[Bug tree-optimization/104269] [12 Regression] Bogus -Wuse-after-free seen in xen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- The easiest would be to run _before_ uncprop. uncprop is really part of out-of-SSA to reduce the number of copies on edges (maybe it should be merged into it instead of being visible as separate pass).
[Bug rtl-optimization/104153] [12 Regression] ICE due to recent ifcvt changes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153 --- Comment #5 from rdapp at linux dot ibm.com --- I would speculate that some of the FAILs are due to the same problem seen in the other PR (104198), i.e. that for the second seq I wrongly assumed that the backend does not recreate the original comparison as well as not read from possibly overwritten regs. Regarding the test failures - in case you don't have anything yet, I could build a vanilla and a patched cross compiler and look and the differences for some of them.
[Bug rtl-optimization/104198] [12 regression] ifcvt change breaks 64-bit SPARC bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104198 --- Comment #13 from rdapp at linux dot ibm.com --- I was away for some days, going to look into this again today.
[Bug tree-optimization/104297] New: MIN_EXPR is not detected for a >= -__INT_MAX__ ? -__INT_MAX__ : a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104297
Bug ID: 104297
Summary: MIN_EXPR is not detected for a >= -__INT_MAX__ ?
-__INT_MAX__ : a
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Take:
int t(int a)
{
int b = -__INT_MAX__ ;
int c = a >= b ? b : a;
return c;
}
int t1(int a)
{
int c = a >= -__INT_MAX__ ? -__INT_MAX__ : a;
return c;
}
--- CUT ---
t1 should be detected to MIN_EXPR ;
[Bug c++/103341] [11 Regression] ICE type of variable instantiation constrained on template parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103341 --- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha --- g++ 12.0.1 20220130 snapshot (g:baf98320ac6cd56da0c0b460fb94e3b87a79220d) still ICEs on the testcase in comment 3.
[Bug middle-end/104296] New: MIN should simplify to unsigned != 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104296
Bug ID: 104296
Summary: MIN should simplify to unsigned != 0
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Take:
unsigned t(unsigned a)
{
unsigned b = 1;
return a >= b ? b : a;
}
unsigned t1(unsigned a)
{
return a >= 1 ? 1 : a;
}
These two functions are the same but currently they do not optimize to the same
thing.
[Bug c++/98675] Accessing member of temporary outside its lifetime allowed in constexpr function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98675 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Tobias Schlüter from comment #3) > Sorry, in my example, I think actually clang is wrong. What is the order of destruction of tempories here in the following statement: A() << 1 Is A() destoryed before the temp B that is returned from operator <<. Note MSVC accepts the code so it might be a bug in clang.
[Bug c++/98675] Accessing member of temporary outside its lifetime allowed in constexpr function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98675 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Schlüter --- Sorry, in my example, I think actually clang is wrong.
[Bug c++/98675] Accessing member of temporary outside its lifetime allowed in constexpr function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98675
Tobias Schlüter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tobi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Schlüter ---
Here's another testcase (derived from code in the Eigen library ) that seems to
illustrate the same issue. Please follow the compiler explorer link to see a
non-constexpr version and its gimple that makes clear that there indeed is a
lifetime issue and also clang's error message https://godbolt.org/z/4zoKaoKa5
struct B;
#define CONSTEXPR constexpr
#define CONSTEVAL consteval
struct A {
public:
CONSTEXPR A() { m_val = 1; }
CONSTEXPR A(const A& other) { m_val = other.m_val;}
CONSTEXPR ~A() {};
CONSTEXPR int val() { return m_val; }
int m_val;
CONSTEXPR B operator<<(int);
};
struct B {
A& m_a;
CONSTEXPR B(A& ref) : m_a(ref) {}
CONSTEXPR B& operator,(int i) { m_a.m_val = i; return *this; }
CONSTEXPR ~B() { finished(); }
CONSTEXPR A finished() { return m_a; }
};
CONSTEXPR B A::operator<<(int i) {
m_val = i;
return B(*this);
}
CONSTEVAL int f()
{
A a = (A() << 1, 2, 3, 4).finished();
return a.val();
}
int g()
{
return f();
}
[Bug c++/104295] ICE: tree check: expected template_decl, have error_mark in build_deduction_guide, at cp/pt.cc:29079
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104295 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||11.2.0, 7.1.0 Keywords||error-recovery Severity|normal |trivial Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2022-01-31 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed.
