[Bug rtl-optimization/92080] Missed CSE of _mm512_set1_epi8(c) with _mm256_set1_epi8(c)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92080 --- Comment #12 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d1cada7481420a23fbec525548ef5bdf64839a34 commit r16-271-gd1cada7481420a23fbec525548ef5bdf64839a34 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Fri Nov 29 18:

[Bug target/117839] Redundant vector XOR instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117839 --- Comment #5 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d1cada7481420a23fbec525548ef5bdf64839a34 commit r16-271-gd1cada7481420a23fbec525548ef5bdf64839a34 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Fri Nov 29 18:

[Bug target/117839] Redundant vector XOR instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117839 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |16.0 Status|NEW

[Bug target/117547] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/*-pr93673.c without TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117547 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Ada] incorrectly specified array of record aggregates in protected object causes bug box in GNAT 12.2.0

(Sorry if I included too much information, this is my first time making a manual bug report by email.) I ran into this error when I forgot to specify all the elements in an array aggregate, but instead of a compiler error or warning, I got a bug box. To be specific: Inside a protected object,

[Bug target/111657] Memory copy with structure assignment from named address space should be improved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111657 --- Comment #12 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aa29654b1128a572c97fcaba94095f493662a0db commit r16-276-gaa29654b1128a572c97fcaba94095f493662a0db Author: Uros Bizjak Date: Tue A

[Bug target/111657] Memory copy with structure assignment from named address space should be improved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111657 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|REOPENED

[Bug tree-optimization/119960] [15/16 Regression] vectorizer seems not to do as much any more since r15-5863

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119960 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- So I do have a patch amending the r15-5863 revision to allow vectorizing the cases again but it regresses gcc.dg/vect/pr116352.c (the testcase the code was added for) since we run into a similar issue in SL

[Bug target/120001] On RISC-V with -O2 and -O3 __sync_or_and_fetch in a loop renders as an endless loop and multiple amoor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120001 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/119317] Named loops (C2y) do not compile with -O1 and -ggdb2 or higher

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119317 --- Comment #5 from Chris Bazley --- Patch has been emailed to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org for review.

[Bug target/120002] R_AARCH64_ABS64 emitted against hidden symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120002 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/120002] R_AARCH64_ABS64 emitted against hidden symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120002 Thomas Weißschuh changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Thomas Wei

[Bug target/120001] On RISC-V with -O2 and -O3 __sync_or_and_fetch in a loop renders as an endless loop and multiple amoor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120001 --- Comment #4 from Vincenzo Romano --- Id the double amoor op intentional? If so, why?

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- It stopped aborting with r14-2709-g65ff4a45b11b5ab13ef849bd5721ab28ff316202 Author: Jan Hubicka AuthorDate: Fri Jul 21 13:54:23 2023 loop-ch improvements, part 5 Currently loop-ch skips all

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Using -fno-finite-loops prevents the assertion from failing: -ffinite-loops Assume that a loop with an exit will eventually take the exit and not loop indefinitely. This allows the compiler to remov

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- N.B. with -O3 we just exit without aborting or looping, even after r14-2709. That's OK, because the behaviour is undefined. It would be nice if we inserted an unreachable or a trap that -fsanitize=undefine

[Bug target/113484] Add support for _Float16 type on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113484 --- Comment #5 from John Platts --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4) > Ah, this was about *actual* half-precision float, which indeed is 3.0 > (Power9). > > But all the same holds: it needs to be added to the ABI before we can h

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- It started aborting with r272234 aka r10-1052-gc29c92c789d938 Author: Feng Xue AuthorDate: Thu Jun 13 05:17:42 2019 PR tree-optimization/89713 - Assume loop with an exit is finite gcc/Change

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely

[Bug c++/119806] OpenACC, OpenMP 'target' offloading vs. C++ 'typeinfo' parts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119806 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Schwinge --- Similarly (I suppose, but have not checked the details), OpenMP_VV 'tests/5.0/application_kernels/declare_target_base_and_derived_class.cpp': GCN: ld: error: undefined symbol: vtable for S1 >>> r

