[Bug target/104853] [RISC-V] -march=rv64g not including extension Zifencei

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104853 --- Comment #4 from Kito Cheng --- Thanks your info, that cause by the default ISA spec version bump issue, binutils 2.38 and GCC 11.* using different default ISA spec cause this issue, I've push a patch to GCC 11 branch [1] for this issue,

[Bug middle-end/104800] reodering of potentially trapping operations and volatile stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800 --- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, muecker at gwdg dot de wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800 > > --- Comment #11 from Martin Uecker --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment

[Bug target/104219] [12 regression] riscv64 compiler build fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104219 Kito Cheng changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/104219] [12 regression] riscv64 compiler build fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104219 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Kito Cheng : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9871d39f752bc9c114ed694662a519d04896f491 commit r11-9644-g9871d39f752bc9c114ed694662a519d04896f491 Author: Kito Cheng Date:

[Bug middle-end/104800] reodering of potentially trapping operations and volatile stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800 --- Comment #12 from Martin Uecker --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) > Btw, with -ftrapv it would mean we cannot re-order any signed arithmetic > with respect to volatile accesses unless we can prove it does not invoke >

[Bug middle-end/104800] reodering of potentially trapping operations and volatile stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800 --- Comment #11 from Martin Uecker --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9) > (In reply to Martin Uecker from comment #8) > > The standard specifies in 5.1.2.3p6 that > > > > "— Volatile accesses to objects are evaluated strictly > >

[Bug middle-end/104800] reodering of potentially trapping operations and volatile stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- Btw, with -ftrapv it would mean we cannot re-order any signed arithmetic with respect to volatile accesses unless we can prove it does not invoke (undefined, but -ftrapv makes it implementation defined)

[Bug middle-end/104800] reodering of potentially trapping operations and volatile stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Martin Uecker from comment #8) > The standard specifies in 5.1.2.3p6 that > > "— Volatile accesses to objects are evaluated strictly > according to the rules of the abstract machine." > >

[Bug target/104853] [RISC-V] -march=rv64g not including extension Zifencei

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104853 --- Comment #3 from rvalue --- (In reply to Kito Cheng from comment #2) > Do you mind give few more version info for binutils and configuration info > for gcc? > > You can obtain those info by following two commands: > $ gcc -v > $ as

[Bug target/104783] [nvptx, openmp] Hang/abort with atomic update in simd construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104783 --- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries --- The patch I have works for target boards unix and unix/-foffload=-mptx=3.1, but I run into the hang for --target_board=unix/-foffload=-misa=sm_75.

[Bug target/104853] [RISC-V] -march=rv64g not including extension Zifencei

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104853 Kito Cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kito at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug go/104832] gccgo / libgo Reproducibility Problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104832 --- Comment #6 from Toolybird --- Created attachment 52588 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52588=edit archive/zip.o differences

[Bug go/104832] gccgo / libgo Reproducibility Problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104832 --- Comment #5 from Toolybird --- Created attachment 52587 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52587=edit image/gif.o differences No worries. I'm attaching 2 diffs pertaining to "image/gif.o" and "archive/zip.o". Thanks

[Bug debug/104778] [12 Regression] ICE in simplify_subreg, at simplify-rtx.cc:7324

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104778 --- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha --- Created attachment 52586 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52586=edit powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu-gcc-12.0.1 -mcmpb -Og -g -c k1n69laf.c -Q --help=target It still ICEs for we w/ 20220306

[Bug go/104832] gccgo / libgo Reproducibility Problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104832 --- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor --- Can you show the differences in one or two of the files, as you did before? Thanks. ASLR could be a factor, but only in the sense that it would make it more likely to reveal a bug in the code. The

[Bug go/104832] gccgo / libgo Reproducibility Problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104832 --- Comment #3 from Toolybird --- Thanks for the quick patch! Things are a bit different now but unfortunately the problem persists. It appears there is an element of randomness to this problem as the list of affected object files has changed.

[Bug target/104853] [RISC-V] -march=rv64g not including extension Zifencei

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104853 --- Comment #1 from rvalue --- It do works with `-march=rv64g_zifencei`, but I don't think it's the right way to work.

