https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116960
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119303
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c7eec82942496520d6b0604aa945a89f279e2562
commit r15-9068-gc7eec82942496520d6b0604aa945a89f279e2562
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119386
--- Comment #51 from Alexander Monakov ---
Michael, can you give your ack/nack for Ard's proposal in comment #24 (the
second variant, I guess keying off -m[no-]direct-extern-access doesn't make
sense here). I think it properly addresses what you
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --enable-libsanitizer
--disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-20250331105654-r15-9061-g5f2078ca11843e-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.1 20250331 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119493
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119528
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
--- Comment #7 from Rich
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119250
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119172
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #2)
> fixed on trunk so far, back ports to follow.
this also needs r15-8244-gfc728cfd569e29, which corrects my typos, to be back
ported.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119510
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d126e2bbb378d1344f871011406c08aa88a85cd
commit r15-9060-g7d126e2bbb378d1344f871011406c08aa88a85cd
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119536
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119295
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119369
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tschwinge at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119218
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119547
--- Comment #1 from 曾治金 ---
I think this issue has nothing to do with the logical-op-non-short-circuit
parameter and it is a bug of risc-v vsetvl pass. The risc-v vsetvl pass use lcm
algorithm to find the suitable place to insert vsetvl instruct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119010
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4903e49b2fe321b1479dce4d3c4e2c2ae297298f
commit r15-9052-g4903e49b2fe321b1479dce4d3c4e2c2ae297298f
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119533
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Does go use sjlj EH "manually"? EH shouldn't result in EDGE_ABNORMAL ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119535
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119539
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-31
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119540
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119539
--- Comment #2 from Hongyu Wang ---
Created attachment 60925
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60925&action=edit
Untested fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119517
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5f2078ca11843e3fe506c2fb72b9260a3cb9853e
commit r15-9061-g5f2078ca11843e3fe506c2fb72b9260a3cb9853e
Author: Tomasz KamiÅski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119369
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Stubbs ---
We used to have work-arounds for ROCm runtime linker deficiencies, but these
were removed in 2020, as they were no longer necessary when we moved to
HSACOv3:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119369
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Schwinge ---
For the record, the (only?) issue here specifically is '__cxa_pure_virtual', an
'abort'-like function. This is defined as follows:
'libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/cxxabi.h':
// Pure virtual functions.
v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119010
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
I'm not sure similar issues cause observed regression for icelake - bisecting
that would help, it happened between r15-6757-gbd28244ec92b9a (good)
and r15-6826-gc1729df6ec1eff (first known bad) when buildi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119442
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 Regression] |[14 Regression] Regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119541
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f3899e0fd3f9aa6b579a21e87b50c61ea5c448df
commit r15-9063-gf3899e0fd3f9aa6b579a21e87b50c61ea5c448df
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119369
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Schwinge ---
I see. Yes -- assuming that I'm understanding the situation correctly -- we'll
need a (post-)static-link or pre-load ('gcc/config/gcn/gcn-run.cc' as well as
'libgomp/plugin/plugin-gcn.c') step to resolve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119532
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-31
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119510
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119510
>
> --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> I don't see how we could do the regenera
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119525
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||13.3.0, 14.2.0, 15.0
Keyword
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119541
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119369
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Stubbs ---
A post-linker could be included as part of the mkoffload process (or maybe we
could fix up the weak directives in the assembler as part of the pre-assembler
step we already have).
Either way, there's no mko
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119010
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a46430c85611ac7faec9507472b8736b89643659
commit r15-9057-ga46430c85611ac7faec9507472b8736b89643659
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119303
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 Regression]|[12/13/14 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119532
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6)
> Is it a regression?
You mean whether there is an older version where it did not ICE?
Presumably not, at least with v8 it also ICEs, and with v5.4.0 there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119537
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/gimplify.cc.jj 2025-03-31 12:53:44.853727077 +0200
+++ gcc/gimplify.cc 2025-03-31 17:05:40.854893880 +0200
@@ -4508,6 +4508,21 @@ gimplify_variant_call_expr (tree expr, f
}
+/* Helper functio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119386
--- Comment #52 from Michael Matz ---
I'm not a backend maintainer, so I have no real say here. But FWIW I don't
see an issue with going via PLT either (if not under -mno-plt effect).
I agree that a dependency on -m[no-]direct-extern-access wou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118690
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
The following (cf. Bug #113905) is related, invalid but probably not detected:
!$omp declare target (f1 : f0) match(context={parallel})
!$omp declare target (f2 : f0) match(context={target})
This violates:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97831
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117002
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9fadadbbbc2b5352e5e70e0e1a9be9b447176913
commit r15-9070-g9fadadbbbc2b5352e5e70e0e1a9be9b447176913
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Sat M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 117002, which changed state.
Bug 117002 Summary: [13/14/15 Regression] lifetime.d: In function
‘_d_newclassT’: error: size of array element is not a multiple of its alignment
with -Warray-bounds and -O2
https://gcc.gnu.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117002
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-March/679777.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #60932|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117002
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a6a2da499ab8b6b9e52cec5bc32bbd48371bb6ba
commit r14-11489-ga6a2da499ab8b6b9e52cec5bc32bbd48371bb6ba
Author: Iain Buclaw
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119537
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
volatile int v;
void *foo (void *);
int
main ()
{
[[gnu::assume (({ x: ++v; true; }))]];
void *p = foo (&&x);
goto *p;
}
compiles at -O2 but fails to assemble. #c0 compiles at -O2 but not at -O0,
per
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119552
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119554
Bug ID: 119554
Summary: [risc-v][bug] Unusual Behavior Observed with RISC-V
Vector Extension (RVV)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83309
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #6)
> We could use one of the other lang_type fields for a hash table until the
> class is complete, perhaps vcall_indices.
