[Bug target/103196] [12 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/p9-vec-length-full-7.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103196 --- Comment #1 from Tamar Christina --- I'm not an expert on the Power ISA either, but it kinda looks like that code was unrolled. The change is supposed to CSE redundant instructions early so perhaps it now fits into your default rtl unroll

[Bug target/103201] [12 Regression] trunk 20211111 ftbfs for amdgcn – libgomp/teams.c:49:6: error: 'struct gomp_thread' has no member named 'num_teams'

, ||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Keywords||openmp Summary|[12 Regression] trunk |[12 Regression] trunk |2021 ftbfs for amdgcn |2021 ftbfs for amdgcn

[Bug target/103200] [12 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr91333.c scan-assembler-times vmovapd|vmovsd 3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103200 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0 Priority|P3

[Bug target/103200] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr91333.c scan-assembler-times vmovapd|vmovsd 3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103200 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-11-12 Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/103204] [11/12 Regression] ICE: in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:3842 (on -O2 and above)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103204 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-11-12 Priority|P3

[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug target/103201] [12 Regression] trunk 20211111 ftbfs for amdgcn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103201 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Keywords|

[Bug target/103196] [12 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/p9-vec-length-full-7.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103196 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0

[Bug tree-optimization/103195] tfft2 text grows by 70% with -Ofast between g:52fa771758635d9c53cddb9116e5a66fae592230...a97fdde627e64202940112009d45d17f85e4cc61

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103195 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection --- Comment #1 from

[Bug tree-optimization/103194] [12 Regression] ice in optimize_atomic_bit_test_and with __sync_fetch_and_and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103194 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug middle-end/103193] gcc for x86_64: wrong code generation: ucomiss instead of comiss

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103193 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-* i?86-*-*

RE: [PATCH] middle-end: fix de-optimizations with bitclear patterns on signed values

> -Original Message- > From: Jakub Jelinek > Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 4:11 PM > To: Tamar Christina > Cc: Jonathan Wakely ; Richard Biener > ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; nd > Subject: Re: [PATCH] middle-end: fix de-optimizations with bitclear patterns > on signed values > > On

[Bug tree-optimization/103192] [12 Regression] ICE on libgomp target-in-reduction-2.{C,c}

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103192 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

Re: [PATCH] testsuite/102690 - XFAIL g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C

On Thu, 11 Nov 2021, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 11/11/21 1:18 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Nov 2021, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > >> On 11/10/21 3:09 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote: > >>> This XFAILs the bogus diagnostic test and rectifies the expectation > >>> on the

[Bug tree-optimization/103204] New: [11/12 Regression] ICE: in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:3842 (on -O2 and above)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103204 Bug ID: 103204 Summary: [11/12 Regression] ICE: in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:3842 (on -O2 and above) Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status:

[Bug c++/71136] [concepts] Spurious 'converting overloaded function is ambiguous' error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71136 --- Comment #3 from Tom Honermann --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Hmm, clang and MSVC also reject the code in comment #1 (the one without the > bool) for the same reason as GCC. Interesting. Perhaps this is a common compiler

[Bug c++/101244] Wrong path in coroutine returning ternary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101244 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/101149] Coroutine compiler error with ternary operator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101149 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection --- Comment #1 from

[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- This seems jump threading related but I can't tell how. -fno-tree-vrp is enough to workaround the bug but I don't have anything more than that.