[Bug target/104853] New: [RISC-V] -march=rv64g not including extension Zifencei

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104853 Bug ID: 104853 Summary: [RISC-V] -march=rv64g not including extension Zifencei Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug libstdc++/95989] Segmentation fault compiling with static libraries and using jthread::request_stop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95989 --- Comment #22 from Jackson Huff --- See bug 104852

[Bug libstdc++/104852] std::[j]thread::detach() still gives segmentation faults with glibc 2.34

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104852 --- Comment #1 from Jackson Huff --- Note that my CMake command includes -lpthread even though CMake has been configured to link it already with -pthread, so when reproducing it, remove -lpthread to better replicate the situation (I only

[Bug libstdc++/104852] New: std::[j]thread::detach() still gives segmentation faults with glibc 2.34

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104852 Bug ID: 104852 Summary: std::[j]thread::detach() still gives segmentation faults with glibc 2.34 Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/104851] New: off-by-one out-of-bound access in supports_vec_convert_optab_p, at optabs-query.cc:725

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104851 Bug ID: 104851 Summary: off-by-one out-of-bound access in supports_vec_convert_optab_p, at optabs-query.cc:725 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug other/63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 Bug 63426 depends on bug 104842, which changed state. Bug 104842 Summary: mips: signed overflow in LUI_OPERAND https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104842 What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/104842] mips: signed overflow in LUI_OPERAND

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104842 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/104842] mips: signed overflow in LUI_OPERAND

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104842 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2ab70a4a5c2d5a9ffb923f13b1c3b938c60dd0f0 commit r12-7555-g2ab70a4a5c2d5a9ffb923f13b1c3b938c60dd0f0 Author: Xi Ruoyao Date: Wed Mar

[Bug target/85665] Multiple typos in diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85665 --- Comment #13 from Chung-Ju Wu --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #12) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > > (In reply to Roland Illig from comment #3) > > > Therefore I thought I'd try a different approach this time. >

[Bug translation/104552] Mistakes in strings to be translated in GCC 12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552 --- Comment #35 from Roland Illig --- (In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #33) > (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #28) > > (In reply to Roland Illig from comment #11) > > > From aarch64-sve-builtins.cc: > > > > passing %qT to

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #27 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #26) > Does it work on macOS now? Yes, thanks! All that remains now is the original `echo -n` problem... Actually, let me test to see if the autolinking works

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #26 from Jonathan Wakely --- Does it work on macOS now?

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #25 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:17bffa0c9f90df49bde6671816bde04008b6c5af commit r12-7554-g17bffa0c9f90df49bde6671816bde04008b6c5af Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug c++/96440] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in tree check: expected tree_list, have error_mark in get_attribute_name, at attribs.c:841

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96440 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e52af9cac7fa7409c78c9f336dc1da57750c9766 commit r12-7552-ge52af9cac7fa7409c78c9f336dc1da57750c9766 Author: Roger Sayle Date: Tue

[Bug c++/104850] New: Instantiating a destructor for a template class too early, before the calling destructor is seen - rejects valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104850 Bug ID: 104850 Summary: Instantiating a destructor for a template class too early, before the calling destructor is seen - rejects valid code Product: gcc

[Bug fortran/104126] [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_gfc_desc_to_cfi_desc, at fortran/trans-expr.c:5649 since r12-4467-g64f9623765da3306

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104126 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/104126] [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_gfc_desc_to_cfi_desc, at fortran/trans-expr.c:5649 since r12-4467-g64f9623765da3306

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104126 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:48777d982add74cef14ec6704a622fce4d4a2609 commit r12-7551-g48777d982add74cef14ec6704a622fce4d4a2609 Author: Tobias Burnus Date:

[Bug c++/96437] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE in tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl common’ structure, have ‘error_mark’ in synthesize_implicit_template_parm, at cp/parser.c:44246

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96437 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3093f8a18e7a9c5a9bba976d58a2f91033e7f35a commit r12-7550-g3093f8a18e7a9c5a9bba976d58a2f91033e7f35a Author: Roger Sayle Date: Tue

[Bug c++/96329] [11/12 Regression] ICE : tree check: expected string_cst, have error_mark in cp_parser_linkage_specification, at cp/parser.c:14640

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96329 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ab72ec7c456c92989276f17fe0ae90a56932149 commit r12-7549-g8ab72ec7c456c92989276f17fe0ae90a56932149 Author: Roger Sayle Date: Tue