[Bug c++/119844] Incomplete types are displayed after the import module

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119844 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic CC|

[Bug middle-end/120003] New: Missed Optimisation / Regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120003 Bug ID: 120003 Summary: Missed Optimisation / Regression Product: gcc Version: 15.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug target/119235] Argument pointer survives LRA with -m31 -mzarch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119235 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d41ce9f7c392d5110a63d61c4c85fb7a5f2f commit r12-11075-gd41ce9f7c392d5110a63d61c4c85fb7a5f2f Author:

[Bug c/120001] New: On RISC-V with -O2 and -O3 __sync_or_and_fetch in a loop renders as an endless loop and multiple amoor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120001 Bug ID: 120001 Summary: On RISC-V with -O2 and -O3 __sync_or_and_fetch in a loop renders as an endless loop and multiple amoor Product: gcc Version: 15.1.0 Status: UNCON

[Bug target/118794] The attached c++ openmp offload code fails, because the c sqrt function makes nonlocal gotos..

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/119235] Argument pointer survives LRA with -m31 -mzarch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119235 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119997 --- Comment #2 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fc62834533f357125b9c1934f80c2ba249adbf9e commit r16-281-gfc62834533f357125b9c1934f80c2ba249adbf9e Author: Richard Biener Date:

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119997 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||13.1.0, 15.1.0 Summary|[13/

[Bug libstdc++/119427] std::erase_if(std::flat_map) does not work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119427 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.3

[Bug libstdc++/119427] std::erase_if(std::flat_map) does not work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119427 --- Comment #3 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aa93272cfd2233858da0792761387cc27f4d5ff3 commit r16-282-gaa93272cfd2233858da0792761387cc27f4d5ff3 Author: Patrick Palka Date: Tu

[Bug c++/104734] -isystem hides -Woverloaded-virtual warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104734 Eugene Shalygin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eugene.shalygin at gmail dot com ---

[Bug target/119900] [16 regression] imagick slowdown with -Ofast -march=native -fprofile-use since r16-39-gf6859fb621179e (interaction of rpad and late-combine)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119900 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug target/120002] R_AARCH64_ABS64 emitted against hidden symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120002 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pins

[Bug c++/119964] [15/16 regression] GCC 15 does not delete explicitly-defaulted move constructor with (const T&&) parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119964 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/119317] Named loops (C2y) do not compile with -O1 and -ggdb2 or higher

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119317 --- Comment #6 from Byron Stanoszek --- I confirm that Chris's patch does indeed fix the compile issue. Thanks!

[Bug middle-end/120003] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] missed optimization around a loop with a checker

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120003 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Maybe r12-3453-g01b5038718056b024b370b74a874fbd92c5bbab3 .

[Bug target/120002] R_AARCH64_ABS64 emitted against hidden symbol

GCC from emitting absolute relocations? Similar to how this code works with clang or -mcmodel=small? > If you want that you should do the similar thing as what the 32bit compat > does for a similar reasons. This is what I am doing for now: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250429-vd

[Bug tree-optimization/120003] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] missed optimization around a loop with a checker

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120003 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.5 Component|middle-end

[Bug middle-end/120003] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] missed optimization around a loop with a checker

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120003 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- I bet it's caused by some jump threading changes for FSM threading opportunities.

[Bug target/120001] On RISC-V with -O2 and -O3 __sync_or_and_fetch in a loop renders as an endless loop and multiple amoor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120001 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Vincenzo Romano from comment #4) > Id the double amoor op intentional? > > If so, why? I said why: Unrolling the infinite loop is what happens. We copy the inner basic block of the loop to "u

[Bug target/110800] [gcn] ICE (segfault) 'during RTL pass: jump' in delete_trivially_dead_insns -> count_reg_usage when C++ exceptions are enabled + used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110800 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/120001] On RISC-V with -O2 and -O3 __sync_or_and_fetch in a loop renders as an endless loop and multiple amoor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120001 --- Comment #1 from Vincenzo Romano --- Please, mark this bug as INVALID. At least for the endless loop part. I am not sure about the double amoor instruction, though.