Indeed. We'd need to use a union for that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119555
Bug ID: 119555
Summary: [avr] const _Fract: Wrong warning: variable 'f0' set
but not used
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119553
--- Comment #1 from Jørgen Kvalsvik ---
Thanks for the report. I think I know what's wrong. When -fpath-coverage (and
really -fprofile-arcs, -fcondition-coverage) is used without -ftest-coverage,
some file output is not enabled. There is a guard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119553
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118762
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin ---
Created attachment 60931
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60931&action=edit
Assembler output
Looks like check should be xfailed on 64-bit hppa-hpux.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
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=113905
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus ---
See also bug #118690 for some Fortran issues related to declare variant
diagnostic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97831
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66826
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||97831
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97831
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> I think this was rejected 3 years ago:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg02221.html
Note clang's not_tail_called does NOT apply to the funct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119553
--- Comment #3 from Jørgen Kvalsvik ---
Created attachment 60933
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60933&action=edit
Proof of concept fix
I could reproduce it on my system, and this patch fixed the crash.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117002
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bfc9520eab16379aa47121d336bfd4d38c6d040a
commit r13-9480-gbfc9520eab16379aa47121d336bfd4d38c6d040a
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108487
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5a830c6cd54d376ee23043381c6ed761559e1e08
commit r14-11483-g5a830c6cd54d376ee23043381c6ed761559e1e08
Author: Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119549
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #32 from Iain Sandoe ---
I am being asked (by build systems folks) to make it possible to build back to
10.13 with the current [XC 16] SDKs (which are supposed to support that - but
do not include these symbols).
This seems a reason
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
Bug ID: 119550
Summary: cross compilation of libstdc++ fail for arm-none-eabi
due to tzname tests
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
--- Comment #3 from Alexandre Bustico ---
I use to build arm-none-eabi snapshot twice a month with crosstool-ng. Since
this patch, build fail, and if I revert this patch, build is ok. I have join
crosstool-ng config.
I can send generated file fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119401
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
--- Comment #4 from Richard Earnshaw ---
At some point crosstool will run GCC's 'configure' script. What I need to see
is the options it passes to that command.
Sorry, I've never used crosstool, so I can't help with that.
It is possible that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119493
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Unfortunately it is not enough and I'm not sure where else to handle it.
The problem is that even with the lhs being disqualified, SRA decides to put
code to extract elements from that lhs and later on put
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119548
Bug ID: 119548
Summary: ICE: tree check: accessed elt 2 of 'tree_vec' with 1
elts in tsubst_pack_expansion when accessing
uninstantiated decltype(lambda template return) type,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119493
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 60927
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60927&action=edit
gcc15-pr119493.patch
Untested patch to handle copying of non-gimple_reg_type arguments for tail
recursion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119517
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119495
--- Comment #2 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #0)
> So my understanding is that this slowdown isn't really that important.
> However, it seemed reasonable to at least notify Richard Sandiford about
> this in ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119549
Bug ID: 119549
Summary: [14/15 Regression] SSE4 code inlined into no-sse4
function
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119545
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.3|13.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108236
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:081989e519b2fa80a36d852af43cdda63b2e1a16
commit r13-9471-g081989e519b2fa80a36d852af43cdda63b2e1a16
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118158
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118035
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13 Regression] |[12 Regression]
|de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119493
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Another thing I've just noticed:
[[gnu::noipa]] int
bar (int x, int y)
{
return x + y;
}
[[gnu::noinline, gnu::noclone]] int
foo (int x, int y)
{
if (x < 10)
[[gnu::musttail]] return bar (x, y);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90389
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119532
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025, gjl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119532
>
> --- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
> It also occurs for current v13 and v14 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119474
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025, ams at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119474
>
> --- Comment #9 from Andrew Stubbs ---
> This patch fixes the -O1 failure, for *this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119493
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> For musttail, perhaps SRA could avoid changing the path from musttail call
> return to the return stmt.
> I've tried
> --- gcc/tree-sra.cc.jj2025-01-02
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Bustico ---
Created attachment 60928
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60928&action=edit
crosstool-ng config to build g++15-devel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I wonder if the problem is that newlib only defined tm.tm_zone conditionally:
struct tm
{
int tm_sec;
int tm_min;
int tm_hour;
int tm_mday;
int tm_mon;
int tm_year;
int tm_wday
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
AC_STRUCT_TIMEZONE is trying to do a link check (for the tzname global) if
struct tm has no tm_zone, thus the problem only occurs for certain non-linux
targets. Since chrono implementation only supports tm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Which is a longwinded version of what Andreas just said :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119550
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119551
Bug ID: 119551
Summary: [modules] ICE when reading inline var referencing
TU-local entity
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119401
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #8)
> (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #6)
> > We could detect if there was an intervening redeclaration by comparing the
> > source location of the specializat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119539
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Comment on attachment 60925
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60925
Untested fix
>+;; Avoid useless masking of count operand.
>+(define_insn_and_split "*3_mask_nf"
>+ [(set (match_operand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119545
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Or like so:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/tuple
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/tuple
@@ -2534,7 +2534,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
{
return [&](index_sequence<_Inds...>) {
//
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119010
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 Regression]|[12/13/14/15 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119442
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:70391e3958db791edea4e877636592de47a785e7
commit r15-9062-g70391e3958db791edea4e877636592de47a785e7
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119548
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83309
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119545
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b9adf3a4c8112df1d74440157f578a8344ebe166
commit r15-9069-gb9adf3a4c8112df1d74440157f578a8344ebe166
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119545
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
101 - 200 of 216 matches
Mail list logo
