[Bug testsuite/105266] new test case gcc.dg/pr105250.c fails with excess errors in r12-8134-g4e892de6774f86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105266 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|REOPENED

[Bug testsuite/105266] new test case gcc.dg/pr105250.c fails with excess errors in r12-8134-g4e892de6774f86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105266 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:186fcf8b7a7c17a8a17466bc9149b3ca4ca9dd3e commit r11-10037-g186fcf8b7a7c17a8a17466bc9149b3ca4ca9dd3e Author: Kewen Lin

RTL Pattern not working

In gcc/combine.cc I have written a pattern to emit a complex rtl instruction which uses 'and' 'shift' 'lshiftrt' and 'or' in a single pattern.But pattern not recognised as single pattern.I changed the cost of this instruction to 0.Still pattern is not generated. How can I check if the

[COMMITTED] xtensa: Improve bswap[sd]i2 insn patterns

From: Takayuki 'January June' Suwa This patch makes bswap[sd]i2 better register allocation, and reconstructs bswapsi2 in order to take advantage of GIMPLE manual byte-swapping recognition. gcc/ChangeLog: * config/xtensa/xtensa.md (bswapsi2): New expansion pattern.

Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] xtensa: Add setmemsi insn pattern

On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 8:52 AM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa wrote: > > This patch introduces setmemsi insn pattern of two kinds, unrolled loop and > small loop, for fixed small length and constant initialization value. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa-protos.h >

Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] xtensa: Add setmemsi insn pattern

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:00 PM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa wrote: > > On 2022/05/27 1:57, Max Filippov wrote: > > is that something that can be addressed in this patch? > > seems hard to resolve, because the RTL-generation pass passes only 68 > bytes in that case: ... > this behavior does not

[Bug tree-optimization/105736] [12 Regression] ICE in force_gimple_operand_1, at gimplify-me.cc:79 since r13-222-g28896b38fabce818

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105736 --- Comment #2 from Siddhesh Poyarekar --- OK, so the fix is pretty straightforward; error_mark_node escapes through as a return in ADDR_EXPR object size computations. I want to get a reproducer independent of ubsan though so that it's

[Bug target/105745] Conditional OpenMP directive fails with GCC 12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105745 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Can you run this under the debugger to see where the crash is? Because there have been almost no changes to the libgomp sources that would effect this.

Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] xtensa: Add setmemsi insn pattern

On 2022/05/27 1:57, Max Filippov wrote: is that something that can be addressed in this patch? seems hard to resolve, because the RTL-generation pass passes only 68 bytes in that case: void f(char *p); void g(void) { char c[72] = {0}; f(c); } without this patch, we would

[Bug c++/105652] [12/13 Regression] ICE: in is_base_type, at dwarf2out.cc:13400 since r12-1937-gc28e1d288ab727de

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105652 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[PATCH v3] RISC-V/testsuite: constraint some of tests to hard_float

Commit 9ddd44b58649d1d ("RISC-V: Provide `fmin'/`fmax' RTL pattern") added tests which check for hard float instructions which obviously fails on soft-float ABI builds. And my recent commit b646d7d279ae ("RISC-V: Inhibit FP <--> int register moves via tune param") is guilty of same crime. So

[Bug c++/105734] [12/13 Regression]: Incorrect "error: invalid use of 'auto'" for explicit destructor inside a template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734 --- Comment #10 from Jeremy R. --- One workaround in the general case is decltype(ns::expression_decomposer(ns::expression_decomposer{} << expr)) = libassert_decomposer = ns::expression_decomposer(ns::expression_decomposer{} << expr); But this

[PATCH v2] RISC-V/testsuite: constraint some of tests to hard_float

Commit 9ddd44b58649d1d ("RISC-V: Provide `fmin'/`fmax' RTL pattern") added tests which check for hard float instructions which obviously fails on soft-float ABI builds. So constraint with "dg-require-effective-target hard_float" This reduces bunch of new RV failures on trunk since that commit.

