[Bug testsuite/116061] [15 regression] new test case gcc.dg/pr116034.c from r15-2220-gb9cefd67a2a464 fails execution on BE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116061 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Actually not that, but s/int g;/short int g;/
[Bug testsuite/116061] [15 regression] new test case gcc.dg/pr116034.c from r15-2220-gb9cefd67a2a464 fails execution on BE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116061 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Ah, guess I should memcpy into short int, not int. Does s/static inline int/static inline short int/ fix this?
[Bug preprocessor/116047] C preprocessor bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116047 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org, ||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- The compiler represents locations and even location ranges as 32-bit integers, so for normally sized sources can encode both line and column and range information, but with too many columns or lines gradually loses the ranges/column information and later the line information as well. Will defer to David for details.
[Bug tree-optimization/116034] [12/13 Regression] wrong code with memcpy() from _Complex unsigned short at -fno-strict-aliasing -O1 and above
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116034 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail|14.1.1, 15.0|14.1.0 Known to work||14.1.1, 15.0 Summary|[12/13/14/15 Regression]|[12/13 Regression] wrong |wrong code with memcpy()|code with memcpy() from |from _Complex unsigned |_Complex unsigned short at |short at|-fno-strict-aliasing -O1 |-fno-strict-aliasing -O1|and above |and above | --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 14.2+/15+ for now.
[Bug target/116029] Linux kernel doesn't build with gcc 11.5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116029 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Good idea.
[Bug c++/116020] Incorrect treatment of (this void) parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116020 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- To me this looks just like a bug in the standard that should be fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/116034] [12/13/14/15 Regression] wrong code with memcpy() from _Complex unsigned short at -fno-strict-aliasing -O1 and above
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116034 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58723 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58723=edit gcc15-pr116034.patch Full untested patch.
[Bug tree-optimization/116034] [12/13/14/15 Regression] wrong code with memcpy() from _Complex unsigned short at -fno-strict-aliasing -O1 and above
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116034 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Started with r7-2818-gebfa15ab654738fcc926a506b3788a303958fa02
[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- It doesn't matter how it is documented, what matters is how it is implemented. E.g. can you do (__builtin_call_with_static_chain) (fn, ptr)? Or __typeof (__builtin_call_with_static_chain)? Regular builtins are what is defined in builtins.def.
[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- That is a bad example, __builtin_call_with_static_chain is not a builtin function, but a keyword.
[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- That is not a prototype. Prototype is what is the C or C++ function type of the builtin. Neither ptr->FAM nor const_exp_with_int_type are valid C types. There is no reason why the second argument should be const, it can be anything convertible to whatever type size_t has, including say for C++ classes with operator long (), _Bool/bool, enumerators, floating point expressions, ...
[Bug target/116029] Linux kernel doesn't build with gcc 11.5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116029 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- So, the problem is that with the addition of TARGET_CPU_grace, TARGET_CPU_generic is now 64, which causes problems, because of return _cores[TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT & 0x3f]; or #define TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT \ (TARGET_CPU_generic | (AARCH64_CPU_DEFAULT_FLAGS << 6)) As pointed out by Sam James, this was fixed in GCC 12 with r12-8060-g5522dec054cb940fe83661b96249aa12c54c1d77 Tested a backport of this or even backport thereof with #define TARGET_CPU_NBITS 8 replaced with #define TARGET_CPU_NBITS 7 fixes this. Unfortunately, this can't be fixed anymore for 11.5 as the branch is closed.
[Bug target/116029] Linux kernel doesn't build with gcc 11.5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116029 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- First differences are in the veclower21 dump in several functions.
[Bug target/116029] Linux kernel doesn't build with gcc 11.5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116029
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target||aarch64-linux
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(insn/f:TI 17679 1114 18278 (set (reg/f:DI 31 sp)
(plus:DI (reg/f:DI 31 sp)
(const_int -1856 [0xf8c0])))
"drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/dc/dml2/display_mode_core.c":6266:1 125
{*adddi3_aarch64}
(nil))
in r11-11539 compiled case in that function, while
(insn/f:TI 17679 1114 18278 (set (reg/f:DI 31 sp)
(plus:DI (reg/f:DI 31 sp)
(const_int -1856 [0xf8c0])))
"drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/dc/dml2/display_mode_core.c":6266:1 125
{*adddi3_aarch64}
(nil))
in r11-11540.