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #21 from Vincent Lefèvre --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16) > As for constant folding, even with double double gcc is able to fold some > constant arithmetics in that format, but because the emulation is only >

[Bug c++/104847] [11/12 Regression] ICE in write_unqualified_name, at cp/mangle.cc:1406

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104847 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Priority|P3

[Bug c++/104108] [10/11 Regression] [c++17+] template alias inside template with static field of template class rejected since r10-6329-g423284053ec51832

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104108 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression] [c++17+]

[Bug c++/104108] [10/11/12 Regression] [c++17+] template alias inside template with static field of template class rejected since r10-6329-g423284053ec51832

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104108 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d54ce4641ed10208be36fd514cae8ff1153c commit r12-7548-gd54ce4641ed10208be36fd514cae8ff1153c Author: Marek Polacek Date:

[Bug go/104832] gccgo / libgo Reproducibility Problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104832 --- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor --- I just committed 2858e2afcb0a6553a222e724d8426451364ee755 which should fix the specific problem in fmt.gox. Let me know if you still see problems here. Thanks.

[Bug c++/104846] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected function_decl, have field_decl in grokmethod, at cp/decl.cc:17999

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104846 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Last

[Bug target/104829] [12 Regression] Pure 32-bit PowerPC build broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104829 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #20 from David Edelsohn --- Double-double has advantages and disadvantages. You're welcome to debate William Kahan about the choice instead of making snarky comments here.

[Bug lto/104237] [11 Regression] Emitted binary code changes when -g is enabled at -O1 -flto and optimize attribute since r11-3126-ga8f9b4c54cc35062

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104237 --- Comment #17 from Chengnian Sun --- Thanks for the prompt help. I managed to locate the exact commit.

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #19 from beebe at math dot utah.edu --- Thanks for the further comments on PowerPC, double double as fake long double, and the news of gcc-12 on Fedora 36 for that CPU. I'll soon build a VM to get access to that combination. I have

[Bug lto/104237] [11 Regression] Emitted binary code changes when -g is enabled at -O1 -flto and optimize attribute since r11-3126-ga8f9b4c54cc35062

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104237 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- -gf4ee27d32 means something didn't work correctly, normally it should be something like r12-6853-gf4ee27d32 which you can use directly in git. Anyway, the git has is after the -g, so f4ee27d32.

[Bug lto/104237] [11 Regression] Emitted binary code changes when -g is enabled at -O1 -flto and optimize attribute since r11-3126-ga8f9b4c54cc35062

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104237 --- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski --- The g part of the uuid stands for global revision and the g needs to be removed to get a normal gut hash.

[Bug fortran/104811] maxloc/minloc cannot accept character arguments without `dim` optional argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104811 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e3e369dad6cbecb1b490b3f3b154c600fba5a6f3 commit r12-7545-ge3e369dad6cbecb1b490b3f3b154c600fba5a6f3 Author: Harald Anlauf Date:

[Bug c++/104806] Weird error message: did you mean "__dt "

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104806 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek --- Note, for the time being only little endian powerpc64 can switch (I think only power9 and later have hw support for IEEE quad and in the ABI it is passed in Altivec/VSX registers. ppc64le only supports

[Bug c++/104806] Weird error message: did you mean "__dt "

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104806 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e480c3c06d20874fd7504bfdcca0b829f8000389 commit r12-7544-ge480c3c06d20874fd7504bfdcca0b829f8000389 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #17 from beebe at math dot utah.edu --- >> ... powerpc currently uses what is called double double for 128bit >> long double. GCC does not know how to constant fold that nicely. Yes, I know about the double double format that IBM,

[Bug lto/104237] [11 Regression] Emitted binary code changes when -g is enabled at -O1 -flto and optimize attribute since r11-3126-ga8f9b4c54cc35062

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104237 --- Comment #14 from Chengnian Sun --- How to interpret the version string of "gcc -v"? For example, in the following output, I tried to locate the commit with id gf4ee27d32, but did not get anything. "gcc version 12.0.1 20220125

[Bug middle-end/104800] reodering of potentially trapping operations and volatile stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800 --- Comment #8 from Martin Uecker --- The standard specifies in 5.1.2.3p6 that "— Volatile accesses to objects are evaluated strictly according to the rules of the abstract machine." and "This is the observable behavior of the program."