[PATCH] c++: implicit dummy object in requires clause [PR103198]

In the testcase below satisfaction misbehaves for f and g ultimately because find_template_parameters fails to notice that the constraint 'val.x' depends on the template parameters of the class template. In contrast, satisfaction works just fine for h. The problem seems to come down to a

[Bug bootstrap/102675] [12 regression] Bootstrap fails in libsanitizer: 'MD5_DIGEST_STRING_LENGTH' was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102675 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||unlvsur at live dot com --- Comment

[Bug sanitizer/103203] libsanitizer builds fails for freebsd13 target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103203 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/103203] New: libsanitizer builds fails for freebsd13 target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103203 Bug ID: 103203 Summary: libsanitizer builds fails for freebsd13 target Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 67934, which changed state. Bug 67934 Summary: [concepts] ICE when providing default function implementations using concepts https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67934 What|Removed

[Bug c++/81717] [c++ concepts] - simple "define function if not defined" code doesn't compile, no errors generated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81717 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michel.steuwer at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/67934] [concepts] ICE when providing default function implementations using concepts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67934 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/103202] New: [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 Bug ID: 103202 Summary: [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/102969] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails after r12-4726

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102969 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2) > Looks like this has resolved itself, most likely by one of the changes to > make greater use of ranger. I can't reproduce it with a cross-compiler and > don't

[Bug tree-optimization/88443] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overflow warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443 Bug 88443 depends on bug 102969, which changed state. Bug 102969 Summary: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails after r12-4726 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102969 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/102969] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails after r12-4726

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102969 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/80268] [concepts] list of candidates for ambiguous call includes unconstrained function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80268 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2019-10-14 00:00:00 |2021-11-11 --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 70862, which changed state. Bug 70862 Summary: [concepts] adding a concept-constrained version of a variable template causes multiple definition assembler error https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70862

[Bug c++/70862] [concepts] adding a concept-constrained version of a variable template causes multiple definition assembler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70862 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.2 Resolution|---

Re: [PATCH] testsuite/102690 - XFAIL g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C

On 11/11/21 1:18 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, 10 Nov 2021, Martin Sebor wrote: On 11/10/21 3:09 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote: This XFAILs the bogus diagnostic test and rectifies the expectation on the optimization. Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed. 2021-11-10

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 68812, which changed state. Bug 68812 Summary: [concepts] bogus mismatched argument pack lengths https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68812 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/68812] [concepts] bogus mismatched argument pack lengths

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68812 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Keywords|

[Bug c++/89997] Garbled expression in error message with -fconcepts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89997 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- In GCC 10+ (with -fconcepts-diagnostics-depth=2), GCC produces: : In function 'void test()': :17:16: error: use of function 'void check() requires requires(X x, T val) {x.X::operator<<()("hello") << val;}

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 71139, which changed state. Bug 71139 Summary: [concepts] ill-formed compound-requirement lacking a semicolon not rejected https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71139 What|Removed

[Bug c++/71139] [concepts] ill-formed compound-requirement lacking a semicolon not rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71139 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||9.4.0 See Also|

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 71140, which changed state. Bug 71140 Summary: [concepts] ill-formed nested-requirement lacking a semicolon not rejected https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71140 What|Removed

[Bug c++/71140] [concepts] ill-formed nested-requirement lacking a semicolon not rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71140 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.1.0 Keywords|

[Bug c++/78955] [c++ concepts] Concept requirements on functions cancels the private section method check in the following code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78955 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/102368] Failure to compile program using the C_SIZEOF function in ISO_C_BINDING

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102368 --- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Testing the following patch: diff --git a/gcc/fortran/check.c b/gcc/fortran/check.c index ffa07b510cd..f325e5e4d5f 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/check.c +++ b/gcc/fortran/check.c @@ -5272,13 +5272,18

[Bug c++/81717] [c++ concepts] - simple "define function if not defined" code doesn't compile, no errors generated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81717 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/68719] [concepts] placeholder deduction doesn't work for member functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68719 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid --- Comment #1 from

[PATCH][GCC] aarch64: Add LS64 extension and intrinsics

Hi, This patch is adding support for LS64 (Armv8.7-A Load/Store 64 Byte extension) which is part of Armv8.7-A architecture. Changes include missing plumbing for TARGET_LS64, LS64 data structure and intrinsics defined in ACLE [0]. Machine description of intrinsics is using new V8DI mode added in a

gcc-9-20211111 is now available

Snapshot gcc-9-2021 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-2021/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 68246, which changed state. Bug 68246 Summary: [concepts] Incorrect evaluation of C++1z fold expressions (... || expr) in concepts https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68246 What|Removed