I can reproduce both in native build
--enable-bootstrap --enable-host-pie --enable-host-bind-now
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --with-bugurl=http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla
--enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-checking=release
--with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-libunwind-exceptions
--enable-gnu-unique-object --enable-linker-build-id
--with-gcc-major-version-only --enable-plugin --enable-initfini-array
--without-isl --enable-multilib --with-linker-hash-style=gnu
--enable-gnu-indirect-function --build=aarch64-redhat-linux
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --enable-link-serialization=1
and in a x86_64-linux to aarch64-linux cross:
--target aarch64-linux --disable-bootstrap --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
[Bug target/116029] New: Linux kernel doesn't build with gcc 11.5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116029 Bug ID: 116029 Summary: Linux kernel doesn't build with gcc 11.5.0 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- ./cc1.r11-11539 -quiet -mlittle-endian -Wall -Wundef -Werror=strict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -fshort-wchar -fno-PIE -Werror=implicit-function-declaration -Werror=implicit-int -Werror=return-type -Wno-format-security -std=gnu11 -Wno-psabi -mabi=lp64 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-unwind-tables -mbranch-protection=none -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -Wno-frame-address -Wno-format-truncation -Wno-format-overflow -Wno-address-of-packed-member -O2 -fno-allow-store-data-races -Wframe-larger-than=2048 -fstack-protector-strong -Wno-main -Wno-unused-but-set-variable -Wno-unused-const-variable -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-optimize-sibling-calls -fno-stack-clash-protection -g -fpatchable-function-entry=2 -fno-inline-functions-called-once -Wvla -Wno-pointer-sign -Wcast-function-type -Wno-stringop-truncation -Wno-stringop-overflow -Wno-restrict -Wno-maybe-uninitialized -Wno-array-bounds -Wno-alloc-size-larger-than -Wimplicit-fallthrough=5 -fno-strict-overflow -fno-stack-check -fconserve-stack -Werror=date-time -Werror=incompatible-pointer-types -Werror=designated-init -Wno-packed-not-aligned -mstack-protector-guard=sysreg -mstack-protector-guard-reg=sp_el0 -mstack-protector-guard-offset=2144 -Wextra -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -Wmissing-include-dirs -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wunused-but-set-variable -Wunused-const-variable -Wstringop-truncation -Wpacked-not-aligned -Wno-unused-parameter -Wno-type-limits -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-missing-field-initializers -Wno-override-init -Wframe-larger-than=3072 -fsanitize=kernel-address -fasan-shadow-offset=0xdfff8000 --param asan-globals=1 --param asan-instrumentation-with-call-threshold=1 --param asan-instrument-allocas=1 --param asan-stack=1 display_mode_core.i -nostdinc -g0 compiles without warnings, while ./cc1.r11-11540 -quiet -mlittle-endian -Wall -Wundef -Werror=strict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -fshort-wchar -fno-PIE -Werror=implicit-function-declaration -Werror=implicit-int -Werror=return-type -Wno-format-security -std=gnu11 -Wno-psabi -mabi=lp64 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-unwind-tables -mbranch-protection=none -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -Wno-frame-address -Wno-format-truncation -Wno-format-overflow -Wno-address-of-packed-member -O2 -fno-allow-store-data-races -Wframe-larger-than=2048 -fstack-protector-strong -Wno-main -Wno-unused-but-set-variable -Wno-unused-const-variable -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-optimize-sibling-calls -fno-stack-clash-protection -g -fpatchable-function-entry=2 -fno-inline-functions-called-once -Wvla -Wno-pointer-sign -Wcast-function-type -Wno-stringop-truncation -Wno-stringop-overflow -Wno-restrict -Wno-maybe-uninitialized -Wno-array-bounds -Wno-alloc-size-larger-than -Wimplicit-fallthrough=5 -fno-strict-overflow -fno-stack-check -fconserve-stack -Werror=date-time -Werror=incompatible-pointer-types -Werror=designated-init -Wno-packed-not-aligned -mstack-protector-guard=sysreg -mstack-protector-guard-reg=sp_el0 -mstack-protector-guard-offset=2144 -Wextra -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -Wmissing-include-dirs -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wunused-but-set-variable -Wunused-const-variable -Wstringop-truncation -Wpacked-not-aligned -Wno-unused-parameter -Wno-type-limits -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-missing-field-initializers -Wno-override-init -Wframe-larger-than=3072 -fsanitize=kernel-address -fasan-shadow-offset=0xdfff8000 --param asan-globals=1 --param asan-instrumentation-with-call-threshold=1 --param asan-instrument-allocas=1 --param asan-stack=1 display_mode_core.i -nostdinc -g0 -fdump-tree-optimized -fdump-rtl-expand -fdump-rtl-final drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/dc/dml2/display_mode_core.c: In function ‘dml_prefetch_check’: drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/dc/dml2/display_mode_core.c:6707:1: warning: the frame size of 3632 bytes is larger than 3072 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
[Bug sanitizer/115793] signed integer overflow check missing at optimization levels -O2, -O3, and -Os
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115793 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- This bugreport is based on the unwarranted assumption that UBSAN reports all UB even at higher optimization levels. It doesn't, that is part of the tradeoff between code speed and amount of reported issues. We don't report all the UB in clearly dead code even at -O0, here VRP simply figures out that the multiplication result would be # RANGE [irange] int [-INF, +INF] MASK 0xe441 VALUE 0x8d9f133a _2 = .UBSAN_CHECK_MUL (56506, 42049); and because that result is only used in (_2 & 65534) == 0 comparison, that comparison is folded to 0 and so the multiplication is optimized away. With e.g. -O2 -fsanitize=undefined, one generally gets diagnosed UB that will still happen in the program, which won't be DCEd.
[Bug c/116016] enhancement: add __builtin_set_counted_by(P->FAM, COUNT) or equivalent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116016 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- So, what would be the prototype of the builtin? Would it be type-generic for both arguments, i.e. effectively void __builtin_set_counted_by (...); which would just verify that 2 arguments are passed, the first one is some flexible array member with counted_by argument and the second argument has some type implicitly convertible to the type of the counted_by member?
[Bug target/116021] Ada build on Darwin: gen_il-main: Symbol not found: ___builtin_nested_func_ptr_created
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Why? The development versions isn't something meant for long time use, one should be prepared to upgrade that to newer snapshots and/or upcoming stable release. There can be major bugs in those, ABI incompatibilities like this, ...
