[Bug target/115042] New: valgrind test fails to compile on armv7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115042 Bug ID: 115042 Summary: valgrind test fails to compile on armv7 Product: gcc Version: 14.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/115037] Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/109442] Dead local copy of std::vector not removed from function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109442 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #18

[Bug rtl-optimization/115013] [15 Regression] LRA: PR114810 fix result in ICE in the RISC-V Vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115013 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug libstdc++/88545] std::find compile to memchr in trivial random access cases (patch)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88545 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug libstdc++/115040] Missed optimization opportunity in std::find of std::vector elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115040 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #3) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > > > clang lowers both the calls to (w)memchr > > > > Is that with libc++ or libstdc++? > > It's libc++. Checked

[Bug tree-optimization/115040] Missed optimization opportunity in std::find of std::vector elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115040 --- Comment #3 from Sam James --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > > clang lowers both the calls to (w)memchr > > Is that with libc++ or libstdc++? It's libc++. Checked locally too..

[Bug tree-optimization/115040] Missed optimization opportunity in std::find of std::vector elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115040 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- > clang lowers both the calls to (w)memchr Is that with libc++ or libstdc++?

[Bug tree-optimization/115040] Missed optimization opportunity in std::find of std::vector elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115040 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/115041] Missed optimization opportunity in std::find of std::vector elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115041 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/115040] New: Missed optimization opportunity in std::find

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115040 Bug ID: 115040 Summary: Missed optimization opportunity in std::find Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/115041] New: Missed optimization opportunity in std::find of std::vector elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115041 Bug ID: 115041 Summary: Missed optimization opportunity in std::find of std::vector elements Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/113578] Incorrect sign printed for -nan on RISC-V

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113578 Andrew Waterman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrew at sifive dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] [15 Regression] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 --- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #7) > So what's the magic to re-enable prange? I can do that and spin a fresh > build. You could revert this patch: commit

[Bug fortran/115039] Statement function with inquiry refs rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115039 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot

[Bug jit/110466] jit.dg FAILs on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110466 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug driver/111700] ICE: SIGSEGV in needs_read_p (input.cc:598) with -fdiagnostics-format=sarif-file or -fdiagnostics-format=sarif-stderr on pre-processed input

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111700 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/114348] Corrupt SARIF output on stderr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114348 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/115037] Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes

[Bug fortran/115039] Statement function with inquiry refs rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115039 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Keywords|

[Bug fortran/115039] New: Statement function with inquiry refs rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115039 Bug ID: 115039 Summary: Statement function with inquiry refs rejected Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] [15 Regression] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So what's the magic to re-enable prange? I can do that and spin a fresh build.

[Bug fortran/102241] [PDT] ICE when declaring derived type with a parameterized derived type member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102241 Oliver Jahn changed: What|Removed |Added CC||oliverjahn at proton dot me --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/115037] Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug rtl-optimization/115021] [14/15 regression] unnecessary spill for vpternlog

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115021 --- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle --- Here's a reduced test case that should be unaffected by the pending changes to how V8QI shifts are expanded. Note that the final "t -= t4" is required to convince the register allocator to "spill". typedef

[Bug target/114942] [14/15 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O1 with "-fno-tree-sra -fno-guess-branch-probability": in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.cc:2713

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114942 --- Comment #6 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Vladimir Makarov : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9585317f0715699197b1313bbf939c6ea3c1ace6 commit r15-364-g9585317f0715699197b1313bbf939c6ea3c1ace6 Author: Vladimir N. Makarov

[Bug middle-end/113982] Poor codegen for 64-bit add with carry widening functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113982 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/115037] Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94293#c4

[Bug middle-end/115037] Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug ipa/114985] [15 regression] internal compiler error: in discriminator_fail during stage2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985 --- Comment #16 from Martin Jambor --- I'll have look, hopefully on Monday.

[Bug middle-end/115037] Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com,

[Bug rtl-optimization/115021] [14/15 regression] unnecessary spill for vpternlog

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115021 Roger Sayle changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at nextmovesoftware dot com

[Bug c++/115038] New: ICE in seh_cfa_offset since 14.1.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115038 Bug ID: 115038 Summary: ICE in seh_cfa_offset since 14.1.0 Product: gcc Version: 14.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/115037] Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- This might be a dup of another bug which talks about the same thing.