[Bug c++/104295] New: ICE: tree check: expected template_decl, have error_mark in build_deduction_guide, at cp/pt.cc:29079
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104295
Bug ID: 104295
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected template_decl, have
error_mark in build_deduction_guide, at cp/pt.cc:29079
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hewillk at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
template
struct B;
template
struct B {
template
struct C { C(T); };
};
int main() {
B::C{0};
}
https://godbolt.org/z/5rxvbd3oe
Maybe dup of Bug 104294, but since their error message is different I opened
this one.
[Bug c++/104294] New: ICE: tree check: accessed elt 2 of 'tree_vec' with 1 elts in tsubst_pack_expansion, at cp/pt.cc:13130
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104294
Bug ID: 104294
Summary: ICE: tree check: accessed elt 2 of 'tree_vec' with 1
elts in tsubst_pack_expansion, at cp/pt.cc:13130
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hewillk at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
template
struct B;
template
struct B {
template
struct C { C(T); };
};
int main() {
B::C{0};
}
https://godbolt.org/z/h1jGhc5b4
[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 Barnabás Pőcze changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pobrn at protonmail dot com --- Comment #46 from Barnabás Pőcze --- (In reply to stream009 from comment #42) > I got strange compile error when I use coroutine with UBSAN. > > The weird thing is error is reported in compile time not runtime. > The code compile fine without UBSAN. > [...] > === begin compile error === > : In function 'void _Z5errori.actor(error(int)::_Z5errori.frame*)': > :21:9: warning: '' may be used uninitialized > [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] >21 | co_return; > | ^ > :21:9: note: '' was declared here >21 | co_return; > | ^ > === end compile error === I am not familiar with the internals of gcc at all, but it appears that this is due to incorrect code generation. When ubsan is not used, the generated gimple looks like this: if (_13 == 0) goto ; else goto ; : _14 = &frame_ptr->__p; result::promise_type::return_void (_14); goto final.suspend; : _15 = &frame_ptr->__p; result::promise_type::return_void (_15); when ubsan is used, however: if (_8 == 0) goto ; else goto ; : D.9938 = &frame_ptr->__p; .UBSAN_NULL (D.9938, 4B, 0); result::promise_type::return_void (D.9938); goto final.suspend; : .UBSAN_NULL (D.9938, 4B, 0); result::promise_type::return_void (D.9938); `D.9938` is not initialized, and I guess hence the warning. --- I have noticed that this does not happen on f6f2d6cfec1c2fe9570b98211be58329d8d7749b, so out of curiosity I tried to bisect gcc: > git bisect start > # new: [f6f2d6cfec1c2fe9570b98211be58329d8d7749b] Daily bump. > git bisect new f6f2d6cfec1c2fe9570b98211be58329d8d7749b > # old: [7ca388565af176bd4efd4f8db1e5e9e11e98ef45] Update ChangeLog and > version files for release > git bisect old 7ca388565af176bd4efd4f8db1e5e9e11e98ef45 > # old: [250f234988b6231669a720c52101d3686d645072] testsuite: Fix up > gcc.target/s390/zero-scratch-regs-1.c > git bisect old 250f234988b6231669a720c52101d3686d645072 > # old: [79513dc0b2d980bfd1b109d0d502de487c02b894] compiler: don't pad > zero-sized trailing field in results struct > git bisect old 79513dc0b2d980bfd1b109d0d502de487c02b894 > # new: [1b62cddcf091fb8cadf575246a7d3ff778650a6b] Fix ipa-modref pure/const > discovery > git bisect new 1b62cddcf091fb8cadf575246a7d3ff778650a6b > # new: [247bac507e63b32d4dc23ef1c55f300aafea24c6] libstdc++: Simplify > std::basic_regex::assign > git bisect new 247bac507e63b32d4dc23ef1c55f300aafea24c6 > # new: [d5f8abe1d3f718a75cbff0a453c1d961be5939b7] Use on-demand ranges in > ssa_name_has_boolean_range before querying nonzero bits. > git bisect new d5f8abe1d3f718a75cbff0a453c1d961be5939b7 > # new: [7d79c3ebc3f3f6f8aecf83726c97474ae5cfe957] Don't record string > concatenation data for 'RESERVED_LOCATION_P' > git bisect new 7d79c3ebc3f3f6f8aecf83726c97474ae5cfe957 > # new: [8137be3958be4e5421c283cce3e5b50dbb80b84e] mips: Fix macro typo > git bisect new 8137be3958be4e5421c283cce3e5b50dbb80b84e > # old: [caef5203d64e61da506909d58890035af32a6239] Fix internal error on > pointer-to-pointer binding in LTO mode > git bisect old caef5203d64e61da506909d58890035af32a6239 > # new: [cc1e28878a228b6c4a0872e56d97ac88971b7725] libstdc++: Check for TLS > support on mingw cross-compilers > git bisect new cc1e28878a228b6c4a0872e56d97ac88971b7725 > # new: [70ee703c479081ac2ea67eb67041551216e66783] coroutines: Make proxy vars > for the function arg copies. > git bisect new 70ee703c479081ac2ea67eb67041551216e66783 > # old: [bd55fa102715c7442c050b193dadfdb5337e2377] Fix PR ada/101970 > git bisect old bd55fa102715c7442c050b193dadfdb5337e2377 > # old: [f008fd3a480e3718436156697ebe7eeb47841457] c++: Fix > __is_*constructible/assignable for templates [PR102305] > git bisect old f008fd3a480e3718436156697ebe7eeb47841457 > # old: [de07cff96abd43f6f65dcf333958899c2ec42598] c++: empty union member > activation during constexpr [PR102163] > git bisect old de07cff96abd43f6f65dcf333958899c2ec42598 > # skip: [c5a735fa9df7eca4666c8da5e51ed9c5ab7cc81a] coroutines: Expose > implementation state to the debugger. > git bisect skip c5a735fa9df7eca4666c8da5e51ed9c5ab7cc81a > # only skipped commits left to test > # possible first new commit: [70ee703c479081ac2ea67eb67041551216e66783] > coroutines: Make proxy vars for the function arg copies. > # possible first new commit: [c5a735fa9df7eca4666c8da5e51ed9c5ab7cc81a] > coroutines: Expose implementation state to the debugger. Unfortunately, when I got to c5a735fa9df7eca4666c8da5e51ed9c5ab7cc81a, it did not build; I am not sure where I had gone wrong: > g++ -std=c+
[Bug jit/104293] New: Add support for setting the alignment of variables
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104293 Bug ID: 104293 Summary: Add support for setting the alignment of variables Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: jit Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: bouanto at zoho dot com Target Milestone: --- Hi. I'm opening this issue to track my upcoming patch adding support for setting the alignment of variables in libgccjit.
[Bug middle-end/78947] sub-optimal code for (bool)(int ? int : int)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78947 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Mine for GCC 13.
[Bug tree-optimization/104292] [missed optimization] boolean addition generates suboptimal code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104292 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=101703 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Found it, PR 101703.
[Bug target/104189] enable 64-bit compare-and-swap on SPARC/Linux with V9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104189 --- Comment #8 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- Any updates on this?
[Bug c++/104291] [12 Regression] gcc accepts template argument involves template parameter(s)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104291 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||needs-bisection Target Milestone|--- |12.0 Summary|gcc accepts template|[12 Regression] gcc accepts |argument involves template |template argument involves |parameter(s)|template parameter(s) Last reconfirmed||2022-01-30 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed, this was rejected in GCC 11.1.0 and 11.2.0.
[Bug rtl-optimization/102446] [9/10/11/12 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102446 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | --- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11) > It still fails for me. As I corrected in #c7, I didn't mean ICE but > miscompilation (at -O3). Yes it does still fail for me too, I don't know what I was doing wrong last night.
[Bug c/104289] -fdiagnostics-parseable-fixits doesn't always generate fixit notes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104289 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement
[Bug tree-optimization/104292] [missed optimization] boolean addition generates suboptimal code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104292 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-01-30 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed, I thought I saw one which was asking about bool + bool == 2 also ...
[Bug tree-optimization/104292] [missed optimization] boolean addition generates suboptimal code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104292 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords||missed-optimization
[Bug tree-optimization/104292] [missed optimization] boolean addition generates suboptimal code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104292 --- Comment #1 from Avi Kivity --- btw, I see that the equivalent bool_and generates optimal code. bool_and(bool, bool): movl%esi, %eax andl%edi, %eax ret Perhaps bool is written with the expectation that any non-zero value is true? But aren't non-zero values other than 1 undefined behavior?