[Bug target/116007] libquadmath fails to build with libgcc/soft-fp/quad.h:69:1: error: unable to emulate 'TF'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- That commit made --without-long-double-128 the default on powerpc*-*-linux-musl*. ELFv2 is one thing, but whether long double is IEEE double, IBM double double or IEEE quad is a separate thing. You need to look at musl what it supports. E.g. glibc in the last few years for powerpc64le-linux supports all 3, on powerpc64-linux or powerpc-linux just IEEE double and IBM double double.
[Bug target/116007] libquadmath fails to build with libgcc/soft-fp/quad.h:69:1: error: unable to emulate 'TF'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- See r10-4792
[Bug target/116007] libquadmath fails to build with libgcc/soft-fp/quad.h:69:1: error: unable to emulate 'TF'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116007 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- To build libquadmath on powerpc*, one needs --with-long-double-128 (and perhaps --with-long-double-format=ieee if C library supports that), unless that is detected automatically. # Check if TFmode long double should be used by default or not. # Some glibc targets used DFmode long double, but with glibc 2.4 # and later they can use TFmode. case "$target" in powerpc*-*-linux* | \ sparc*-*-linux* | \ s390*-*-linux* | \ alpha*-*-linux*) AC_ARG_WITH(long-double-128, [AS_HELP_STRING([--with-long-double-128], [use 128-bit long double by default])], gcc_cv_target_ldbl128="$with_long_double_128", [ case "$target" in s390*-*-linux-musl*) gcc_cv_target_ldbl128=yes ;; powerpc*-*-linux-musl*) gcc_cv_target_ldbl128=no ;; *)] [GCC_GLIBC_VERSION_GTE_IFELSE([2], [4], [gcc_cv_target_ldbl128=yes], [ [gcc_cv_target_ldbl128=no grep '^[ ]*#[]*define[ ][ ]*__LONG_DOUBLE_MATH_OPTIONAL' \ $target_header_dir/bits/wordsize.h > /dev/null 2>&1 \ && gcc_cv_target_ldbl128=yes ]])] [ ;; esac ]) ;; esac >From thbis, it seems powerpc musl likely doesn't have neither double double nor IEEE quad support and so in that case you can't use --enable-libquadmath --enable-libquadmath-support.
[Bug tree-optimization/115766] [12/13/14/15 Regression] wrong code at optimization levels -O2, -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115766 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- The testcase is bogus. As documented, you can't really take address of the different union members and access interchangeably through such pointers. In standard C/C++, only one union element is active, access to all the others while another one is active are UB (unless you assign to a different one and through that activate it). So, union type punning is not valid in standard C/C++ at all. GCC as an extension allows type punning through unions, but only if the union is visible in the access path. See https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#Type-punning
[Bug target/115982] [15 Regression] ICE: unrecognizable insn in ira_remove_insn_scratches with -mavx512vl since r15-1742
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115982
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|ICE: unrecognizable insn in |[15 Regression] ICE:
|ira_remove_insn_scratches |unrecognizable insn in
|with -mavx512vl |ira_remove_insn_scratches
||with -mavx512vl since
||r15-1742
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Simplified testcase:
typedef float VF __attribute__((__vector_size__(16)));
typedef int VI __attribute__((__vector_size__(16)));
VI
foo (VF x)
{
return !x;
}
Started with r15-1742-g55f80c690c5fa59836646565a9dee2a3f68374a0
[Bug c++/114460] [C++26] P3106R1 - Clarifying rules for brace elision in aggregate initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114460 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Also tested GCC 4.1 and 3.2 (that time only in C++98) and it also works expectedly.
[Bug c++/110338] Implement C++26 language features
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338 Bug 110338 depends on bug 114460, which changed state. Bug 114460 Summary: [C++26] P3106R1 - Clarifying rules for brace elision in aggregate initialization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114460 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/94404] [meta-bug] C++ core issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404 Bug 94404 depends on bug 114460, which changed state. Bug 114460 Summary: [C++26] P3106R1 - Clarifying rules for brace elision in aggregate initialization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114460 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/114460] [C++26] P3106R1 - Clarifying rules for brace elision in aggregate initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114460 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- I've additionally tested GCC 11.5, GCC 8.5 and GCC 4.8.5 and the aggr-init1.C test passes in all language variants that support it, had to tweak slightly the second testcase because of differences in in effective target and dejagnu directive format support and in the 4.8 case also for wording of one case, but otherwise it passed. So, I'm committing a Yes rather than a specific version which implemented this to cxx-status.html.
[Bug c++/110343] [C++26] P2558R2 - Add @, $, and ` to the basic character set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- I've posted https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-July/657583.html I don't think we should change the raw string handling for C23, because unlike C++26 they didn't add the $@` chars to the basic character set, but next to it.
[Bug middle-end/115887] ICE: in gsi_insert_on_edge_immediate, at gimple-iterator.cc:849 with -O -fnon-call-exceptions -finstrument-functions and _BitInt()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115887 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |14.2 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Should be fixed now for 15.1+ and 14.2+.
[Bug middle-end/115527] incorrect folding of __builtin_clear_padding()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115527 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Should be fixed for 15.1+, 14.2+ and 11.5 for now, 13 and 12 backports to be done later.
[Bug target/115973] PPCLE: Inefficient code for __builtin_uaddll_overflow and __builtin_addcll
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115973 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- See PR43892
[Bug c++/110343] [C++26] P2558R2 - Add @, $, and ` to the basic character set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I've tried to understand the preprocessor issue mentioned in the paper, but am
confused on what is the right behavior and why.