[Bug middle-end/101836] __builtin_object_size(P->M, 1) where M is an array and the last member of a struct fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836 --- Comment #7 from Siddhesh Poyarekar --- I couldn't work on -fstrict-flex-arrays then, sorry. I do have it in my plan for gcc 13, but I'll admit it's not on the very top of my list of things to do this year. If you or anyone else needs a

[PATCH] RISC-V/testsuite: constraint some of tests to hard_float

From: Vineet Gupta Commit 9ddd44b58649d1d ("RISC-V: Provide `fmin'/`fmax' RTL pattern") added tests which check for hard float instructions which obviously fails on soft-float ABI builds. So constraint with "dg-require-effective-target hard_float" This reduces bunch of new RV failures on trunk

[PATCH] c-family: fix attribute constructor ICE [PR90658]

Here the C compiler crashes because a FUNCTION_DECL got into get_priority -> default_conversion, and the C FE's version of d_c specifically asserts that it doesn't get a FUNCTION_DECL. All uses of default_conversion in c-attribs.cc are guarded by != IDENTIFIER_NODE && != FUNCTION_DECL, but

[PATCH] c++: Add !TYPE_P assert to type_dependent_expression_p [PR99080]

As discussed here: , type_dependent_expression_p should not be called with a type argument. I promised I'd add an assert so here it is. One place needed adjusting, the comment explains why. Bootstrapped/regtested on

[Bug c++/105746] New: vector::resize causes Warray-bounds when optimizer uses __builtin_memcpy or __builtin_memmove

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105746 Bug ID: 105746 Summary: vector::resize causes Warray-bounds when optimizer uses __builtin_memcpy or __builtin_memmove Product: gcc Version: 10.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[PATCH] libgompd: Add ompd_get/rel_display_control_vars

libgomp/ChangeLog 2022-05-27 Mohamed Atef * libgompd.map (ompd_get_display_control_vars, ompd_rel_display_control_vars): New global symbol versions. * env.c: (gompd_buffer, gompd_env_buff_size): New Variables. (dump_icvs): New function. (initialize_env): call dump_icvs. * ompd-icv.c:

Re: [committed] exec-stack warning for test which wants executable stacks

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 03:17:01 +0200 Regarding setting the default for the RWX-segment warning per-target: > How about the usual method, a line in the ld emulparams > file for the target? JFTR: no extra infrastructure bits needed. I found the right spot, just a

[Bug libstdc++/105671] [11/12/13 Regression] Unexplained "undefined reference" error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105671 Joseph S. Myers changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Unexplained "undefined |[11/12/13 Regression]

gcc-10-20220526 is now available

Snapshot gcc-10-20220526 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20220526/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch

[Bug c/90658] [9/10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE in default_conversion, at c/c-typeck.c:2159

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90658 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9 Regression] ICE in |[9/10/11/12/13 Regression]

Re: [PATCH] c++: cv-quals of dummy obj for non-dep memfn call [PR105637]

On Thu, 26 May 2022, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 5/26/22 14:57, Patrick Palka wrote: > > On Thu, 26 May 2022, Patrick Palka wrote: > > > > > Here we expect the calls to BaseClass::baseDevice resolve to the second, > > > third and fourth overloads respectively in light of the cv-qualifiers > > > of

[Bug libstdc++/105681] [12 Regression] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.3.0

[committed] libstdc++: Fix narrowing conversions for 16-bit size_t [PR105681]

Tested x86_64-linux, bootstrapped msp430-elf, pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- On a 16-bit target such as msp430 we get errors about narrowing long values to size_t, which is only 16-bit. When --enable-libstdcxx-pch is used the header breaks the build because of these narrowing errors.

[committed] libstdc++: Fix atomic and error_code printers for versioned namespace

Tested x86_64-linux, pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- This fixes the printers to work with std::__8::atomic and std::__v8::ios_errc and std::__v8::future_errc. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * python/libstdcxx/v6/printers.py (StdErrorCodePrinter): Make lookup for ios_errc and future_errc

[committed] libstdc++: Move std::iostream_category() definition to new file

Tested x86_64-linux, pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- This fixes a missing symbol when the dual ABI is disabled, e.g. for the versioned namespace build. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * src/c++11/Makefile.am: Add new source file. * src/c++11/Makefile.in: Regenerate. *

[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:367740bf6d3a6627798b3955e5d85efc7549ef50 commit r13-787-g367740bf6d3a6627798b3955e5d85efc7549ef50 Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug c++/105569] [12/13 Regression] -Waddress warns on dynamic_cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105569 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

Re: [PATCH] Add a bit dislike for separate mem alternative when op is REG_P.