[Bug tree-optimization/104292] New: [missed optimization] boolean addition generates suboptimal code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104292
Bug ID: 104292
Summary: [missed optimization] boolean addition generates
suboptimal code
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: avi at scylladb dot com
Target Milestone: ---
bool bool_or(bool b1, bool b2) {
return b1 + b2;
}
generates
bool_or(bool, bool):
movzbl %dil, %edi
movzbl %sil, %esi
addl%esi, %edi
setne %al
ret
Whereas it could generate
bool_or(bool, bool):
or %edi, %esi
mov %esi, %eax
ret
For a net gain of two instructions (and the final mov can often be elided, so
up to three).
I encountered this while using std::plus<> with boolean types. It could be
optimized as a specialization of std::plus, but I think a magic transformation
in the optimizer would make it apply in more places.
[Bug c++/104291] New: gcc accepts template argument involves template parameter(s)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104291
Bug ID: 104291
Summary: gcc accepts template argument involves template
parameter(s)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hewillk at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This should be rejected.
#include
template
struct S { };
template
struct S { };
S x;
https://godbolt.org/z/ecoGPWq3q
[Bug middle-end/95115] RISC-V 64: inf/inf division optimized out, invalid operation not raised
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95115 --- Comment #8 from Xi Ruoyao --- This is causing Glibc test failure on every port without hardware acos/asin instruction.
[Bug libstdc++/92770] std::unordered_map requires both T and U to be fully declared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92770 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- The relevant changes were r12-4258-g64acc43de1e336 and r12-4259-gd87105d697ced1
[Bug fortran/80524] [F03] Problematic behaviour with a finalization subroutine in gfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80524 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas --- (In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #7) > This is still present in the actual trunk. I can confirm that Intel's interpretation is completely correct. I have a patch in progress that issues the correct number of final calls but which is ordering the evaluation of the function result and the finalization of the lhs in the wrong order. Paul
[Bug go/104290] New: [12 Regression] trunk 20220126 fails to build libgo on i686-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
Bug ID: 104290
Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 20220126 fails to build libgo on
i686-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
Assignee: ian at airs dot com
Reporter: doko at debian dot org
CC: cmang at google dot com
Target Milestone: ---
trunk 20220126 fails to build libgo on i686-gnu:
../../../src/libgo/go/net/unixsock_posix.go:116:56: error: reference to
undefined name 'readMsgFlags'
116 | n, oobn, flags, sa, err = c.fd.readMsg(b, oob, readMsgFlags)
|^
../../../src/libgo/go/net/unixsock_posix.go:117:12: error: reference to
undefined name 'readMsgFlags'
117 | if readMsgFlags == 0 && err == nil && oobn > 0 {
|^
../../../src/libgo/go/net/unixsock_posix.go:118:17: error: reference to
undefined name 'setReadMsgCloseOnExec'
118 | setReadMsgCloseOnExec(oob[:oobn])
| ^
Makefile:3026: recipe for target 'net.lo' failed
make[6]: *** [net.lo] Error 1
[Bug c/104289] New: -fdiagnostics-parseable-fixits doesn't always generate fixit notes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104289
Bug ID: 104289
Summary: -fdiagnostics-parseable-fixits doesn't always generate
fixit notes
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: eric.pouech at orange dot fr
Target Milestone: ---
[eric]$ cat b2.c
#include
#define foo(x...) printf(x);
int main(void)
{
long l = 0;
foo("this is a"
"long line: %d\n", l);
return 0;
}
[eric]$ LC_ALL=C gcc -Wall -fdiagnostics-parseable-fixits -c b2.c
b2.c: In function 'main':
b2.c:8:9: warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2
has type 'long int' [-Wformat=]
8 | foo("this is a"
| ^~~
9 | "long line: %d\n", l);
|~
||
|long int
b2.c:3:26: note: in definition of macro 'foo'
3 | #define foo(x...) printf(x);
| ^
I'm expecting a fixit note to be present.
Note: the same snipnet without the multi line string, or the macro work as
expected.
[Bug libstdc++/92770] std::unordered_map requires both T and U to be fully declared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92770 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Intentionally, but it's not guaranteed to keeps working in future. The standard still says it's undefined.
[Bug rtl-optimization/102446] [9/10/11/12 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102446 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- It still fails for me. As I corrected in #c7, I didn't mean ICE but miscompilation (at -O3).