Consider
#define STR(x) #x
const char *a = "\u00b7";
const char *b = STR(\u00b7);
const char *c = "\u0041";
const char *d = STR(\u0041);
const char *e = STR(a\u00b7);
const char *f = STR(a\u0041);
const char *g = STR(a \u00b7);
const char *h = STR(a \u0041);
const char *i = "\u066d";
const char *j = STR(\u066d);
const char *k = "\u0040";
const char *l = STR(\u0040);
const char *m = STR(a\u066d);
const char *n = STR(a\u0040);
const char *o = STR(a \u066d);
const char *p = STR(a \u0040);
Neither clang nor gcc emit any diagnostics on the a, c, i and k initializers,
those are certainly valid.
g++ emits with -pedantic-errors errors on all the others, while clang++ on the
ones with STR involving \u0041, \u0040 and a\u0066d.
The chosen values are \u0040 '@' as something being changed by this paper,
\u0041 'A',
\u00b7 as an example of character which is pedantically valid in identifiers if
not at the start and \u066d s something pedantically not valid in identifiers.
Now, https://eel.is/c++draft/lex.charset#6 says that UCN used outside of a
string/character literal which corresponds to basic character set character (or
control character) is ill-formed, that would make d, f, h cases invalid for C++
and l, n, p cases invalid for C++26.
https://eel.is/c++draft/lex.name states which characters can appear at the
start of the identifier and which can appear after the start.
And https://eel.is/c++draft/lex.pptoken states that preprocessing-token is
either identifier, or tons of other things, or
"each non-whitespace character that cannot be one of the above"
Then https://eel.is/c++draft/lex.pptoken#1 says that this last category is
invalid if the preprocessing token is being converted into token.
And https://eel.is/c++draft/lex.pptoken#2 includes
"If any character not in the basic character set matches the last category, the
program is ill-formed."
Now, e.g. for the C++23 STR(\u0040) case, \u0040 is there not in the basic
character set, so valid outside of the literals (not the case anymore in
C++26), but it isn't nondigit and doesn't have XID_Start property, so it isn't
IMHO an identifier and so must be the "each non-whitespace character that
cannot be one of the above" case.
Why doesn't the above mentioned https://eel.is/c++draft/lex.pptoken#2 sentence
make that invalid? Ignoring that, I'd say it would be then stringized and that
feels like it is what clang++ is doing.
Now, e.g. for the STR(a\u066d) case, I wonder why that isn't lexed as a
identifier
followed by \u066d "each non-whitespace character that cannot be one of the
above"
token and stringified similarly, clang++ rejects that.
What GCC libcpp seems to be doing is that if that forms_identifier_p calls
_cpp_valid_utf8 or _cpp_valid_ucn with an argument which tells it is first or
second+ in identifier, and e.g. _cpp_valid_ucn then for UCNs valid in string
literals calls
else if (identifier_pos)
{
int validity = ucn_valid_in_identifier (pfile, result, nst);
if (validity == 0)
cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR,
"universal character %.*s is not valid in an identifier",
(int) (str - base), base);
else if (validity == 2 && identifier_pos == 1)
cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR,
"universal character %.*s is not valid at the start of an identifier",
(int) (str - base), base);
}
so basically all those invalid in identifiers cases emit an error and pretend
to be valid in identifiers, rather than what e.g. _cpp_valid_utf8 does for C
but not for C++ and only for the chars completely invalid in identifiers rather
than just valid in identifiers but not at the start:
/* In C++, this is an error for invalid character in an identifier
because logically, the UTF-8 was converted to a UCN during
translation phase 1 (even though we don't physically do it that
way). In C, this byte rather becomes grammatically a separate
token. */
if (CPP_OPTION (pfile, cplusplus))
cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR,
"extended character %.*s is not valid in an identifier",
(int) (*pstr - base), base);
else
{
*pstr = base;
return false;
}
The comment doesn't really match what is done in recent C++ versions because
there UCNs are translated to characters and not the other way around.
[Bug c/66425] (void) cast doesn't suppress __attribute__((warn_unused_result))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425 --- Comment #76 from Jakub Jelinek --- (void) casts not quieting the warning was an intentional request when the warning has been added, I really don't think it is a good idea to change that. The fact that clang people can't properly implement Perhaps you can ask glibc to recategorize some of the declarations to use [[nodiscard]] instead of __attribute__((__warn_unused_result__)), IMHO it is helpful to have different badnesses of ignoring the result, WUR attribute should be used for the cases where it is always or pretty much always a very severe bug, while nodiscard can be used for the lighter cases (using the result is nice to have, but usually nothing wrong will happen if it is ignored). E.g. ignoring return value of realloc is pretty much always a bad idea and just (void) realloc (...); is something that shouldn't be supported.
[Bug middle-end/115887] ICE: in gsi_insert_on_edge_immediate, at gimple-iterator.cc:849 with -O -fnon-call-exceptions -finstrument-functions and _BitInt()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115887 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58692 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58692=edit gcc15-pr115887.patch Untested fix.
[Bug middle-end/115527] incorrect folding of __builtin_clear_padding()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115527 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Unfortunately that isn't enough. I've noticed the c-c++-common/torture/builtin-clear-padding*.c tests didn't have dg-do run directives even when I clearly expected them to be run tests, and while this patch fixes the new test and builtin-clear-padding-1.c there, builtin-clear-padding-5.c still fails, I think there is some bug in clear_padding_flush. So, ETA tomorrow.