[Bug tree-optimization/115034] Missed optimization: reduntant store of identical value in the slot

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115034 --- Comment #2 from XChy --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Note there is some memory model requirements here that I always forget if > this can happen or not. Hmm. Could you please provide some documents about the memory model

[Bug ipa/106935] [11/12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE in redirect_call_stmt_to_callee, at cgraph.cc:1505 since r10-5098-g9b14fc3326e08797

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106935 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/115037] New: Unused std::vector is not optimized away.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115037 Bug ID: 115037 Summary: Unused std::vector is not optimized away. Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/115036] New: division is not shortened based on value range

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115036 Bug ID: 115036 Summary: division is not shortened based on value range Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] [15 Regression] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #6 from Aldy

[Bug tree-optimization/115035] New: Missed optimization: fold min/max in phi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115035 Bug ID: 115035 Summary: Missed optimization: fold min/max in phi Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] [15 Regression] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 --- Comment #5 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cbd420a1c3e2bb549dc83b53cc9a31aa6b23952c commit r15-363-gcbd420a1c3e2bb549dc83b53cc9a31aa6b23952c Author: Aldy Hernandez Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/115033] Incorrect optimization of by-reference closure fields by fre1 pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115033 --- Comment #3 from Spenser --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Please attach the preprocessed source rather than just a snippet of code. Sorry about that. Thought I added it when submitting the report, but I think the file was

[Bug tree-optimization/115033] Incorrect optimization of by-reference closure fields by fre1 pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115033 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|1 |0 Status|WAITING

[Bug tree-optimization/115034] Missed optimization: reduntant store of identical value in the slot

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115034 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Note there is some memory model requirements here that I always forget if this can happen or not.

[Bug tree-optimization/115033] Incorrect optimization of by-reference closure fields by fre1 pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115033 --- Comment #2 from Spenser --- Created attachment 58178 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58178=edit Pre-processed C++ reproducer

[Bug ipa/114985] [15 regression] internal compiler error: in discriminator_fail during stage2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985 --- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #11) > I have reverted the prange enabling patch until the IPA pass is fixed. Thank you!

[Bug tree-optimization/115034] New: Missed optimization: reduntant store of identical value in the slot

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115034 Bug ID: 115034 Summary: Missed optimization: reduntant store of identical value in the slot Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/115013] [15 Regression] LRA: PR114810 fix result in ICE in the RISC-V Vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115013 Vladimir Makarov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug libstdc++/109822] Converting std::experimental::simd masks yields an error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109822 --- Comment #12 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) --- Fixed powerpc test failure on all branches.

[Bug libstdc++/110054] stdx::simd masked store should not use non-temporal store instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110054 Matthias Kretz (Vir) changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED

[Bug libstdc++/114750] converting load/store of simd fails compilation on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114750 Matthias Kretz (Vir) changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED

[Bug libstdc++/114803] simd conversion to [[gnu::vector_size(N)]] type hits invalid code in experimental/bits/simd_builtin.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114803 Matthias Kretz (Vir) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/114803] simd conversion to [[gnu::vector_size(N)]] type hits invalid code in experimental/bits/simd_builtin.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114803 --- Comment #5 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9e3663ba96df1315f53b4b488f4c2e63633c7b2f commit r11-11434-g9e3663ba96df1315f53b4b488f4c2e63633c7b2f Author: Matthias

[Bug libstdc++/114750] converting load/store of simd fails compilation on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114750 --- Comment #6 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fb2f4a191cc74b6ab2899798db8a59a9b2a3f23f commit r11-11431-gfb2f4a191cc74b6ab2899798db8a59a9b2a3f23f Author: Matthias

[Bug libstdc++/109822] Converting std::experimental::simd masks yields an error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109822 --- Comment #11 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4190a95cb837c5d221d9c5677f49f3c7d4d5576f commit r11-11428-g4190a95cb837c5d221d9c5677f49f3c7d4d5576f Author: Matthias

[Bug libstdc++/110054] stdx::simd masked store should not use non-temporal store instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110054 --- Comment #6 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:db0c654ae689e92d8ba0421815a820278b777b06 commit r11-11427-gdb0c654ae689e92d8ba0421815a820278b777b06 Author: Matthias

[Bug tree-optimization/115033] Incorrect optimization of by-reference closure fields by fre1 pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115033 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-05-10

[Bug tree-optimization/115033] New: Incorrect optimization of by-reference closure fields by fre1 pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115033 Bug ID: 115033 Summary: Incorrect optimization of by-reference closure fields by fre1 pass Product: gcc Version: 12.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug modula2/115032] gm2/iso/run/pass/packed.mod FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115032 --- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth --- The failure started on 20240205.