[Bug target/111107] i686-w64-mingw32 does not realign stack when __attribute__((aligned)) or __attribute__((vector_size)) are used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07 LIU Hao changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #61234|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/111107] i686-w64-mingw32 does not realign stack when __attribute__((aligned)) or __attribute__((vector_size)) are used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07 LIU Hao changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #61236|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c/120002] New: R_AARCH64_ABS64 emitted against hidden symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120002 Bug ID: 120002 Summary: R_AARCH64_ABS64 emitted against hidden symbol Product: gcc Version: 14.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/120001] On RISC-V with -O2 and -O3 __sync_or_and_fetch in a loop renders as an endless loop and multiple amoor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120001 --- Comment #2 from Vincenzo Romano --- If I put __sync_fetch_and_or instead of __sync_or_and_fetch I objously get the expected behavior as fas as the endless loop is concerned.

[Bug tree-optimization/120003] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] missed optimization around a loop with a checker

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120003 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-04-29 Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug target/119980] wrong aliasing decision with structure acces

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119980 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug target/117547] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/*-pr93673.c without TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117547 --- Comment #7 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a0a64aa5da0af5ecb022675cdb9140ccfa098ce3 commit r16-270-ga0a64aa5da0af5ecb022675cdb9140ccfa098ce3 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue Nov 12 09:

[Bug target/119980] wrong aliasing decision with structure acces

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119980 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > Yes, it looks very very similar. > > In peephole2 the redundant load/store pair keeping the = 2 store data > dependent on the later load vanishes (with -fdisa

[Bug c++/119999] New: Wrong Pointer Comparison in GCC 10/11/12/13 with -Os/-Oz Flags

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 Bug ID: 11 Summary: Wrong Pointer Comparison in GCC 10/11/12/13 with -Os/-Oz Flags Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/119998] New: ICE (segfault) on missing constraint in redeclaration.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119998 Bug ID: 119998 Summary: ICE (segfault) on missing constraint in redeclaration. Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 C

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.5 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug debug/78685] -Og generates too many ""s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685 --- Comment #32 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3cf97980aaab6971ae179625a5e1188255dcf925 commit r16-273-g3cf97980aaab6971ae179625a5e1188255dcf925 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug debug/78685] -Og generates too many ""s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685 --- Comment #31 from Jakub Jelinek --- That is nonsense. -O0 -fvar-tracking doesn't work and would be substantial amount of work, far more than artificially adding uses of all vars at the end of their scopes for -Og.

[Bug debug/78685] -Og generates too many ""s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685 --- Comment #33 from Konstantin Kharlamov --- @Richard Biener: thank you for the change! If I may point out though, the new text still says: > […]-Og should be the optimization level of choice for the standard > edit-compile-debug cycle, offerin

[Bug debug/78685] -Og generates too many ""s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685 --- Comment #34 from Konstantin Kharlamov --- > which is a problem, because it which is a problem, because it the actual > situation whoops, sorry, not sure what happened to that part, it's supposed to be "which is a problem, because it contrad

[Bug rtl-optimization/119982] [16 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr109362.c scan-assembler \tmovq\t8\\(%rdi\\), %r by r16-190-g6901d56fea2132

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119982 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/119983] Member function in unnamed type causes internal compiler error in module.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119983 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org K

[Bug c++/103524] [meta-bug] modules issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524 Bug 103524 depends on bug 119983, which changed state. Bug 119983 Summary: Member function in unnamed type causes internal compiler error in module. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119983 What|Removed

[Bug c++/119983] Member function in unnamed type causes internal compiler error in module.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119983 --- Comment #3 from Nathaniel Shead --- I will note that making the variable internal linkage will silence GCC 15, since a TU-local variable itself is not an exposure; this is appropriate if you only need the variable within that TU. For exampl