[Bug c++/68246] [concepts] Incorrect evaluation of C++1z fold expressions (... || expr) in concepts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68246 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|7.0 |6.2 Keywords|

[Bug c++/97450] [concepts] Bogus errors during constraint normalization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97450 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 77595, which changed state. Bug 77595 Summary: concepts: constrained member functions illegally instantiated during explicit class template instantiation https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77595

[Bug c++/96164] Constraints and explicit template instantiation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96164 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akrzemi1 at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/77595] concepts: constrained member functions illegally instantiated during explicit class template instantiation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77595 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c++/96111] checking type of attribute with concepts results in compilation error or ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96111 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||12.0 Keywords|

[Bug fortran/102368] Failure to compile program using the C_SIZEOF function in ISO_C_BINDING

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102368 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/67901] [concepts] overloading bug when considered more specialized vs more constrained

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67901 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I needed one slight change to get the code to compiler (I needed this change even for clang and MSVC): Change: requires sizeof...(ArgumentsRest) % 2 == 0 to: requires (sizeof...(ArgumentsRest) % 2 == 0)

[Bug c++/94332] [concepts] requires-expression that contains a requires-expression incorrectly evaluates to false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94332 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/86009] [Concepts] Placeholder as argument to partial-concept-id forms extra constrained parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86009 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Note MSVC accepts the code in comment #2 but with the warning: (6): warning C4667: 'void f(wchar_t *)': no function template defined that matches forced instantiation

[PATCH] rs6000: testsuite: Add rop_ok effective-target function

This patch adds a new effective-target function that tests whether it is safe to emit the ROP-protect instructions and updates the ROP test cases to use it. Segher, as we discussed offline, this uses the double [] which you said isn't needed in general regex's, but for some reason is needed in

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 85806, which changed state. Bug 85806 Summary: [concepts] Hard error for "invalid use of non-static data member" in a requires expression https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85806 What|Removed

[Bug c++/85806] [concepts] Hard error for "invalid use of non-static data member" in a requires expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85806 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/71136] [concepts] Spurious 'converting overloaded function is ambiguous' error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71136 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm, clang and MSVC also reject the code in comment #1 (the one without the bool) for the same reason as GCC.

[Bug c++/90097] [concepts] Error while comparing 2 non-type parameters in constraints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90097 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

Re: rs6000: Fix up flag_shrink_wrap handling in presence of -mrop-protect [PR101324]

Sorry for taking so long to get back to this. On 10/29/21 4:45 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 10:17:39PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: >> +/* Ensure hashst comes after mflr and hashchk comes after ld 0,16(1). */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "mflr 0.*hashst 0," } } */

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 --- Comment #14 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #13) > (In reply to anlauf from comment #12) > > > Any reason not to use the macros from safe-ctype.h? > > Can we actually use it? This is part of

Re: [PATH][_GLIBCXX_DEBUG] Fix unordered container merge

On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 at 21:33, François Dumont wrote: > On 11/11/21 9:41 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 11:55, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 16:25, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, 8 Nov 2021 at 21:36, François Dumont >>> wrote:

[PATCH v2] implement -Winfinite-recursion [PR88232]

Attached is a v2 of the solution I posted earlier this week with a few tweaks made after a more careful consideration of the problem and possible false negatives and positives. 1) It avoids warning for [apparently infinitely recursive] calls in noreturn functions where the recursion may be

[Bug target/103201] New: [12 Regression] trunk 20211111 ftbfs for amdgcn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103201 Bug ID: 103201 Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 2021 ftbfs for amdgcn Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