[Bug middle-end/115527] incorrect folding of __builtin_clear_padding()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115527 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to qinzhao from comment #6) > --- a/gcc/gimple-fold.cc > +++ b/gcc/gimple-fold.cc > @@ -4815,6 +4815,7 @@ clear_padding_type (clear_padding_struct *buf, tree > type, > unsigned int prev_align = buf->align; > HOST_WIDE_INT off = buf->off + buf->size; > HOST_WIDE_INT prev_sz = buf->sz; > + HOST_WIDE_INT prev_size = buf->size; > clear_padding_flush (buf, true); > tree elttype = TREE_TYPE (type); > buf->base = create_tmp_var (build_pointer_type (elttype)); > @@ -4835,8 +4836,8 @@ clear_padding_type (clear_padding_struct *buf, tree > type, > buf->base = base; > buf->sz = prev_sz; > buf->align = prev_align; > - buf->size = off % UNITS_PER_WORD; > - buf->off = off - buf->size; > + buf->size = prev_size + nelts * fldsz; > + buf->off = 0; > memset (buf->buf, 0, buf->size); > break; > } That is incorrect. I think the right fix is --- gcc/gimple-fold.cc.jj 2024-07-16 13:36:36.0 +0200 +++ gcc/gimple-fold.cc 2024-07-16 15:50:26.493782065 +0200 @@ -4832,6 +4832,7 @@ clear_padding_type (clear_padding_struct buf->off = 0; buf->size = 0; clear_padding_emit_loop (buf, elttype, end, for_auto_init); + off += sz; buf->base = base; buf->sz = prev_sz; buf->align = prev_align; Will try to test it soon.
[Bug middle-end/115527] incorrect folding of __builtin_clear_padding()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115527
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Testcase more appropriate for the testsuite:
/* PR middle-end/115527 */
struct T { struct S { double a; signed char b; long c; } d[3]; int e; };
int
main ()
{
struct T t = { { { 1., 2, 3 }, { 4., 5, 6 }, { 7., 8, 9 } }, 10 };
__builtin_clear_padding ();
for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i)
if (t.d[i].a != 1. + 3 * i
|| t.d[i].b != 3 * i + 2
|| t.d[i].c != 3 * i + 3)
__builtin_abort ();
if (t.e != 10)
__builtin_abort ();
}
[Bug middle-end/115847] SIMD attribute on a function which returns a vector causes an ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115847 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yeah, the Intel ABI for this only handles scalar integral/pointer/enum/bool/floating point types and _Complex, and our variant thereof doesn't even handle _Complex. Returning arrays is returning pointers, so that works, but returning other types should be handled like the struct cases.
[Bug sanitizer/115837] ASAN FPE on unknown address report missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115837 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yeah. You can always make it fatal by -fno-sanitize-recover=integer-divide-by-zero and then already the libubsan runtime will terminate the program. But if you choose to try to recover, the UB just happens and whatever it implies happens too.
[Bug c++/115769] New: Implement CWG 2867 - Order of initialization for structured bindings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115769
Bug ID: 115769
Summary: Implement CWG 2867 - Order of initialization for
structured bindings
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I've tried to come up with a testcase for DR 2867
https://wg21.link/CWG2867
Both GCC and Clang currently pass this with -DCURRENT which is the ordering of
e, a, b initialization, but invoke T::~T () before the get methods are called
rather than after them.
This is because cp_finish_decl on the structured binding base (aka e) calls
initialize_local_var, which temporarily sets stmts_are_full_exprs_p = 1 and
finish_expr_stmt will wrap it into a CLEANUP_POINT_EXPR.
If that is not what we want, not really sure what we need to do; change
initialize_local_var, so that for DECL_DECOMPOSITION_P && DECL_DECOMP_IS_BASE
vars to set stmts_are_full_exprs_p to 0 instead of 1 and somewhere in the
callers wrap the statements from cp_finish_decl and cp_finish_decomp into a
statement list wrapped inside of CLEANUP_POINT_EXPR, something else?
// DR 2867 - Order of initialization for structured bindings
// { dg-do run { target c++11 } }
// { dg-options "" }
namespace std {
template struct tuple_size;
template struct tuple_element;
}
struct S {
int a, b, c;
static int d;
template
int ()
{
if (d != I + 2)
__builtin_abort ();
++d;
return I ? a : b;
}
};
int S::d = 0;
template<> struct std::tuple_size { static const int value = 2; };
template struct std::tuple_element { using type = int; };
struct T {
T () { if (S::d != 0) __builtin_abort (); ++S::d; }
#ifndef CURRENT
~T () { if (S::d != 4) __builtin_abort (); ++S::d; }
#else
~T () {}
#endif
};
S
foo (T)
{
S s { 1, 2, 3 };
if (S::d != 1)
__builtin_abort ();
++S::d;
return s;
}
int
main ()
{
auto [a, b] = foo (T {}); // { dg-warning "structured bindings only
available with" "" { target c++14_down } }
#ifndef CURRENT
if (S::d != 5 || a != 2 || b != 1)
#else
if (S::d != 4 || a != 2 || b != 1)
#endif
__builtin_abort ();
}
[Bug c++/115744] [C++26] P2747R2 - constexpr placement new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115744
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58563|0 |1
is obsolete||
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 58580
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58580=edit
gcc15-pr115744.patch
With the PR115754 change in, this seems mostly about the FTMs and making
placement new constexpr.