[Bug rtl-optimization/119982] [16 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr109362.c scan-assembler \tmovq\t8\\(%rdi\\), %r by r16-190-g6901d56fea2132

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119982 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 29 Apr 2025, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119982 > > Andrew Pinski changed: > >What|Removed |Add

[Bug gcov-profile/118581] auto_profile can't annotate bb with all debug_stmt which assigned value with constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118581 --- Comment #6 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:59e853308bd797f91df15fd0fa65a3b5ce2cf4a2 commit r16-274-g59e853308bd797f91df15fd0fa65a3b5ce2cf4a2 Author: hongtao.liu Date: Wed Ja

[Bug debug/78685] -Og generates too many ""s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685 --- Comment #35 from Lukas Grätz --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #31) > That is nonsense. > -O0 -fvar-tracking doesn't work and would be substantial amount of work, far > more than artificially adding uses of all vars at the end of th

[Bug gcov-profile/118581] auto_profile can't annotate bb with all debug_stmt which assigned value with constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118581 Hongtao Liu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/119996] [modules] Inline reference to a TU-local entity is nulled when used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119996 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.2 Ever confirmed|0

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119997 Bug ID: 119997 Summary: [13/14/15/16 Regression] PRE no longer hoists &ptr->field Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119997 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug debug/78685] -Og generates too many ""s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78685 --- Comment #30 from Lukas Grätz --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #29) > On Mon, 28 Apr 2025, Hi-Angel at yandex dot ru wrote: > > Hi, I understand it's a low-priority issue, but could we at least change the > > documentation to sa

[Bug rtl-optimization/119982] [16 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr109362.c scan-assembler \tmovq\t8\\(%rdi\\), %r by r16-190-g6901d56fea2132

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119982 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |rtl-optimization See Also|

[Bug target/119985] TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_RETURN is still referenced in target.def

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119985 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |16.0 Resolution|---

[Bug target/119985] TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_RETURN is still referenced in target.def

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119985 --- Comment #1 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f3a6b3972f6e6886297e59fcaf85f374859ca46 commit r16-275-g0f3a6b3972f6e6886297e59fcaf85f374859ca46 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue Apr 29 09:

[Bug c++/119806] OpenACC, OpenMP 'target' offloading vs. C++ 'typeinfo' parts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119806 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/107020] [OpenMP][UBSAN] ICE during GIMPLE pass: sanopt via ubsan_expand_vptr_ifn: "output_operand: invalid expression as operand"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107020 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/112475] [UBSAN][OpenMP] ICE during GIMPLE pass: sanopt in output_operand: invalid expression as operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112475 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Schwinge --- *** Bug 107020 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Right, it's undefined to keep looping like that, so the compiler assumes that the loop must terminate, which can only happen if the assert fails, so it optimizes it to fail.

[Bug target/120000] New: Unoptimal structure copy loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12 Bug ID: 12 Summary: Unoptimal structure copy loop Product: gcc Version: 16.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target A

[Bug c++/119916] [15/16 Regression] folly (2025.04.14.00 and earlier): coroutine tests fail with GCC 15 since r15-3153-g68ee624bc52ba1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119916 --- Comment #18 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #17) > > > In the meantime, perhaps it would be enough to revert the "fix" for > > > PR115908 > > > (and presumably mark that as INVALID?) - or do you have other thoug

[Bug rtl-optimization/120004] __builtin_unreachable/noreturn should not fall through to another function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120004 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Another option which I am thinking about is just expanding > __builtin_unreachable as the same as a trap. So at -O0, an explict > __builtin_unreachable will turn

[Bug c/120010] __attribute__((unused)) does not work for function arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120010 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-15.1.0/gcc/Common-Type-Attributes.html#index-unused-type-attribute "This is often the case with lock or thread classes, which are usually defined and then not referenced, b

[Bug c/120010] __attribute__((unused)) does not work for function arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120010 --- Comment #2 from H. Peter Anvin --- Having to omit the name puts us right back into macro hell... having to macroize every function definition. It also violates the principle of least surprise, since __attribute__((used)) works if attached t

[Bug c/120010] __attribute__((unused)) does not work for function arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120010 --- Comment #3 from H. Peter Anvin --- THat should of course have been __attribute__((unused)).

