RE: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from 8-bit to 16-bit

Just migrated to the pointer_mux for the var-tracking, it works well even the bitsize of tree_base code is different from the rtl_def code. I will prepare the PATCH if there is no surprise from the X86 bootstrap test. Thanks Richard for pointing out the pointer_mux, ! Pan -Original

[Committed] New testcase

While I was writting a match.pd patch, I can across GCC was being miscompiled but no testcase was failing. So this adds that testcase. Committed after testing on x86_64 with make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="execute.exp=20230509-1.c" gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.c-torture/execut

[PATCH] _Hashtable implementation cleanup

Hi Rather than providing a series of patches for _Hashtable I prefer to submit them one by one. It will maximize the chances to have some of them in gcc 14. I'm starting with this simple patch to do some cleanup in the current implementation to ease compiler optimizations by making some

Re: [PATCH V2] RISC-V: Insert vsetivli zero, 0 for vmv.x.s/vfmv.f.s instructions satisfying REG_P(operand[1]) in -O0.

LGTM. Let's wait for kito's feedback. Thanks :) juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai From: Li Xu Date: 2023-05-10 12:02 To: gcc-patches CC: kito.cheng; palmer; juzhe.zhong; Li Xu Subject: [PATCH V2] RISC-V: Insert vsetivli zero, 0 for vmv.x.s/vfmv.f.s instructions satisfying REG_P(operand[1]) in -O0. This

[PATCH V2] RISC-V: Insert vsetivli zero, 0 for vmv.x.s/vfmv.f.s instructions satisfying REG_P(operand[1]) in -O0.

This issue happens is because the operand1 of scalar move can be REG_P (operand[1]) in the O0 case, which causes the VSETVL PASS to not insert the vsetvl instruction correctly, and the compiler crashes. Consider this following case: int16_t foo1 (void *base, size_t vl) { int16_t maxVal =

[PATCH] RISC-V: Support const series vector for RVV auto-vectorization

From: Juzhe-Zhong This patch is the prerequiste patch for more RVV auto-vectorization support. Since when we enable a very simple binary operations, we will end up with such following ICE: during RTL pass: expand add_run-1.c: In function 'main': add_run-1.c:28:1: internal compiler error:

[Bug middle-end/104069] Wuse-after-free=2 -O0 false positive "may be used"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069 Miklos Karacsony changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mkaracsony81 at gmail dot com ---

Re: GCC 12.3 Released

Cool, thanks Ankur ! On Tue, 9 May 2023, 20:09 Ankur Saini, wrote: > I think you can do that by via > > https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-announce > > > On 09-May-2023, at 7:34 PM, Hemlata Chelwani via Gcc > wrote: > > > > how can i unsubscribe ? > > Best Regards, > > Hemlata Chelwani >

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

> From: Arsen Arsenović > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Jakub Jelinek , > jwakely@gmail.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org > Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 22:21:03 +0200 > > > The concern is using the good will of the GNU Toolchain brand as the tip of > > the spear or battering ram to motivate software packages to fix

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Insert vsetivli zero, 0 for vmv.x.s/vfmv.f.s instructions satisfying REG_P(operand[1]) in -O0.

Thanks for fix this. It seems that we don't have much testing in O0 (Mostly testing in optimize > 0). A couple of comments here: >> if (avl == NULL_RTX && !optimize) Chang it into ---> info.has_avl_no_reg () >> \ No newline at end of file Check each test files make sure each file has a newline

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

> From: Florian Weimer > Cc: Jakub Jelinek , Eli Zaretskii , > jwakely@gmail.com, ar...@aarsen.me > Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 22:57:20 +0200 > > * Eli Zaretskii via Gcc: > > >> Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 21:07:07 +0200 > >> From: Jakub Jelinek > >> Cc: Jonathan Wakely , ar...@aarsen.me, > >>

[PATCH] RISC-V: Insert vsetivli zero, 0 for vmv.x.s/vfmv.f.s instructions satisfying REG_P(operand[1]) in -O0.