On 2022-05-24 23:39, liuhongt wrote: Rigt now, mem_cost for separate mem alternative is 1 * frequency which is pretty small and caused the unnecessary SSE spill in the PR, I've tried to rework backend cost model, but RA still not happy with that(regress somewhere else). I think the root cause

[Bug c++/105569] [12/13 Regression] -Waddress warns on dynamic_cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105569 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6f56efa94e845db0d5c934ca202295019bf334c1 commit r13-784-g6f56efa94e845db0d5c934ca202295019bf334c1 Author: Marek Polacek Date:

[Bug libgomp/105745] New: Conditional OpenMP directive fails with GCC 12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105745 Bug ID: 105745 Summary: Conditional OpenMP directive fails with GCC 12 Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- Ah, and I didn't see this when building for msp430 because I used --disable-libstdcxx-pch and that means the build doesn't depend on the header. I can now reproduce the build failure, and the patch in

[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- And it was indeed something I asked for, see r12-2355 c++: Don't hide narrowing errors in system headers Jonathan pointed me at this issue where constexpr unsigned f() { constexpr int n =

[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4) > possibly the system header diagnostic changes? Yes, the narrowing check here was PR c++/57891 which was fixed for GCC 9. But it was still allowed in system

[PATCH v3] DSE: Use the constant store source if possible

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 04:14:17PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > "H.J. Lu" writes: > > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:30 AM Richard Sandiford > > wrote: > >> > >> "H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches" writes: > >> > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > >> >> On Sat, May 21,

Re: [PATCH] c++: cv-quals of dummy obj for non-dep memfn call [PR105637]

On 5/26/22 14:57, Patrick Palka wrote: On Thu, 26 May 2022, Patrick Palka wrote: Here we expect the calls to BaseClass::baseDevice resolve to the second, third and fourth overloads respectively in light of the cv-qualifiers of 'this' in each case. But ever since r12-6075-g2decd2cabe5a4f, the

Re: [PATCH v2] c++: suppress -Waddress warnings with *_cast [PR105569]

On 5/26/22 09:33, Marek Polacek wrote: On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 09:26:16AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: On 5/25/22 16:25, Marek Polacek wrote: On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 09:43:47AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: On 5/16/22 13:06, Marek Polacek wrote: dynamic_cast can legally return nullptr, so I

[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 --- Comment #5 from David Summers --- Yes I can confirm that going back to gcc-11.2.0 - and it works again, that being the only change. It explains how I got the headers, on my first build I used 11.2.0; whilst it was building saw that gcc-12

☺ Buildbot (GNU Toolchain): gccrust - build successful (master)

A restored build has been detected on builder gccrust-fedora-s390x while building gccrust. Full details are available at: https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#builders/37/builds/137 Build state: build successful Revision: 1a04c501e41ec0dee74d520a7ca4373cb7df7a48 Worker: fedora-s390x

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Clean up the option_mask defines (part 1)

On Thu, 2022-05-26 at 13:31 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 09:40:18AM -0500, will schmidt wrote: > > On Thu, 2022-05-26 at 05:47 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > I'll dig a bit more, but would handle that in a separate > > patch. > > Can you please

Re: [x86 PATCH] Pre-reload splitter to transform and; cmp into not; test.

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:41 PM Roger Sayle wrote: > > > A common idiom for testing if a specific set of bits is set in a value > is to use "(X & Y) == Y", which on x86 results in an AND followed by a > CMP. A slightly improved implementation is to instead use (~X & Y)==0, > that uses a NOT and

Re: [PATCH] c++: cv-quals of dummy obj for non-dep memfn call [PR105637]

On Thu, 26 May 2022, Patrick Palka wrote: > Here we expect the calls to BaseClass::baseDevice resolve to the second, > third and fourth overloads respectively in light of the cv-qualifiers > of 'this' in each case. But ever since r12-6075-g2decd2cabe5a4f, the > calls incorrectly resolve to the

[x86 PATCH] Pre-reload splitter to transform and;cmp into not;test.

A common idiom for testing if a specific set of bits is set in a value is to use "(X & Y) == Y", which on x86 results in an AND followed by a CMP. A slightly improved implementation is to instead use (~X & Y)==0, that uses a NOT and a TEST (or ANDN where available); still two "fast"

[Bug c++/105571] Spurious "set but not used" on static constexpr local, used in lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105571 --- Comment #2 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña --- Simplified reproducer from Bug 105743: See https://godbolt.org/z/xq16xac15. ```C++ void f(auto x) { x(0); } void g() { static constexpr auto h = [](...) { }; f([](auto x) { h(x); }); }