[Bug libgcc/120011] New: [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 Bug ID: 120011 Summary: [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4 Product: gcc Version: 15.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/120009] RFE: idea: void (dummy) objects (really...)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120009 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- >I will file a bug for __attribute__((unused)). There is no bug on the unused case, you are marking the typedef decl as unused not the type being unused. GNU C (and C23) also handles omitting the paramater

[Bug c/120009] RFE: idea: void (dummy) objects (really...)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120009 --- Comment #2 from H. Peter Anvin --- Very interesting indeed... I just tried it as such: struct empty_t { } __attribute__((unused)); typedef struct empty_t empty_t __attribute__((unused)); int foo(empty_t a, int b, int c, empty_t d, int e,

[Bug rtl-optimization/120004] __builtin_unreachable/noreturn should not fall through to another function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120004 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Another option which I am thinking about is just expanding __builtin_unreachable as the same as a trap. So at -O0, an explict __builtin_unreachable will turn into a trap. And the RTL optimizations don't take

[Bug c/120010] New: __attribute__((unused)) does not work for function arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120010 Bug ID: 120010 Summary: __attribute__((unused)) does not work for function arguments Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/120009] RFE: idea: void (dummy) objects (really...)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120009 --- Comment #4 from H. Peter Anvin --- Well, I did both. See also bug 120010; I don't believe this is at all consistent. Having to omit the variable name defeats the whole purpose here.

[Bug target/120011] [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- https://gcc.gnu.org/cgit/gcc/commit/?h=releases/gcc-15&id=972a03737284b8611ec4e6315f6ca04d56ec05bf is the only x86 change on the 15 branch. There are no other changes on the branch which would have touched i

[Bug target/120011] [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Kneifel --- Created attachment 61243 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61243&action=edit creduced addtf3.c from libgcc

[Bug other/119855] Fixincludes needed for assert.h to support C++26's P2264R7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119855 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely --- The C23 change and the C++26 change were proposed concurrently and were originally part of the same proposal, and the glibc bug about scoped enums is related to that same proposal. However, glibc really

[Bug rtl-optimization/120004] __builtin_unreachable/noreturn should not fall through to another function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120004 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2025-04-29 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug fortran/119995] 521.wrf_r module_bl_mynn.fppized.f90:(.text+0x3398): undefined reference to `erf_'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119995 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pins

[Bug middle-end/119999] [12/13 Regression] explicit infinite goto loop removed causing assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/117312] RFE: x86 (and perhaps others): inline assembly: "red-zone" clobber

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117312 H. Peter Anvin changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|WAITING

[Bug ipa/120006] [15 Regression] wrong code with -O2 -fipa-pta

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120006 --- Comment #1 from Avraham Hollander --- Created attachment 61239 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61239&action=edit util-linux build log from portage. Contains all the compiler output.

[Bug c++/120005] TU-local exposure error in constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120005 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >I'm additionally seeing errors in a module which internally uses some boost >containers. That one looks like a correct error. https://github.com/boostorg/container/commit/a4c4c3b3191ece1396e0a863e636346

[Bug c++/120005] TU-local exposure error in constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120005 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I think even comment #0 is correct error message. constexpr causes the linkage to be local. I think you need inline here to cause the linkage to be vague.

[Bug ipa/120006] New: [15 Regression] wrong code with -O2 -fipa-pta

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120006 Bug ID: 120006 Summary: [15 Regression] wrong code with -O2 -fipa-pta Product: gcc Version: 15.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

  1   2   >