[Bug ipa/103083] [10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code due to ipa-cp's bits value propagation since r10-5538-gc7ac9a0c7e3916f1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103083 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] Wrong |[10/11/12 Regression] Wrong |code due to ipa-cp's value |code due to ipa-cp's bits |range propagation since |value propagation since |r10-5538-gc7ac9a0c7e3916f1 |r10-5538-gc7ac9a0c7e3916f1 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- The last proposal to fix this is in https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-November/585668.html I will have another look, re-test and ping it soon.
[Bug tree-optimization/104288] [11/12 Regression] EVRP null pointer check removal for strcmp (and maybe others) is not flow senative
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104288 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org, ||amacleod at redhat dot com, ||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Started with r11-3685-gfcae5121154d1c3382b056bcc2c563cedac28e74
[Bug tree-optimization/104288] [11/12 Regression] EVRP null pointer check removal for strcmp (and maybe others) is not flow senative
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104288 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection Component|middle-end |tree-optimization --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- EVRP is removing the null pointer check. I suspect the ranger code is not taking into account where we are in the IR and it thinks the arguments to strcmp will be null pointers but before we have other function calls which might not return.
[Bug middle-end/104288] [11/12 Regression] Null pointer check invalidly deleted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104288
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-30
Summary|Null pointer check |[11/12 Regression] Null
|invalidly deleted |pointer check invalidly
||deleted
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed.
Reduced/more self-contained testcase:
void h(int result) __attribute__((noipa));
void h(int result)
{
if (result)
__builtin_exit(0);
}
void n(const char *value_1) __attribute__((noipa));
void n(const char *value_1)
{
h(value_1 == 0);
int result = !__builtin_strcmp(value_1, "value 1");
__builtin_exit (!result);
}
int main()
{
n(0);
}
[Bug c/104288] New: Null pointer check invalidly deleted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104288
Bug ID: 104288
Summary: Null pointer check invalidly deleted
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: nrk at disroot dot org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
In the following code, the null checks are removed when compiled with `-O2` on
gcc v11.2.1. Compiling with `-O2 -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks` produces
proper result.
#include
#include
#include
#include
#define RESULT_PASS "PASS"
#define RESULT_FAIL "FAIL"
void test_assert(bool result)
{
printf("Assert: %s\n", result ? RESULT_PASS : RESULT_FAIL);
if (!result)
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
void test_strcmp(const char *value_1, const char *value_2)
{
test_assert(value_1 != NULL);
test_assert(value_2 != NULL);
bool result = !strcmp(value_1, value_2);
printf("Test equal: %s\n", result ? RESULT_PASS : RESULT_FAIL);
}
int main()
{
test_strcmp(NULL, "value 1");
}
(code snippet taken from:
https://gist.github.com/novns/c84d6e1efd6304b3076811fef34096fd )
[Bug libstdc++/92770] std::unordered_map requires both T and U to be fully declared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92770 Fedor Chelnokov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fchelnokov at gmail dot com --- Comment #2 from Fedor Chelnokov --- I see that this issue is fixed in GCC trunk. Demo: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/Gz5WY495Y Was it intentionally or by accident?
[Bug c++/58855] Attributes ignored on type alias in template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58855
gcc at ebasoft dot com.pl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at ebasoft dot com.pl
--- Comment #3 from gcc at ebasoft dot com.pl ---
This bug is still present in gcc version 11.2.1 20220115
namespace concepts
{
template
concept arithmetic = std::integral || std::floating_point;
}
template
using point_vector = T __attribute__((__vector_size__(sizeof(T)*2)));
warning: ignoring attributes applied to dependent type ‘T’ without an
associated declaration [-Wattributes]
70 | using point_vector = T
__attribute__((__vector_size__(sizeof(T)*2)));
|
^
[Bug d/104287] [12 regression] error: spurious trailing punctuation sequence ').' in format [-Werror=format-diag]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104287 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0
[Bug d/104287] New: [12 regression] error: spurious trailing punctuation sequence ').' in format [-Werror=format-diag]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104287 Bug ID: 104287 Summary: [12 regression] error: spurious trailing punctuation sequence ').' in format [-Werror=format-diag] Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: build Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: d Assignee: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org Reporter: sch...@linux-m68k.org Target Milestone: --- ../../gcc/d/decl.cc: In function 'void d_finish_decl(tree)': ../../gcc/d/decl.cc:1601:53: error: spurious trailing punctuation sequence ').' in format [-Werror=format-diag] 1601 | "its initializer size (%wd).", | ^~