The only thing that doesn't work is the
new (p + 1) int[]{2, 3}; // error (in this paper)
case from the paper xfailed in the last testcase, the IL has there
<<< Unknown tree: expr_stmt
(void) (TARGET_EXPR (b) + 4>>, TARGET_EXPR )>, int * D.2643;
<<< Unknown tree: expr_stmt
(void) (D.2643 = (int *) D.2642) >>>;
and so there is nothing that would trigger some error during constexpr
evaluation.
Shouldn't build_new_1 for maybe_constexpr_fn (current_function_decl) in the
array_p case add some extra cast to the array type it is looking for rather
than just the ultimate element type?
[Bug sanitizer/115765] [13 Regression] signed integer overflow check missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115765 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- This is in dead code, something || 8 will always be 1 and when something doesn't have side-effects, even -O0 performs some limited optimizations.
[Bug c++/115754] [14 Regression] C++26 ICE on constexpr new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115754 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-07-02 Blocks|110338 | Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Summary|[14/15 Regression] C++26|[14 Regression] C++26 ICE |ICE on constexpr new|on constexpr new --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 15.1+ for now. Referenced Bugs: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338 [Bug 110338] Implement C++26 language features
[Bug c++/115747] [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115747 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Implemented for 15.1+.
[Bug c++/110338] Implement C++26 language features
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338 Bug 110338 depends on bug 115747, which changed state. Bug 115747 Summary: [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115747 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/110338] Implement C++26 language features
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338 Bug 110338 depends on bug 115745, which changed state. Bug 115745 Summary: [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115745 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/115745] [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115745 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Implemented for 15.1+.
[Bug c++/115745] [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115745 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #58564|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58566 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58566=edit gcc15-pr114745.patch Bootstrap/regtest of the first patch found one testcase that needed to be adjusted, here is an updated patch with that.
[Bug c++/115747] [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115747 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #58560|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58565 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58565=edit gcc15-pr115747.patch Updated patch. Had to guard return error_mark_node for the non-SFINAE case on !flag_permissive, otherwise it triggers an ICE (statement parsing into error_mark_node without seen_error ()).
[Bug c++/110343] [C++26] P2558R2 - Add @, $, and ` to the basic character set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Ed, ping again, will you post this to gcc-patches?
[Bug c++/115747] [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115747
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #4)
> I think we want parallel changes for the vec and non-vec cases.
Of course, left those out for brevity.
> I agree that the diagnostic message needs to be different for C++26, just
> that the C++26 diagnostic should also be affected by -Wno-delete-incomplete.
So
@@ -4114,6 +4114,21 @@ build_vec_delete_1 (location_t loc, tree
if (!COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type))
{
+ if (cxx_dialect > cxx23)
+ {
+ if (complain & tf_error)
+ {
+ if (warn_delete_incomplete
+ && permerror (loc, "operator % used on "
+ "incomplete type"))
+ {
+ cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic (base, type, DK_PERMERROR);
+ return error_mark_node;
+ }
+ }
+ else
+ return error_mark_node;
+ }
if (complain & tf_warning)
{
auto_diagnostic_group d;
then? -Wno-delete-incomplete will make it silently accepted except during
SFINAE,
-fpermissive accepted with a warning?
And obviously I'll adjust the testsuite to whatever is chosen.
[Bug c++/115747] [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115747
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Do you mean something like:
@@ -4114,6 +4114,14 @@ build_vec_delete_1 (location_t loc, tree
if (!COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type))
{
+ if (cxx_dialect > cxx23)
+ {
+ if ((complain & tf_error)
+ && permerror (loc, "operator % used on "
+ "incomplete type"))
+ cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic (base, type, DK_PERMERROR);
+ return error_mark_node;
+ }
if (complain & tf_warning)
{
auto_diagnostic_group d;
or
@@ -4114,19 +4114,22 @@ build_vec_delete_1 (location_t loc, tree
if (!COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type))
{
- if (complain & tf_warning)
+ if (complain & (cxx_dialect > cxx23 ? tf_error : tf_warning))
{
auto_diagnostic_group d;
- if (warning_at (loc, OPT_Wdelete_incomplete,
- "possible problem detected in invocation of "
- "operator %"))
+ diagnostic_t kind = cxx_dialect > cxx23 ? DK_PERMERROR : DK_WARNING;
+ if (emit_diagnostic (kind,loc, OPT_Wdelete_incomplete,
+ "possible problem detected in invocation of "
+ "operator %"))
{
- cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic (base, type, DK_WARNING);
+ cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic (base, type, kind);
inform (loc, "neither the destructor nor the "
"class-specific operator % will be called, "
"even if they are declared when the class is defined");
}
}
+ if (cxx_dialect > cxx23)
+ return error_mark_node;
/* This size won't actually be used. */
size_exp = size_one_node;
goto no_destructor;
or something else? I think the former is fine, the wording of the second
variant is just weird, because it isn't a possible problem, it is strictly
invalid code for C++26 and there is no need to explain what would happen in
that case.
[Bug c++/115745] [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115745 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #58557|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58564 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58564=edit gcc15-pr115745.patch Indeed, this worked in brief testing. I'm currently bootstrapping/regtesting the first versions of the 2 patches, once that is done, will test this.