Re: [PATH][_GLIBCXX_DEBUG] Fix unordered container merge

On 11/11/21 9:41 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 11:55, Jonathan Wakely > wrote: On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 16:25, Jonathan Wakely mailto:jwak...@redhat.com>> wrote: On Mon, 8 Nov 2021 at 21:36, François Dumont

[Bug target/103193] gcc for x86_64: wrong code generation: ucomiss instead of comiss

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103193 --- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- Converting from >= to == is inappropriate (because >= should raise invalid for all NaN operands but == should do so only for signaling NaNs). If that's happening in

[Bug c/102989] Implement C2x's n2763 (_BitInt)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989 --- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- N2775 (hopefully to be considered at the Jan/Feb 2022 WG14 meeting) is the proposal for constant suffixes.

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 --- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #12) > Any reason not to use the macros from safe-ctype.h? Can we actually use it? This is part of libiberty, AFAIK, and I am not sure that we link libgfortran against

[Bug fortran/96255] [F2018] Implement optional type spec for index in DO CONCURRENT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96255 --- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #8) > New patch. This adds a bool component to gfc_forall_iterator so > that an iterator with an index-name that shadows a variable from > outer scope can be

Re: [PATCH 16/18] rs6000: Test case adjustments

On 11/11/21 2:06 PM, Bill Schmidt wrote: > >>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/int_128bit-runnable.c >>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/int_128bit-runnable.c >>> @@ -11,9 +11,9 @@ >>> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mvrlq\M} 2 } } */ >>> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times

[PATCH, committed] rs6000: Fix test_mffsl.c to require Power9 support

Hi! Per previous discussion, committed the following as obvious. commit 8a8458ac6bbc4263dd2c1ee55979b29fc7195794 Author: Bill Schmidt Date: Thu Nov 11 14:36:04 2021 -0600 rs6000: Fix test_mffsl.c to require Power9 support 2021-11-11 Bill Schmidt gcc/testsuite/

Re: [PATH][_GLIBCXX_DEBUG] Fix unordered container merge

On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 11:55, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 16:25, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, 8 Nov 2021 at 21:36, François Dumont >> wrote: >> >>> Yet another version this time with only 1 guard implementation. The >>> predicate to invalidate the safe

[Bug tree-optimization/93150] (A) == CST1 &( ((A)==CST2) | ((A)==CST3) ) is not simplified

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93150 --- Comment #4 from Navid Rahimi --- Although I wrote a small code to just test this optimization. But I am not able to verify this transformation [1]. https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/THP27D The code can be something like this but if I were able

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

Go patch committed: Traverse func subexprs when creating func descriptors

This patch to the Go frontend fixes the Create_func_descriptors pass to traverse the subexpressions of the function in a Call_expression. There are no subexpressions in the normal case of calling a function a method directly, but there are subexpressions when in code like F().M() when F returns an

[Bug fortran/103137] [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_simplify_transpose, at fortran/simplify.c:8181 since r12-4967-gbcf3728abe848888

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103137 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ccc4f79f1a6dd08437e10db729694a744abb10a commit r11-9235-g9ccc4f79f1a6dd08437e10db729694a744abb10a Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/103138] [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_simplify_cshift, at fortran/simplify.c:2139 since r12-4967-gbcf3728abe848888

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103138 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ccc4f79f1a6dd08437e10db729694a744abb10a commit r11-9235-g9ccc4f79f1a6dd08437e10db729694a744abb10a Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug target/103200] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr91333.c scan-assembler-times vmovapd|vmovsd 3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103200 Bug ID: 103200 Summary: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr91333.c scan-assembler-times vmovapd|vmovsd 3 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug testsuite/100655] 'g++.dg/tsan/pthread_cond_clockwait.C' FAILs due to 'pthread_cond_clockwait' missing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100655 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug jit/103199] New: FAIL: ../jit/docs/examples/tut04-toyvm/toyvm.c, initial compilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103199 Bug ID: 103199 Summary: FAIL: ../jit/docs/examples/tut04-toyvm/toyvm.c, initial compilation Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/103193] gcc for x86_64: wrong code generation: ucomiss instead of comiss