[Bug middle-end/102209] NRVO for function parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102209 --- Comment #2 from Federico Kircheis --- Isn't the compiler allowed to do copy/move elision even if observable since before c++17?

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15) > (In reply to beebe from comment #14) > > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 > > > > That is a really old one, from early 2006; I would have

[Bug fortran/104845] Wrong array size for component of CLASS array element

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104845 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus --- Part of the testcase is part of the patch at: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/591414.html When this PR is fixed (and that patch is committed): Please uncomment the commented lines.

[Bug fortran/104844] CLASS actual to assumed-rank TYPE(*) wrongly passes declared instead of dynamic type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104844 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus --- Part of the testcase is part of the patch at: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/591414.html When this PR is fixed (and that patch is committed): Please uncomment the commented lines.

[Bug fortran/104849] New: ICE in find_array_section, at fortran/expr.cc:1616

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104849 Bug ID: 104849 Summary: ICE in find_array_section, at fortran/expr.cc:1616 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/104848] New: ICE in simplify_intrinsic_op, at fortran/expr.cc:1305

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104848 Bug ID: 104848 Summary: ICE in simplify_intrinsic_op, at fortran/expr.cc:1305 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/104847] New: [11/12 Regression] ICE in write_unqualified_name, at cp/mangle.cc:1406

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104847 Bug ID: 104847 Summary: [11/12 Regression] ICE in write_unqualified_name, at cp/mangle.cc:1406 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/104846] New: [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected function_decl, have field_decl in grokmethod, at cp/decl.cc:17999

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104846 Bug ID: 104846 Summary: [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected function_decl, have field_decl in grokmethod, at cp/decl.cc:17999 Product: gcc Version:

[Bug fortran/104845] New: Wrong array size for component of CLASS array element

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104845 Bug ID: 104845 Summary: Wrong array size for component of CLASS array element Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal

[Bug c++/104678] pointer to member cannot be passed as template argument after derived/base cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104678 --- Comment #1 from S Béla --- Ping

[Bug translation/104552] Mistakes in strings to be translated in GCC 12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552 --- Comment #34 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:34b45cc5266db9e4098df43bec898625a6004b77 commit r12-7542-g34b45cc5266db9e4098df43bec898625a6004b77 Author: Iain Sandoe Date:

[Bug fortran/104844] New: CLASS actual to assumed-rank TYPE(*) wrongly passes declared instead of dynamic type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104844 Bug ID: 104844 Summary: CLASS actual to assumed-rank TYPE(*) wrongly passes declared instead of dynamic type Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug analyzer/99771] Analyzer diagnostics should not say ""

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99771 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7175f36812b32d3de242f15c065b9cb68e957a9 commit r12-7541-gb7175f36812b32d3de242f15c065b9cb68e957a9 Author: David Malcolm Date:

[Bug rtl-optimization/104777] [9/10/11 Regression] gcc crashes while compiling a custom coroutine library sample

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104777 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] gcc |[9/10/11 Regression] gcc

[Bug rtl-optimization/104777] [9/10/11/12 Regression] gcc crashes while compiling a custom coroutine library sample

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104777 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1133c0205a7e2a65834a1af780b8da15eead2a9 commit r12-7540-ge1133c0205a7e2a65834a1af780b8da15eead2a9 Author: Marek Polacek Date:

[Bug fortran/104811] maxloc/minloc cannot accept character arguments without `dim` optional argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104811 --- Comment #5 from Amir Shahmoradi --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #4) > (In reply to anlauf from comment #2) > > (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > > > Compiles and executes without optimization or if -fno-frontend-optimize is

[Bug fortran/104811] maxloc/minloc cannot accept character arguments without `dim` optional argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104811 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to beebe from comment #14) > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 > > That is a really old one, from early 2006; I would have hoped that it > had long since been repaired in gcc.

