598dcb07b6ea71f4549917f2647eb34f38a
commit r12-10976-g77172598dcb07b6ea71f4549917f2647eb34f38a
Author: Uros Bizjak
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118739
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3634a7d15d94590cef313f503a32d4698276fd04
commit r13-9413-g3634a7d15d94590cef313f503a32d4698276fd04
Author: Uros Bizjak
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119071
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5ab16e594f29f2c1b4f4b54b2174de171be6c2a6
commit r13-9414-g5ab16e594f29f2c1b4f4b54b2174de171be6c2a6
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119046
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff505948631713d8c62523005059b10e25343617
commit r15-7833-gff505948631713d8c62523005059b10e25343617
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119046
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:db76482175c4e76db273d7fb3a00ae0f932529a6
commit r15-7832-gdb76482175c4e76db273d7fb3a00ae0f932529a6
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119046
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119108
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119108
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Matthew Malcomson from comment #3)
> I only looked into VecSource/5/2, and unfortunately I looked into it on an
> internal setup that compiles slightly differently.
>
> In that slightly diffe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119114
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #16 from Niklas Haas ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #15)
> (In reply to Niklas Haas from comment #12)
> > Out of curiosity, is there a work-around that I could use to get current
> > versions of GCC to compile the ri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100010
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-12-24 00:00:00 |2025-3-5
--- Comment #11 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118874
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118953
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:54da358ff51ded726fe7c026fa59c8db0a1b72ed
commit r15-7831-g54da358ff51ded726fe7c026fa59c8db0a1b72ed
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119009
--- Comment #4 from Jennifer Schmitz ---
Thanks for looking into this. Indeed, the runtime has recovered in the
meantime. From our side, we can close the PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111551
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107143
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] |[15 Regression]
|gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118914
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118610
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Given the range in question this seems relevant:
ommit 01339d29b7663d85eea6145eac2b1ad1da428c11
Author: Vladimir N. Makarov
Date: Tue Jan 28 08:37:33 2025 -0500
[PR118663][LRA]: Change secondary me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
BTW, in gcc 14 we applied the PR101523 in Fedora with a hack to only start
rejecting these simplifications with no i2 modifications after accepting 1000
of those in a function (so get the PR101523 compile ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111551
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
With LTO the situation seems pretty much the same
21.23% imagick_r_peak. imagick_r_peak.trunk-pgolto-Ofast-native-m64
[.] MorphologyApply.cold
14.30% imagick_r_peak. imagick_r_peak.trunk-nop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115842
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115118
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108083
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118232
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111750
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116140
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116078
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115835
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102954
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115218
--- Comment #9 from 康桓瑋 ---
(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.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118942
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6e17b356a78635e66d1a895b86fbcc0bde0589bb
commit r14-11385-g6e17b356a78635e66d1a895b86fbcc0bde0589bb
Author: Hannes Brau
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118874
--- Comment #19 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #17)
> I wonder about moving much of the return_temp handling to
> gimplify_modify_expr...
This runs into ordering trouble with cp_gimplify_init_expr, which elides t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116080
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118942
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
struct S {
template void foo (int = [] {}) const;
};
struct T {
static void bar (const S &);
};
The earlier finish_member_declaration calls are followed by finish_struct ->
finish_struct_1 -> finish_st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119129
--- Comment #2 from eczbek.void at gmail dot com ---
Is the ice-on-invalid-code tag correct? The code looks valid to me and it seems
to compile on Clang.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117364
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119118
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119129
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.3|---
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If the presence in TYPE_FIELDS is desirable, perhaps either we should repeat
fixup_type_variants (or just update TYPE_FIELDS on all variants manually) in
the
if (--parser->num_classes_being_defined == 0)
blo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119131
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In cmpelim dump I still see
(insn 176 7 8 2 (set (reg:SD 47 v15 [207])
(const_double:SD 0E-101 [N/A])) "pr119131.c":11:24 78 {*movsd_aarch64}
(expr_list:REG_EQUIV (const_double:SD 0E-101 [N/A])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119118
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #5)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc
> > index fbe7333fd71..ed29623fcdf 100644
> > ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
--- Comment #4 from Kees Cook ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Take the address of one outside of the array is valid and well defined.
>
> That is:
> &p->array[3];
>
> is always valid and well defined.
This isn't about taking
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
Kees Cook changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
--- Comment #1 from Kees Cook ---
And for reference, this is built with: -O2 -Wall -fstrict-flex-arrays=3
-fsanitize=bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115402
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119110
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I hope this is fixed now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115402
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dangelog at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
Bug ID: 119132
Summary: off-by-one error in -fsanitizer=bounds when addressing
a pointer instead of an integral
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113076
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119132
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
On &p->array[size + 1];
The instrument is to make sure that would form a valid range of the index.
Which is only 0...size.
The instrumentation is not done on the pointer deference later on either.
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=118998
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1b43154b90be6a2f691b98d4e395c07ac6c7045c
commit r15-7845-g1b43154b90be6a2f691b98d4e395c07ac6c7045c
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119130
Bug ID: 119130
Summary: Results of vec_pack_to_short_fp32 intrinsic are not in
the expected order on big-endian POWER9
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95507
Bug 95507 depends on bug 115580, which changed state.
Bug 115580 Summary: [12/13 regression] null pointer warning from an unevaluated
context
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115580
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115580
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c635072ae68f60f14333cf113e75fa25a55becf
commit r14-11387-g8c635072ae68f60f14333cf113e75fa25a55becf
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115580
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 regression]|[12/13 regression] null
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119131
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] ICE: in |[15 Regression] ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119118
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> The following adjustment to the logic around the bounds-checking code
> fixes the issue:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116572
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |ipa
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117364
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #7)
> Fixed for GCC 15 so far. The ramp generation is completely different in
> earlier versions, the code that would need to change in 14 and below is in
> morph_fn_to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115580
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:459c8a55567b06522e4b9cc0a4ef62f9d3024526
commit r15-7839-g459c8a55567b06522e4b9cc0a4ef62f9d3024526
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119131
Bug ID: 119131
Summary: [15 Regression] ICE: in get_attr_type, at
config/aarch64/aarch64.md:17054 at -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyword
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119118
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc
> index fbe7333fd71..ed29623fcdf 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119110
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c21d5a3591fd761872e18278e1cd8ec18e36d4cb
commit r15-7842-gc21d5a3591fd761872e18278e1cd8ec18e36d4cb
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119127
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
101 - 200 of 203 matches
Mail list logo