[Bug c++/105571] Spurious "set but not used" on static constexpr local, used in lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105571 Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña changed: What|Removed |Added CC||johelegp at gmail dot com

[Bug c++/105743] Bogus unused but set lambda warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105743 Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[PATCH] c++: cv-quals of dummy obj for non-dep memfn call [PR105637]

Here we expect the calls to BaseClass::baseDevice resolve to the second, third and fourth overloads respectively in light of the cv-qualifiers of 'this' in each case. But ever since r12-6075-g2decd2cabe5a4f, the calls incorrectly resolve to the first overload at instantiation time. This happens

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Clean up the option_mask defines (part 1)

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 09:40:18AM -0500, will schmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2022-05-26 at 05:47 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > Yeah, the longer names are a bit annoying in any case. We'll get > > used > > to it (if those long lines are fixed ;-) ) > > Agree. I would not be opposed to somewhat

[Bug rtl-optimization/105744] New: [11/12/13 Regression] wrong code with -fexpensive-optimizations -flive-range-shrinkage on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu

630-g3dff965cae6-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-powerpc64le Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 13.0.0 20220526 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug target/105738] asan error during bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105738 --- Comment #2 from David Binderman --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > It could be clang/llvm miscompiling stage 2. Can you try with gcc as the > original compiler? Thanks for the suggestion. I did that, and the problem seems to

[Bug sanitizer/105729] False positive UBsan "reference binding to null pointer of type" when evaluating array indexing which throws exception

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105729 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 53039 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53039=edit gcc13-pr105729.patch Untested fix.

Re: [PATCH v4, rs6000] Add V1TI into vector comparison expand [PR103316]

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 09:16:59AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > Does Power10 fully support int128 in 32 bit mode? I would expect no, > so the additional test is required. It isn't supported on any 32-bit ABI, Power or not. It would simplify many things if it was though! Segher

Re: [PATCH 5/5] xtensa: Improve bswap[sd]i2 insn patterns

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:35 AM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa wrote: > > This patch makes bswap[sd]i2 better register allocation, and reconstructs > bswapsi2 in order to take advantage of GIMPLE manual byte-swapping > recognition. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.md

[Bug c++/105743] New: Bogus unused but set lambda warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105743 Bug ID: 105743 Summary: Bogus unused but set lambda warning Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3

Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] xtensa: Add setmemsi insn pattern

On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 8:52 AM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa wrote: > > This patch introduces setmemsi insn pattern of two kinds, unrolled loop and > small loop, for fixed small length and constant initialization value. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa-protos.h >

Re: [PATCH 3/5] xtensa: Fix instruction counting regarding block move expansion

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:35 AM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa wrote: > > This patch makes counting the number of instructions of the remainder > (modulo 4) part more accurate. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.cc (xtensa_expand_block_move): > Make instruction

Re: [PATCH 2/5] xtensa: Make use of IN_RANGE macro where appropriate

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:35 AM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa wrote: > > No functional changes. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * gcc/config/xtensa/constraints.md (M, O): Use the macro. > * gcc/config/xtensa/predicates.md (addsubx_operand, > extui_fldsz_operand, >

Re: [PATCH 1/5] xtensa: Simplify EXTUI instruction maskimm validations

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:35 AM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa wrote: > > No functional changes. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * gcc/config/xtensa/predicates.md (extui_fldsz_operand): Simplify. > * gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.cc (xtensa_mask_immediate, print_operand): > Ditto. > --- >

[Bug middle-end/101836] __builtin_object_size(P->M, 1) where M is an array and the last member of a struct fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836 qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org

[committed] libstdc++: Add constexpr to std::counted_iterator post-increment (LWG 3643)

Tested powerpc64le-linux, pushed to trunk. This can be backported to 11 and 12 too. -- >8 -- libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * include/bits/stl_iterator.h (counted_iterator::operator++(int)): Add 'constexpr' as per LWG 3643. * testsuite/24_iterators/counted_iterator/lwg3643.cc:

Re: [PATCH] AArch64: Cleanup option processing code

Wilco Dijkstra writes: > Further cleanup option processing. Remove the duplication of global > variables for CPU and tune settings so that CPU option processing is > simplified even further. Move global variables that need save and > restore due to target option processing into aarch64.opt. This

Re: [PATCH V4 2/3] RISC-V:Cache Management Operation instructions

Hi Simon: Good catch, those cache operations should take an address operand. On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 7:58 PM Simon Cook wrote: > > Hi, > > I've just tried using these builtins now these have landed in trunk, and > I have a question about the cbo builtins. > > Looking at the code being