[Bug middle-end/26374] Compile failure on long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 --- Comment #14 from beebe at math dot utah.edu --- >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26374 That is a really old one, from early 2006; I would have hoped that it had long since been repaired in gcc. However, I just checked my VM

[Bug rtl-optimization/104843] signed overflow in compute_const_anchors, at cse.cc:1180

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104843 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Target||mips Blocks|

[Bug rtl-optimization/104843] New: signed overflow in compute_const_anchors, at cse.cc:1180

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104843 Bug ID: 104843 Summary: signed overflow in compute_const_anchors, at cse.cc:1180 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #24 from Jonathan Wakely --- Patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/591396.html

[Bug target/104781] [12 regression] SEGV in _Unwind_GetGR during i386 Ada bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104781 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:23ed4df521db9d66782d3f9cf291fc2564cf313a commit r12-7539-g23ed4df521db9d66782d3f9cf291fc2564cf313a Author: H.J. Lu Date: Fri Mar 4

[Bug target/104613] ICE in dwarf2out_frame_debug_adjust_cfa, at dwarf2cfi.c:1189

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104613 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu --- We can add a sorry since -mfunction-return=thunk isn't supported with __builtin_eh_return.

[Bug target/104790] [12 Regression] ICE (insn does not satisfy its constraints) with MVE since r12-4374-g5efeaa0d29525fa28e189e6278c1b1651fb0d7bf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104790 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Andre Simoes Dias Vieira : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:796f5220c808bc37adbd1081476589ab1a5d7ac3 commit r12-7538-g796f5220c808bc37adbd1081476589ab1a5d7ac3 Author: Andre Vieira

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely --- I have a patch ...

[Bug translation/104552] Mistakes in strings to be translated in GCC 12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552 --- Comment #33 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #28) > (In reply to Roland Illig from comment #10) > > From aarch64-sve-builtins.cc: > > > error_at (location, "passing single vector %qT to argument

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely --- \? is not allowed in a POSIX BRE, and unsupported by Solaris and BSD. The capture group with \( and \) is not supported by /usr/bin/sed on Solaris, but is supported by /usr/xpg4/bin but I guess we can

[Bug c++/88061] section attributes of variable templates are ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88061 Barry Revzin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com ---

[Bug tree-optimization/40073] Vector short/char shifts generate sub-optimal code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073 --- Comment #19 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I stumbled over this as well as some point. One thing I started playing with, but had to set aside was making vect_get_range_info smarter. In particular the case I was looking at VAR would have a single

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #21 from Jonathan Wakely --- We should use: sed -n 's,^tags/,,;s,^basepoints/gcc-,r,p'

[Bug translation/104552] Mistakes in strings to be translated in GCC 12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552 --- Comment #32 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Eric Gallager : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6319391d5634ceb07abfadfaabee25e403f5110a commit r12-7537-g6319391d5634ceb07abfadfaabee25e403f5110a Author: Eric Gallager Date:

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #20 from Jonathan Wakely --- The first sed is failing.

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #19 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #10) > > I still get "expr: syntax error" when trying to do `git gcc-descr 716bb02b` > > after re-running `sh ./contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh` > > Ok, so can you

[Bug libstdc++/54865] [parallel mode] tests timeout on power64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54865 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/104842] New: mips: signed overflow in LUI_OPERAND

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104842 Bug ID: 104842 Summary: mips: signed overflow in LUI_OPERAND Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely --- Eric, please try again now.

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #17 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:10ecf5182a0f63d79a44b953483ecfbb54d29bcb commit r12-7536-g10ecf5182a0f63d79a44b953483ecfbb54d29bcb Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely --- Using "${r}" instead of ${r:-no} would be simpler too, but that can be done separately.

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7) > https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.69/html_node/ > Limitations-of-Usual-Tools.html#index-g_t_0040command_007bexpr_007d-1813 > > The

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #14 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #13) > Ah, but 'expr match str re' is not in POSIX, it should be 'expr str : re' Great, I can confirm it works for me. Can you please install the change?

[Bug target/104841] New: [nvptx] Multi-version ptx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104841 Bug ID: 104841 Summary: [nvptx] Multi-version ptx Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely --- Ah, but 'expr match str re' is not in POSIX, it should be 'expr str : re'

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely --- Ah no, my mistake, any POSIX shell should expand that correctly.

[Bug other/102664] contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh uses echo -n, which isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely --- git-descr.sh uses ${r:-no} which is a bash feature, but the shebang says /bin/sh

  1   2   >