[Bug modula2/115032] New: gm2/iso/run/pass/packed.mod FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115032 Bug ID: 115032 Summary: gm2/iso/run/pass/packed.mod FAILs Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: modula2

[Bug target/115028] [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr101950-2.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115028 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||testsuite-fail Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/115031] New: g++.dg/modules/pr99023_b.X FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115031 Bug ID: 115031 Summary: g++.dg/modules/pr99023_b.X FAILs Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug tree-optimization/114998] [14 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 with "-fno-tree-dce" on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault since r14-9767

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114998 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[14/15 Regression] ICE on |[14 Regression] ICE on

[Bug tree-optimization/114998] [14/15 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 with "-fno-tree-dce" on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault since r14-9767

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114998 --- Comment #5 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:34d15a4d630a0d54eddb99bdab086c506e10dac5 commit r15-362-g34d15a4d630a0d54eddb99bdab086c506e10dac5 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug c++/115030] Constrained auto variable declaration with partial specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115030 --- Comment #2 from Seyed Sajad Kahani --- Created attachment 58177 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58177=edit a similar code that works, as a clue (clue_1.cc) Additionally, the problem will disappear by enclosing

[Bug c++/115030] Constrained auto variable declaration with partial specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115030 --- Comment #1 from Seyed Sajad Kahani --- Created attachment 58176 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58176=edit report_2.cc, additional invalid code Moreover, by replacing 'c' with A{} that makes it an invalid code (see

[Bug target/115029] FFT computation performance regression, x86, between gcc-14 and gcc-13 on skylake platform

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115029 --- Comment #2 from Colin Ian King --- Created attachment 58175 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58175=edit gcc-14 disassembly

[Bug target/115029] FFT computation performance regression, x86, between gcc-14 and gcc-13 on skylake platform

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115029 --- Comment #1 from Colin Ian King --- Created attachment 58174 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58174=edit gcc-13 disassembly

[Bug c++/115030] New: Constrained auto variable declaration with partial specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115030 Bug ID: 115030 Summary: Constrained auto variable declaration with partial specialization Product: gcc Version: 14.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/115028] [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr101950-2.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115028 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target|i386-pc-solaris2.11 |i386-pc-solaris2.11, |

[Bug target/115029] New: FFT computation performance regression, x86, between gcc-14 and gcc-13 on skylake platform

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115029 Bug ID: 115029 Summary: FFT computation performance regression, x86, between gcc-14 and gcc-13 on skylake platform Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/113982] Poor codegen for 64-bit add with carry widening functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113982 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Note, since PR95853 we also recognize bool(r > ~0ULL) as the check rather than bool(r >> 64).

[Bug target/115028] [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr101950-2.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115028 --- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth --- Created attachment 58171 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58171=edit gcc-14 assembler input

[Bug target/115028] [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr101950-2.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115028 --- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth --- Created attachment 58170 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58170=edit trunk assembler input

[Bug target/115028] New: [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr101950-2.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115028 Bug ID: 115028 Summary: [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr101950-2.c FAILs Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug ipa/114985] [15 regression] internal compiler error: in discriminator_fail during stage2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985 --- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka --- So this is problem in ipa_value_range_from_jfunc? It is Maritn's code, I hope he will know why types are wrong here. Once can get type compatibility problem on mismatched declarations and LTO, but it seems

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] [15 Regression] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|msp430-elf fails|[15 Regression] msp430-elf

[Bug c/115027] Missing warning: unused struct's with self-referential initialisers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115027 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/98529] [11/12/13/14/15 Regression] g++.dg/modules/stdio-1_a.H FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98529 --- Comment #9 from Rainer Orth --- I see it's a common issue on Solaris: instead of the expected Depset:0 decl entity:204 function_decl:'::fprintf' as found on Linux, we have Depset:0 decl entity:26 function_decl:'::std::printf' What's

[Bug c/115023] __builtin_assoc_barrier does not talk about contracting even though it prevents it too

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115023 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- It's supposed to behave like parens in the Fortran standard, maybe they have good wording.