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103193 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak --- Here is compilable testcase: _Bool a (void) { #pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS ON float f; _Bool b; f = __builtin_nan (""); b = f >= f; // ucomiss (wrong), comiss (correct) return b; } Tree optimizers

Re: [PATCH 16/18] rs6000: Test case adjustments

Hi Segher, [Sorry to be answering these out of order...] On 11/5/21 5:37 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 11:13:52AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: >> * gcc.target/powerpc/bfp/scalar-extract-exp-2.c: Adjust. > My favourite changelog entry! But, adjust to what? This is

[committed] libstdc++: Make pmr::memory_resource::allocate implicitly create objects

Tested x86_64-linux, pushed to trunk. Calling the placement version of ::operator new "implicitly creates objects in the returned region of storage" as per [intro.object]. This allows the returned memory to be used as storage for implicit-lifetime types (including arrays) without additional

[committed] libstdc++: Remove public std::vector::data() member

Tested x86_64-linux, pushed to trunk. This function only exists to avoid an error in the debug mode vector, so doesn't need to be public. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * include/bits/stl_bvector.h (vector::data()): Give protected access, and delete for C++11 and later. ---

[Bug c/102989] Implement C2x's n2763 (_BitInt)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989 --- Comment #9 from Alejandro Colomar --- Is there any proposal regarding suffices for constants? I didn't see it in the main proposal for _BitInt(). I mean something like 1u8 to create a constant of type unsigned _BitInt(8). --- @Joseph

[Bug c++/103198] ICE for requires requires clause with varadic templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103198 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/103175] [12 Regression] internal compiler error: in handle_call_arg, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:4139

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103175 --- Comment #6 from David Binderman --- Created attachment 51773 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51773=edit gzipped C++ source code Another test case. Flag -O1 required.

[Bug c/102989] Implement C2x's n2763 (_BitInt)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[PATCH 2/3] gimple-fold: Use ranges to simplify _chk calls

Instead of comparing LEN and SIZE only if they are constants, use their ranges to decide if LEN will always be lower than or same as SIZE. This change ends up putting the stringop-overflow warning line number against the strcpy implementation, so adjust the warning check to be line number

[PATCH 3/3] gimple-fold: Use ranges to simplify strncat and snprintf

Remove the warnings for strncat since it is already handled (and even the error messages look identical) in gimple-ssa-warn-access. Instead, use len range to determine if it is within bounds of source and destination and simplify it to strcat if it's safe. Likewise for snprintf, use ranges to

[PATCH 1/3] gimple-fold: Transform stp*cpy_chk to str*cpy directly

Avoid going through another folding cycle and use the ignore flag to directly transform BUILT_IN_STPCPY_CHK to BUILT_IN_STRCPY when set, likewise for BUILT_IN_STPNCPY_CHK to BUILT_IN_STPNCPY. Dump the transformation in dump_file so that we can verify in tests that the direct transformation

[PATCH 0/3] gimple-fold improvements

This patchset improves folding in cases where input lengths and/or destination sizes may not be constant but are range bound. Tested on x86_64 with a full bootstrap build and verified that there are no regressions resulting from this patchset. Also tested a build of bash, which results in 3

[Bug middle-end/100810] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-397-gda9e6e63d1ae22e530ec7baf59f6ed028bf05776

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100810 Roger Sayle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|roger at

[Bug target/103197] ppc inline expansion of memcpy/memmove should not use lxsibzx/stxsibx for a single byte

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197 --- Comment #2 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org --- >From the reload dump: 0 Non input pseudo reload: reject++ 1 Non-pseudo reload: reject+=2 1 Non input pseudo reload: reject++

  1   2   3   4   >