This issue happens is because the operand1 of scalar move can be REG_P (operand[1]) in the O0 case, which causes the VSETVL PASS to not insert the vsetvl instruction correctly, and the compiler crashes. Consider this following case: int16_t foo1 (void *base, size_t vl) { int16_t maxVal =

[Bug testsuite/109793] new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr108950.c from r11-10752-gd4cbcb9e45c6d4 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109793 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||testsuite-fail CC|

Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] [x86] x86: Add a new option -mdaz-ftz to enable FTZ and DAZ flags in MXCSR.

On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 5:49 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 7:37 AM Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 1:35 PM Hongtao Liu wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 4:04 PM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 5:40 AM

[PATCH] Fixes and workarounds for warnings during autoprofiledbootstrap build

autoprofiledbootstrap build produces new warnings since inlining decisions are different from other builds. This patch contains fixes and workarounds for those warnings. Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. gcc/ChangeLog: * config/i386/i386-expand.cc (expand_vec_perm_interleave2): Work around

[committed] CRIS: Fix ccmode typo in cris_postdbr_cmpelim

Typo spotted while doing CCmode improvements, as a missed optimization. It's almost visible from the patch context; there's not much done in terms of "mode-adjustment" when replacing (reg:CC CRIS_CC0_REGNUM) with a copy! This bug affects functions in the newlib printf-formatting functions

[Bug middle-end/109505] (t | 15) & svcntb() causes an OOM/ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109505 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug target/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- Oh I know this bug.

[Bug target/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- -O0: LRA non-specific : 33.12 ( 20%) 0.06 ( 1%) 33.15 ( 19%) 279M ( 25%) LRA virtuals elimination : 2.08 ( 1%) 0.00 ( 0%) 2.08 ( 1%) 18M ( 2%) LRA reload

[Bug target/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > At -O0, it seems like LRA is taking a long time. But -O0 completes for me on the trunk.

[Bug target/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- At -O0, it seems like LRA is taking a long time.

[Bug c++/109795] is_standard_layout incorrect for colliding member and base class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109795 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >The following compiles on GCC 13.1.0 when it should not: You have the opposite way around. GCC is the one which rejects this code while the other compilers accept it ...

[Bug c++/109795] New: is_standard_layout incorrect for colliding member and base class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109795 Bug ID: 109795 Summary: is_standard_layout incorrect for colliding member and base class Product: gcc Version: 13.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/109765] [14 regression] ICE in real_to_decimal_for_mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109765 --- Comment #6 from Sam James --- Report is at https://marc.info/?l=gmp-bugs=168367093126416=2. I ended up sending it a few times because I've had mail delivery problems before and I didn't realise the list was moderated even for subscribers.

[Bug c++/109790] [11/12/13/14 Regression] internal compiler error in write_member_name, at cp/mangle.cc:2992

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109790 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC|

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 23:38, Joel Sherrill wrote: > We are currently using gcc 12 and specifying C11. To experiment with > these stricter warnings and slowly address them, would we need to build > with a newer C version? No, the proposed changes are to give errors (instead of warnings) for rules

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 5:28 PM David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 4:40 PM Jonathan Wakely > wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, 9 May 2023, 21:13 David Edelsohn, wrote: > > > >> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Eli Zaretskii via Gcc > >> wrote: > >> > >>> > Date: Tue, 9 May 2023

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 4:40 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > On Tue, 9 May 2023, 21:13 David Edelsohn, wrote: > >> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Eli Zaretskii via Gcc >> wrote: >> >>> > Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 21:07:07 +0200 >>> > From: Jakub Jelinek >>> > Cc: Jonathan Wakely , ar...@aarsen.me,

[Bug c++/109790] [11/12/13/14 Regression] internal compiler error in write_member_name, at cp/mangle.cc:2992

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109790 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Target Milestone|---

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][PUSHED] Fix cfg maintenance after inlining in AutoFDO

>> free_dominance_info (CDI_DOMINATORS); @@ -1674,7 +1677,7 @@ >> auto_profile (void) >> pop_cfun (); >>} >> >> - return TODO_rebuild_cgraph_edges; >> + return 0; >This change isn't mentioned - was it accidential? No, it wasn't accidental. There is no reason to return