[Bug rtl-optimization/115021] [14/15 regression] unnecessary spill for vpternlog

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115021 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.2 Priority|P3

[Bug target/115014] GCC generates incorrect instructions for addressing the data segment through EBP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115014 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||i?86-*-* --- Comment #13 from Richard

[Bug tree-optimization/115011] [14/15 Regression] Missed optimization: (bool) (f ? 1: t) ==> 1 when bool t = (0 >= f) + x;

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115011 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug c/115027] New: Missing warning: unused struct's with self-referential initialisers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115027 Bug ID: 115027 Summary: Missing warning: unused struct's with self-referential initialisers Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/115014] GCC generates incorrect instructions for addressing the data segment through EBP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115014 --- Comment #12 from Martin Doucha --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #7) > I think your report was misunderstood. Anyway, when EBP is not a frame > pointer, I think the chances are low that it is derived from ESP. Would > accurate

[Bug ipa/114985] [15 regression] internal compiler error: in discriminator_fail during stage2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985 --- Comment #13 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #12 from Aldy Hernandez --- > Created attachment 58168 > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58168=edit > proposed patch in testing I just tried

[Bug target/115014] GCC generates incorrect instructions for addressing the data segment through EBP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115014 --- Comment #11 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10) > int f(int *a) > { > int b; > size_t t = (size_t) > size_t t1 = (size_t)a; > return *(int*)(((size_t))+(t-t1)); > } > > Is kinda of valid c but might fail

[Bug target/115014] GCC generates incorrect instructions for addressing the data segment through EBP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115014 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- int f(int *a) { int b; size_t t = (size_t) size_t t1 = (size_t)a; return *(int*)(((size_t))+(t-t1)); } Is kinda of valid c but might fail with your definition.

[Bug target/113578] Incorrect sign printed for -nan on RISC-V

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113578 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #2) > If a conversion from float to double (for passing in variable arguments) > occurs at runtime on RISC-V, that will produce a positive-signed NaN (that's >

[Bug target/115014] GCC generates incorrect instructions for addressing the data segment through EBP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115014 --- Comment #9 from Martin Doucha --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8) > Someone in theory could also use an offset from esp and run into a similar > failure. Well yes, but that would be an actual stack overflow and the whole point

[Bug target/115014] GCC generates incorrect instructions for addressing the data segment through EBP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115014 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- I didn't misunderstanding it. I just think it is not a valid request. Especially when it comes to it is only this special kvm kernel. Someone in theory could also use an offset from esp and run into a

[Bug target/115014] GCC generates incorrect instructions for addressing the data segment through EBP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115014 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/115004] [11/12/13/14/15 Regression] Missed optimization for Dead Code Elimination

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115004 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.5 Known to work|

[Bug target/115002] [14/15 regression] wide integer vector performance regression, x86, between gcc-14 and gcc-13 using target clones on skylake platform

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115002 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target

[Bug tree-optimization/114998] [14/15 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 with "-fno-tree-dce" on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault since r14-9767

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114998 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Breakpoint 5, release_ssa_name_fn (fn=0x76be4000, var=) at ../../src/gcc-14-branch/gcc/tree-ssanames.cc:619 619 vec_safe_push (FREE_SSANAMES_QUEUE (fn), var); (gdb) p v.m_vecpfx $7 =

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 --- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez --- Jeff, if you still have your tree around, could you try this patch? I'll queue it with the rest of patches I will push before enabling prange when the IPA issues are sorted out.

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 --- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez --- Created attachment 58169 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58169=edit proposed patch

[Bug tree-optimization/115026] msp430-elf fails gcc.dg/pr66444.c with prange enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115026 --- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez --- OK, this is embarrassing. We are incorrectly folding a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR range operation: Folding statement: x_7 = 2048B + _2; -Queued stmt for removal. Folds to: 2062B +Queued stmt for removal. Folds

[Bug target/114981] [avr] Improve powi implementation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114981 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/114981] [avr] Improve powi implementation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114981 --- Comment #6 from GCC Commits --- The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fcdd723779f9ad9af9638e11ffe56786de2d02ce commit r14-10194-gfcdd723779f9ad9af9638e11ffe56786de2d02ce Author:

  1   2   >