[Bug c++/115754] [14/15 Regression] C++26 ICE on constexpr new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115754 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||14.1.0, 15.0 Target Milestone|--- |14.2 Summary|C++26 ICE on constexpr new |[14/15 Regression] C++26 ||ICE on constexpr new
[Bug c++/115754] New: C++26 ICE on constexpr new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115754
Bug ID: 115754
Summary: C++26 ICE on constexpr new
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jason at gcc dot gnu.org, unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Depends on: 115744
Blocks: 110338
Target Milestone: ---
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #115744 +++
While working on the PR115744 patch, I've noticed that vanilla trunk or GCC 14
ICE on
namespace std
{
using size_t = decltype (sizeof 0);
template
struct allocator
{
constexpr allocator () noexcept {}
constexpr T *allocate (size_t n)
{ return static_cast (::operator new (n * sizeof(T))); }
constexpr void
deallocate (T *p, size_t n)
{ ::operator delete (p); }
};
}
constexpr void *
operator new (std::size_t, void *p) noexcept
{ return p; }
constexpr bool
foo ()
{
std::allocator a;
auto b = a.allocate (1);
::new (b) int ();
a.deallocate (b, 1);
return true;
}
constexpr bool a = foo ();
with -std=c++26. Of course, the C++26 constexpr placement new support isn't
there and users shouldn't be declaring placement operator new themselves,
especially with constexpr when it is not, but still we shouldn't ICE.
Filing separately in case we want to backport it.
The fix for this in the WIP patch was the
@@ -8103,7 +8103,10 @@ cxx_eval_constant_expression (const cons
tree oldop = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
tree op = cxx_eval_constant_expression (ctx, oldop,
- lval,
+ (VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (t))
+|| (tcode == VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR
+&& lval == vc_glvalue))
+ ? lval : vc_prvalue,
non_constant_p, overflow_p);
if (*non_constant_p)
return t;
hunk in constexpr.cc, if lval is vc_discard but we aren't really discarding the
result,
I think the void * -> something * cast code at least but most likely various
other checks rely on op being actually an rvalue. If this is a (void) cast,
discarding it is fine, we won't process anything. And I think
VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR can be around various VAR_DECLs on the lhs, so I think we
also need at least vc_glvalue handling for that.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338
[Bug 110338] Implement C++26 language features
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115744
[Bug 115744] [C++26] P2747R2 - constexpr placement new
[Bug c++/115744] [C++26] P2747R2 - constexpr placement new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115744 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58563 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58563=edit gcc15-pr115744-wip.patch Untested WIP patch.
[Bug c++/115747] [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115747 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2024-07-02 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58560 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58560=edit gcc15-pr115747.patch Untested implementation.
[Bug c++/115745] [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115745 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58557 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58557=edit gcc15-pr115745.patch Untested implementation.
[Bug c++/115747] New: [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115747 Bug ID: 115747 Summary: [C++26] P3144R2 - Deleting a pointer to an incomplete type should be ill-formed Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- See <https://wg21.link/P3144R2>.
[Bug c++/115746] New: [C++26] P2963R3 - Ordering of constraints involving fold expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115746 Bug ID: 115746 Summary: [C++26] P2963R3 - Ordering of constraints involving fold expressions Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- See <https://wg21.link/P2963R3>.
[Bug c++/115745] [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115745 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2024-07-02 Ever confirmed|0 |1
[Bug c++/115745] New: [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115745 Bug ID: 115745 Summary: [C++26] P0963R3 - Structured binding declaration as a condition Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- See <https://wg21.link/P0963R3>.
[Bug c++/115744] New: [C++26] P2747R2 - constexpr placement new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115744 Bug ID: 115744 Summary: [C++26] P2747R2 - constexpr placement new Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- See <https://wg21.link/P2747R2>.
[Bug fortran/114825] [11 Regression] Compiler error using gfortran and OpenMP since r5-1190
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114825 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug driver/115440] unrecognized command-line option '--c++17'; did you mean '--stdc++17'?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115440 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.5 Resolution|--- |FIXED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug sanitizer/114956] [11 Regression] Segmentation fault with -fsanitize=address -fsanitize=null -O2 when attribute no_sanitize_address is enabled since r9-5742
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114956 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c++/114691] [11 Regression] Bogus ignoring loop annotation warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114691 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug tree-optimization/114876] [11 Regression] -fprintf-return-value mishandles %lc with a '\0' argument.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114876 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c++/114634] [11 Regression] Crash Issue Encountered in GCC Compilation of Template Code with Aligned Attribute since r9-1745
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114634 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c++/114572] [OpenMP] "internal compiler error: in assign_temp" with assignment operator and lastprivate clause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114572 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |11.5 Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug tree-optimization/114566] [11 Regression] Misaligned vmovaps when compiling with stack-protector-strong for znver4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114566 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c++/114537] bit_cast does not work NSDMI of bitfields
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114537 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |11.5 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 114537, which changed state. Bug 114537 Summary: bit_cast does not work NSDMI of bitfields https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114537 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug libquadmath/114533] libquadmath: printf: fix misaligned access on args
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114533 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |11.5 --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c/114493] [11 Regression] internal compiler error: in fld_incomplete_type_of with may_alias
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114493 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug target/114310] [11 Regression] [aarch64] __sync_val_compare_and_swap fails on __int128_t with newval = 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114310 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c++/113674] [11 Regression] [[____attr____]] causes internal compiler error: in decl_attributes, at attribs.cc:776
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113674 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug c/113262] [11 Regression] ICE when using [[gnu::copy("")]] attribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113262 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug middle-end/110115] [11 Regression] Wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110115 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug middle-end/111422] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111422 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.5 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug libgomp/113192] [11 Regression] ERROR: couldn't execute "../../../gcc/libgomp/testsuite/flock": no such file or directory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113192 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug testsuite/66005] libgomp make check time is excessive
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66005 Bug 66005 depends on bug 113192, which changed state. Bug 113192 Summary: [11 Regression] ERROR: couldn't execute "../../../gcc/libgomp/testsuite/flock": no such file or directory https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113192 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug target/113122] Assembler messages: Error: operand type mismatch for `movabs' / bad expression / invalid use of register with -fprofile -mcmodel=large -masm=intel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113122 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |11.5 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug middle-end/110027] [11 regression] Stack objects with extended alignments (vectors etc) misaligned on detect_stack_use_after_return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110027 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug middle-end/108789] __builtin_(add|mul|sub)_overflow methods generate duplicate operations if both operands are const which in turn causes wrong code due to overlapping arguments
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108789 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |11.5 Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug rtl-optimization/110079] [11 Regression] ICE with -freorder-blocks-and-partition and inline-asm goto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110079 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 11.5 as well.