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

Thomas Koenig via Gcc writes: > Not replying to anybody in particular, just a bit of history, with > some potential parallels. > > In gfortran, we have had two major issues with interfaces. One was that > code which had happily violated the compiler ABI started failing, due > to a fix in the

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 108303, which changed state. Bug 108303 Summary: lookup failes with requires clause on non-template friend function of a class template https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108303 What|Removed

[Bug c++/108303] lookup failes with requires clause on non-template friend function of a class template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108303 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/109751] [13/14 Regression] boost iterator_interface fails concept check starting in gcc-13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109751 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |

[Bug c++/109751] [13/14 Regression] boost iterator_interface fails concept check starting in gcc-13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109751 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |rejects-valid Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/97700] Bogus error when a class containing a function pointer is used as a non-type template parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97700 --- Comment #5 from Lukas Böger --- One part of this seems to be resolved with version 13. Below, only the lambda use case fails to compile, whereas prior to version 13, both type aliases are rejected: ``` void fun() {} struct S { void

Re: [PATCH] libffi: fix handling of homogeneous float128 structs [PR109447]

On 5/9/23 3:50 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Mai 09 2023, Peter Bergner via Gcc-patches wrote: > >> It's almost as if the top level build machinery >> adds a LD_LIBRARY_PATH=... > > See how the toplevel Makefile sets LD_LIBRARY_PATH (via RPATH_ENVVAR) if > gcc-bootstrap is set. I'm sorry to be

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

Not replying to anybody in particular, just a bit of history, with some potential parallels. In gfortran, we have had two major issues with interfaces. One was that code which had happily violated the compiler ABI started failing, due to a fix in the gfortran front end which meant that we were

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

* Eli Zaretskii via Gcc: >> Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 21:07:07 +0200 >> From: Jakub Jelinek >> Cc: Jonathan Wakely , ar...@aarsen.me, gcc@gcc.gnu.org >> >> On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 10:04:06PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii via Gcc wrote: >> > People who ignore warnings will use options that disable these new

Re: [PATCH] libffi: fix handling of homogeneous float128 structs [PR109447]

On Mai 09 2023, Peter Bergner via Gcc-patches wrote: > It's almost as if the top level build machinery > adds a LD_LIBRARY_PATH=... See how the toplevel Makefile sets LD_LIBRARY_PATH (via RPATH_ENVVAR) if gcc-bootstrap is set. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 7578

Re: [PATCH] Add RTX codes for BITREVERSE and COPYSIGN.

On Sat, 6 May 2023, Roger Sayle wrote: > An analysis of backend UNSPECs reveals that two of the most common UNSPECs > across target backends are for copysign and bit reversal. This patch > adds RTX codes for these expressions to allow their representation to > be standardized, and them to

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

On Tue, 9 May 2023, 21:13 David Edelsohn, wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Eli Zaretskii via Gcc > wrote: > >> > Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 21:07:07 +0200 >> > From: Jakub Jelinek >> > Cc: Jonathan Wakely , ar...@aarsen.me, >> gcc@gcc.gnu.org >> > >> > On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 10:04:06PM

Re: [PATCH] c++, v2: Reject attributes without arguments used as pack expansion [PR109756]

On 5/9/23 15:23, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 01:17:09PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: How about changing cp_parser_std_attribute to set TREE_VALUE to error_mark_node if it skips arguments? In limited testing that seems to work (tried GXX_TESTSUITE_STDS=98,11,14,17,20,2b make

[Bug target/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #55034|0 |1 is obsolete|

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

David Edelsohn writes: > This seems to be the core tension. If developers cared about these issues, > they would enable appropriate warnings and -Werror. These issues are easy to miss and overlook. Making them louder helps prevent that. Additionally, requiring the users to remember a dozen

[Bug c++/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/109794] Massive memory usage when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 --- Comment #1 from Sam James --- Created attachment 55035 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55035=edit evaluate_prg_hwy.ii.xz (13)