[Bug c++/105734] [12/13 Regression]: Incorrect "error: invalid use of 'auto'" for explicit destructor inside a template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734 --- Comment #9 from Jeremy R. --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7) > (In reply to Jeremy R. from comment #1) > > More minimal: https://godbolt.org/z/WcGab4W8T > > The https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs very clearly says to provide the

[Bug sanitizer/105729] False positive UBsan "reference binding to null pointer of type" when evaluating array indexing which throws exception

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105729 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug other/105729] False positive UBsan "reference binding to null pointer of type" when evaluating array indexing which throws exception

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105729 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- I think the problem is that fold_unary optimizes conversion of (const struct Bar *) ((const struct Foo *) this)->data + (sizetype) range_check (x) to const struct Bar & type into conversion of the lhs of

Re: [PATCH v2] DSE: Use the constant store source if possible

"H.J. Lu" writes: > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:30 AM Richard Sandiford > wrote: >> >> "H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches" writes: >> > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 5:02 AM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > When recording

[Bug ipa/105639] [12/13 Regression] ICE in propagate_controlled_uses, at ipa-prop.cc:4195 since r12-7936-gf6d65e803623c7ba

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105639 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/105742] [9/10/11/12/13 Regression] accepts-invalid non-dependent call to non-static member function from unrelated class in presence of dependent base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105742 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||10.3.0, 11.2.0, 12.1.0,

[Bug c++/105742] New: accepts-invalid non-dependent call to non-static member function from unrelated class in presence of dependent base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105742 Bug ID: 105742 Summary: accepts-invalid non-dependent call to non-static member function from unrelated class in presence of dependent base Product: gcc

[PATCH] c++: fix broken copy elision with nested TARGET_EXPRs [PR105550]

In this problem, we are failing to properly perform copy elision with a conditional operator, so this: constexpr A a = true ? A{} : A{}; fails with: error: 'A{((const A*)(&))}' is not a constant expression The whole initializer is TARGET_EXPR }> : TARGET_EXPR }>> where the outermost

[Bug c++/105741] Wrong preprocessor parameter substitution with ##__VA_ARGS__.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105741 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/105741] Wrong preprocessor parameter substitution with ##__VA_ARGS__.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105741 --- Comment #3 from JFK --- Any idea about how to work around this without the use of VA_OPT ?

[PATCH] ipa: Check cst type when propagating controled uses info (PR 105639)

Hi, PR 105639 shows that code with type-mismatches can trigger an assert after runnning into a branch that was inteded only for references to variables - as opposed to references to functions. Fixed by moving the condition from the assert to the guarding if statement. Bootstrapped and tested on

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Clean up the option_mask defines (part 1)

On Thu, 2022-05-26 at 05:47 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > Hi, Thanks Kewen and Segher for the reviews. Additional comments below. > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 03:01:37PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote: > > on 2022/5/26 14:12, Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > on 2022/5/26 04:25, will

[Bug c++/105741] Wrong preprocessor parameter substitution with ##__VA_ARGS__.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105741 --- Comment #1 from JFK --- Same problem with 10.2.0

[Bug c++/105741] New: Wrong preprocessor parameter substitution with ##__VA_ARGS__.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105741 Bug ID: 105741 Summary: Wrong preprocessor parameter substitution with ##__VA_ARGS__. Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[PATCH] Mips: Enable asynchronous unwind tables with both ASAN and LSAN

Enable asynchronous unwind tables with both ASAN and TSAN for correct back-trace. LLVM currently enables asynchronous unwind tables for: ASAN, HWSAN, TSAN, MSAN, and DFSAN. HWSAN is currently available only on AArch64, while MSAN and DFSAN are not available at all. Also, LLVM checks is

[Bug preprocessor/105732] [9/10/11/12/13 Regression] internal compiler error: unspellable token PADDING

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug lto/105727] __builtin_constant_p expansion in LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- That may be true, but I think only the 1/2/4/8/16 sizes are interesting to handle with special code. And as the function is provably called by a function which can have any size and through LTO can get a

[Bug tree-optimization/105739] [9/10 Regression] Miscompilation of Linux kernel update.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105739 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug lto/105727] __builtin_constant_p expansion in LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727 --- Comment #15 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz --- > No, see c#10. I know it will work if BUILD_BUG call is removed. However the only reason I can see why original author put it there is that he/she wanted to write special case checkers for