[Bug middle-end/90348] [11 Regression] Partition of char arrays is incorrect in some cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90348 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #37 from Jakub Jelinek --- Worked around for 11.5 as well.
[Bug tree-optimization/61203] [5/6/7/8 Regression] g++.old-deja/g++.jason/rvalue2.C FAILs with -O2 -fno-inline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61203 Bug 61203 depends on bug 90348, which changed state. Bug 90348 Summary: [11 Regression] Partition of char arrays is incorrect in some cases https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90348 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c/115290] [12 Regression] tree check fail in c_tree_printer, at c/c-objc-common.cc:330
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115290 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 12.5 as well.
[Bug tree-optimization/115544] ICE: in lower_complexexpr_stmt, at gimple-lower-bitint.cc:4719 with -O -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-forwprop and _BitInt() __builtin_mul_overflow()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115544 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.2 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 14.2+ and 15.1+.
[Bug middle-end/115551] [missed optimization] "c1 << (a + c2)" not optimized into "(c1 << c2) << a"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115551 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- We should also verify that it doesn't stand in the way of shift sanitization, because unsigned int a; ... 1 << (5 + a); is well defined only for a in [0, 26] while once we optimize it to (1 << 5) << a; that would be well defined for a in [0, 31]. I think the shift sanitization is done early, so just something to be verified in a testcase next to the patch.
[Bug tree-optimization/115544] ICE: in lower_complexexpr_stmt, at gimple-lower-bitint.cc:4719 with -O -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-forwprop and _BitInt() __builtin_mul_overflow()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115544 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58466 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58466=edit gcc15-pr115544.patch So far lightly tested fix.
[Bug c/115109] Incorrect type of enumeration constant in redeclaration of enumeration constant (C23)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115109
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It is always good if you're testing on x86_64 to test such tests with
make check-gcc
RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix\{-m32/-mno-mmx/-mno-sse,-m32/-msse2,-m64\}
dg.exp='pr105109.c c23-tag-enum-*.c'"
or similar, that allows testing both 64-bit and 32-bit compilation and for the
latter both the variants with vector support and without (e.g. in case test
needs -Wno-psabi).
I certainly see
+FAIL: gcc.dg/c23-tag-enum-6.c (test for errors, line 10)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/c23-tag-enum-6.c (test for errors, line 13)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/c23-tag-enum-7.c (test for excess errors)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/pr115109.c (test for excess errors)
on i686-linux and not on x86_64-linux and the above make check would show it
immediately, even before trying to bootstrap/regtest the patch.
[Bug debug/115543] DWARF call_site_parameter entries are not generated for stack-passed parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115543 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- That is not a bug, DW_TAG_call_site_parameter is emitted only when it has something relevant to say (like, what value has been passed). If it isn't known how to reconstruct the value or if the compiler is unable to track the value passed to it, it can omit it.
[Bug c/115539] Misoptimization of application at -O2 -g on x86-64 causing segfaults on valid memory accesses where it works on both clang and gcc at -g (no -O2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115539 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Your testcase isn't self-contained, there is no main, so there isn't much we can do about it, but from the 220 -Wstrict-aliasing warnings I'd say it is very likely the code violates TBAA just about everywhere. Try -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing? If that helps, most likely it is just bogus code being compiled.
[Bug c/115516] constexpr use before C23 could give a better error message
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115516 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Sorry, this was about C, not C++. And apparently C++ manages to warn about that in cp_parser_diagnose_invalid_type_name through if (cxx_dialect < cxx11 && id == ridpointers[(int)RID_CONSTEXPR]) check.
[Bug c/115516] constexpr use before C23 could give a better error message
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115516 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- It will be hard, because constexpr before C++11 is not a keyword. And it can't be, int constexpr = 1; is completely valid C++98.
[Bug c/115290] [12 Regression] tree check fail in c_tree_printer, at c/c-objc-common.cc:330
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115290 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[12/13/14/15 Regression]|[12 Regression] tree check |tree check fail in |fail in c_tree_printer, at |c_tree_printer, at |c/c-objc-common.cc:330 |c/c-objc-common.cc:330 | --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Should be fixed for 13.4+/14.2+/15.1+ for now, 12 branch is frozen right now, so it will need to wait for 12.5.
[Bug c/115290] [12/13/14/15 Regression] tree check fail in c_tree_printer, at c/c-objc-common.cc:330
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115290 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 58449 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58449=edit gcc15-pr115290.patch Untested fix.
[Bug libstdc++/115512] _Float32 overloads in cmath cause ICE for default AVR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115512 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- .