[Bug c++/109794] New: Compile time hog when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109794 Bug ID: 109794 Summary: Compile time hog when building chromium on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR103716 - [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:15964

Duuh! There's even a choice :-) Paul On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 19:29, Harald Anlauf wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On 5/9/23 18:00, Paul Richard Thomas via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > This problem caused the gimplifier failure because the reference chain > > ending in an inquiry_len still

Re: [PATCH] libffi: fix handling of homogeneous float128 structs [PR109447]

On 5/5/23 4:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 02:29:34PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: >> Merged from upstream libffi commit: 464b4b66e3cf3b5489e730c1466ee1bf825560e0 >> >> 2023-05-03 Dan Horák >> >> libffi/ >> PR libffi/109447 >> * src/powerpc/ffi_linux64.c

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Cc: Jonathan Wakely , gcc@gcc.gnu.org >> Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 18:38:05 +0200 >> From: Arsen Arsenović via Gcc >> >> You're actively dismissing the benefit. > > Which benefit? > > No one has yet explained why a warning about this is not enough, and > why it must be

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Eli Zaretskii via Gcc wrote: > > Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 21:07:07 +0200 > > From: Jakub Jelinek > > Cc: Jonathan Wakely , ar...@aarsen.me, > gcc@gcc.gnu.org > > > > On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 10:04:06PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii via Gcc wrote: > > > > From: Jonathan Wakely

Re: Question on patch -fprofile-partial-training

Honza, Thanks a lot for your comments. > On May 9, 2023, at 6:22 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > From my understanding, -fprofile-partial-training is one important option > for PGO performance. I don't think so, speed benefit would be rather small I guess. >>> I saw some

[Bug libffi/109447] test case libffi.closures/cls_align_longdouble_split.c fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109447 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0069ce6631880776a44fb8408c6428c0812285cf commit r12-9526-g0069ce6631880776a44fb8408c6428c0812285cf Author: Dan Horák

[committed] libstdc++: Fix pretty printers and add tests

Tested powerpc64le-linux. Pushed to trunk. I'll backport to gcc-13 too. -- >8-- This fixes a couple of errors in the printers for chrono types, and adds tests to ensure they keep working. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * python/libstdcxx/v6/printers.py (StdChronoDurationPrinter):

[PATCH] configure: Implement --enable-host-pie

[ This is my third attempt to add this configure option. The first version was approved but it came too late in the development cycle. The second version was also approved, but I had to revert it: . I've fixed the problem (by

[Bug c++/109790] internal compiler error in write_member_name, at cp/mangle.cc:2992

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109790 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||c++-lambda, |

[PATCH] c++, v2: Reject attributes without arguments used as pack expansion [PR109756]

On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 01:17:09PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > How about changing cp_parser_std_attribute to set TREE_VALUE to > error_mark_node if it skips arguments? In limited testing that seems to work (tried GXX_TESTSUITE_STDS=98,11,14,17,20,2b make -j32 -k check-g++

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

> Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 21:07:07 +0200 > From: Jakub Jelinek > Cc: Jonathan Wakely , ar...@aarsen.me, gcc@gcc.gnu.org > > On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 10:04:06PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii via Gcc wrote: > > > From: Jonathan Wakely > > > Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 18:15:59 +0100 > > > Cc: Arsen Arsenović ,

[Bug c++/109751] boost iterator_interface fails concept check starting in gcc-13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109751 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

Re: Testsuite: Add missing 'torture-init'/'torture-finish' around 'LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS' usage (was: Let each 'lto_init' determine the default 'LTO_OPTIONS', and 'torture-init' the 'LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS

Hi Thomas, On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 17:17, Christophe Lyon wrote: > Hi! > > On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 11:00, Thomas Schwinge > wrote: > >> Hi Christophe! >> >> On 2023-05-09T09:32:55+0200, Christophe Lyon >> wrote: >> > On Wed, 3 May 2023 at 13:47, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches < >>