[Bug c++/96363] bogus error with multiple constrained partial specialization forward declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96363 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.2 --- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka

[Bug c++/96363] bogus error with multiple constrained partial specialization forward declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96363 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:97dc78d705a90c1ae83c78a7f2e24942cc3a6257 commit r13-779-g97dc78d705a90c1ae83c78a7f2e24942cc3a6257 Author: Patrick Palka Date:

[Bug preprocessor/105732] [9/10/11/12/13 Regression] internal compiler error: unspellable token PADDING

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

Re: [PATCH v2] c++: suppress -Waddress warnings with *_cast [PR105569]

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 09:26:16AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 5/25/22 16:25, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 09:43:47AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > On 5/16/22 13:06, Marek Polacek wrote: > > > > dynamic_cast can legally return nullptr, so I don't think it's helpful > >

Re: [PATCH v2] c++: suppress -Waddress warnings with *_cast [PR105569]

On 5/25/22 16:25, Marek Polacek wrote: On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 09:43:47AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: On 5/16/22 13:06, Marek Polacek wrote: dynamic_cast can legally return nullptr, so I don't think it's helpful for -Waddress to warn for if (dynamic_cast()) // ... More generally,

Re: [PATCH] c++: constrained partial spec forward decl [PR96363]

On 5/25/22 13:24, Patrick Palka wrote: Here during cp_parser_single_declaration for #2, we were calling associate_classtype_constraints for TPL (the primary template type) before maybe_process_partial_specialization could get a chance to notice that we're in fact declaring a distinct constrained

Re: [PATCH v4, rs6000] Add V1TI into vector comparison expand [PR103316]

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:52 AM Kewen.Lin wrote: > > Hi Haochen, > > on 2022/5/26 13:30, HAO CHEN GUI wrote: > > Kewen, > > Thanks so much for your advice. Just one question about effective-target. > > > > For the test cases, it needs both power10_ok and int128 support. I saw > > some > >

Re: ☠ Buildbot (GNU Toolchain): gccrust - failed 'grep unexpected ...' (failure) (master)

Hi, On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 09:53:41AM +, builder--- via Gcc-rust wrote: > A new failure has been detected on builder gccrust-fedora-s390x while > building gccrust. > > Full details are available at: > https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#builders/37/builds/136 > > Build state:

[committed 3/3] libstdc++: Refactor includes for unordered containers

Tested powerpc64le-linux, pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- This moves some #include directives to the relevant place. For example, needs so should include it directly instead of relying on and to do so first. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * include/bits/functional_hash.h (__is_fast_hash): Add

[committed 1/3] libstdc++: Make headers include their prerequisites

From: Nathan Sidwell Tested powerpc64le-linux, pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- These headers were relying on their includers having already included some prerequisites. That makes them unsuitable to be header-units. So directly include the needed headers. Reviewed-by: Jonathan Wakely

[committed 2/3] libstdc++: Remove some unnecessary includes

Tested powerpc64le-linux, pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- These headers do not use anything in directly, and it's included by and anyway, because they do need it. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * include/bits/ranges_algobase.h: Do not include . * include/std/string: Likewise.

[Bug c++/105737] [10/11 only] Incorrect evaluation order in new expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105737 --- Comment #3 from m.cencora at gmail dot com --- FWIW Ordered evaluation of elements in braced-init-list exists since C++11 (it was not a part of P0145).

Re: [PATCH V4 2/3] RISC-V:Cache Management Operation instructions

Hi, I've just tried using these builtins now these have landed in trunk, and I have a question about the cbo builtins. Looking at the code being generated it looks like these builtins return an int and take no arguments, but reading the instructions these should instead take an int and

[Bug tree-optimization/105739] [9/10 Regression] Miscompilation of Linux kernel update.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105739 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- The call is added at: #0 gimple_set_code (g=, code=GIMPLE_CALL) at ../../gcc/gimple.c:108 #1 0x00bceae1 in gimple_alloc (code=GIMPLE_CALL, num_ops=7) at ../../gcc/gimple.c:140 #2

[Bug tree-optimization/105740] New: missed optimization switch transformation for conditions with duplicate conditions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105740 Bug ID: 105740 Summary: missed optimization switch transformation for conditions with duplicate conditions Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/105739] [9/10 Regression] Miscompilation of Linux kernel update.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105739 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 53036 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53036=edit update.i.xz

  1   2   >