[Bug tree-optimization/106922] New: [12 Regression] Bogus uninitialized warning on boost::optional<>>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106922 Bug ID: 106922 Summary: [12 Regression] Bogus uninitialized warning on boost::optional<>> Product: gcc Version: 12.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug modula2/106443] Many 32-bit tests FAIL to link on Solaris/sparcv9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106443 --- Comment #4 from Gaius Mulley --- just querying whether this bug can be closed now?

[Bug tree-optimization/106912] [13 Regression] ICE in vect_transform_loops, at tree-vectorizer.cc:1032 since r13-1575-gcf3a120084e94614

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106912 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- OK, it's a late IPA pass doing the clones it seems. The scalar node got the 'const' stripped btw, but the call fntype still has it via the attributes. It loses 'const' by Old value = 252968993 New value

[Bug target/106910] roundss not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106910 --- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu --- > The backend should modernize itself, get rid of the > ix86_builtin_vectorized_function parts for those functions and instead rely > on define_expands with vector modes. Indeed, let me do it.

[Bug c/106920] -Warray-bound false positive regression with -O2 or -Os and constant address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106920 --- Comment #2 from Dominique Martinet --- Thanks for the very fast reply! since you mentioned null pointers I now see this warning doesn't happen if I try with a larger constant, I just had bad luck that imx-atf uses an address < 4k...? I ch

[Bug target/106902] [11/12/13 Regression] Program compiled with -O3 -mfma produces different result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106902 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[11/12 Regression] Program |[11/12/13 Regression]

<    1   2