https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104813
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/6cfcq4Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104813
Bug ID: 104813
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: in
adjust_references_in_caller, at ipa-cp.cc:4963
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104762
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101929
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc
index 9188d727e33..7f1f12fb6c6 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc
@@ -2374,7 +2375,7 @@ fail:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104812
Bug ID: 104812
Summary: Construct-name with same variable name in scope
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104811
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104811
Bug ID: 104811
Summary: maxloc/minloc cannot accept character arguments
without `dim` optional argument.
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
HaoChen Gui changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guihaoc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104616
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-03-07
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104613
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
struct _Unwind_Context _Unwind_Resume_or_Rethrow_this_context;
void offset (int);
struct _Unwind_Context {
void *reg[7];
} _Unwind_Resume_or_Rethrow() {
struct _Unwind_Context cur_contextcur_context =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104615
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104809
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104808
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> these are in debug_* functions so they don't need to be translated as they
> are not user visible at all.
> That is they are only used while debugging GCC.
If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552
--- Comment #26 from Roland Illig ---
>From cp/module.cc:
> returning to the gate for a mechanical issue
This diagnostic is a fatal error. Fatal errors must be actionable. This
diagnostic isn't actionable, instead it increases confusion for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552
--- Comment #25 from Roland Illig ---
>From cp/module.cc:
inform (loc, "compiler is %sversion %s%s%s",
IS_EXPERIMENTAL (my_ver) ? "experimental " : "",
my_string,
reject_p ? "" :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552
--- Comment #24 from Roland Illig ---
>From cp/module.cc:
> error_at (loc, "compiled module is %sversion %s",
> IS_EXPERIMENTAL (their_ver) ? "experimental " : "",
> their_string);
The word "experimental" must be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104810
Bug ID: 104810
Summary: Wrong order of "note: ... this enumerator %qD"
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic, testsuite-fail
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104809
Bug ID: 104809
Summary: Explain ELRoND to translators
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104808
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
these are in debug_* functions so they don't need to be translated as they are
not user visible at all.
That is they are only used while debugging GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104806
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Actually "__dt " should not be recommended at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104808
Bug ID: 104808
Summary: unclear diagnostic "MAP %qD TO %qT"
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104807
Bug ID: 104807
Summary: x86_64-w64-mingw32 target does not have visibility
setting
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-11.2.0/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-fomit-frame-pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104636
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If you have something in between {}s it will be an error, not a pedwarn
(pedwarn will emit a warning with -Wpedantic and error with -pedantic-errors).
I believe the reason why it is a pedwarn in the {} case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104636
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90148
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99297
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104797
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |trivial
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104796
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104795
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104795
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96248
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40883
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104636
--- Comment #4 from Artur Bać ---
So conclusion from Your arguments is to me that -std=c++20 doesn't guarantee
strict c++20 compatibility as another switches are required to force explicit
constructor be used only explicitly and disallow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90597
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.5 |12.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #5 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> rbp is hard frame pointer, so depending on whether the function needs a
> frame pointer (at -O0 I think all functions do), the register isn't
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104806
Bug ID: 104806
Summary: Weird error message: did you mean "__dt "
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
rbp is hard frame pointer, so depending on whether the function needs a frame
pointer (at -O0 I think all functions do), the register isn't available for use
(and therefore for clobbering) in inline asm.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104801
Pawel P changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104801
--- Comment #3 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to Pawel P from comment #2)
> I understand. Thank you for clarification
You should close with RESOLVED INVALID since there is nothing to fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104801
Pawel P changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #3 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Clobber of "rsp" makes no sense, you can't change the value of the stack
> pointer in inline asm without restoring it back before the end of inline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104804
--- Comment #4 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> What exactly are you trying to achieve (because & on your testcase makes no
> sense at all, the other input is "r" and therefore can't ever match
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #2 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Clobber of "rsp" makes no sense, you can't change the value of the stack
> pointer in inline asm without restoring it back before the end of inline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104804
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As I wrote, the only way to implement +m reliably in gcc is to lower it
immediately as "=m" (whatever) ... "0" (whatever) with ensuring that
side-effects in whatever are evaluated just once.
And, in that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
Bug ID: 104805
Summary: [12.0] x86_64 Extended asm may use rbp register to
input/output even thougth "rbp" is in the clobber list
when "rsp" and "rbp" are both in the in the clobber
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104804
--- Comment #2 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> +m is handled as =m with corresponding m, early clobber for that doesn't
> make sense, on one side you require that the input is the same as the
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104804
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104804
Bug ID: 104804
Summary: [12.0] x86_64 Extended asm always failed with "+=m" in
Output Operands and wrong error info
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
50 matches
Mail list logo