[Bug fortran/100961] Intrinsic function as value to a class(*) assumed rank argument fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100961 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Known to fail|

[Bug c++/109761] [10/11/12/13 Regression] Nested class destructor's noexcept specification incorrectly considered as too loose compared to the outer class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109761 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12/13/14 Regression] |[10/11/12/13 Regression]

[Bug c++/109752] [13 regression] ICE in check_complete_insertion, at hash-table.h:578 since r13-4937

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109752 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/109752] [13/14 regression] ICE in check_complete_insertion, at hash-table.h:578 since r13-4937

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109752 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bbb6cf926f1732559b3a8aaf2796d34e8651c066 commit r14-640-gbbb6cf926f1732559b3a8aaf2796d34e8651c066 Author: Patrick Palka Date:

[Bug c++/109761] [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] Nested class destructor's noexcept specification incorrectly considered as too loose compared to the outer class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109761 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c13906f258fb34b3e0c90ddc8d9191dd72f3da0e commit r14-639-gc13906f258fb34b3e0c90ddc8d9191dd72f3da0e Author: Patrick Palka Date:

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 10:04:06PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii via Gcc wrote: > > From: Jonathan Wakely > > Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 18:15:59 +0100 > > Cc: Arsen Arsenović , gcc@gcc.gnu.org > > > > On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 17:56, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > > > No one has yet explained why a warning about

[Bug fortran/90207] Debugging generated tree code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90207 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|10.5|--- --- Comment #8 from

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

> From: Jonathan Wakely > Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 18:15:59 +0100 > Cc: Arsen Arsenović , gcc@gcc.gnu.org > > On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 17:56, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > No one has yet explained why a warning about this is not enough, and > > why it must be made an error. Florian's initial post

[Bug fortran/87851] [10 Regression] Wrong return type for len_trim

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87851 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.3.0, 12.2.0, 13.1.0,

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

> From: Sam James > Cc: Arsen Arsenović , d...@killthe.net, > jwakely@gmail.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org > Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 18:05:09 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii via Gcc writes: > > >> Cc: Jonathan Wakely , gcc@gcc.gnu.org > >> Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 18:38:05 +0200 > >> From: Arsen Arsenović via

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR97122 - Spurious FINAL ... must be in the specification part of a MODULE

On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 08:35:00PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote: > On 5/9/23 20:29, Steve Kargl via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > > It's not needed. See above. gfc_state_stack->previous is referenced > > a few lines above the if-stmt. The reference will segfault if the > > pointer is NULL. > > > >

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR97122 - Spurious FINAL ... must be in the specification part of a MODULE

On 5/9/23 20:29, Steve Kargl via Gcc-patches wrote: On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 08:24:16PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote: Hi Paul, On 5/9/23 17:51, Paul Richard Thomas via Gcc-patches wrote: Hi All, Thanks to Steve Kargl for the fix. It caused finalize_8.f03 to fail because this testcase checked

Re: [PATCH 01/16] arm: [MVE intrinsics] add binary_maxvminv shape

On 5/9/23 15:50, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote: Hi Christophe, -Original Message- From: Christophe Lyon Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 1:19 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Kyrylo Tkachov ; Richard Earnshaw ; Richard Sandiford Cc: Christophe Lyon Subject: [PATCH 01/16] arm: [MVE intrinsics]

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR97122 - Spurious FINAL ... must be in the specification part of a MODULE

On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 08:24:16PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On 5/9/23 17:51, Paul Richard Thomas via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Thanks to Steve Kargl for the fix. It caused finalize_8.f03 to fail because > > this testcase checked that finalizable derived types could

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR103716 - [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:15964

Hi Paul, On 5/9/23 18:00, Paul Richard Thomas via Gcc-patches wrote: Hi All, This problem caused the gimplifier failure because the reference chain ending in an inquiry_len still retained a full array reference. This had already been corrected for deferred character lengths but the fix extends

[PATCH v2 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf

This patch adds the missing expanders for smax/smin for v*hf modes, by using the VDQWH iterator instead of VALLW. 2022-09-08 Christophe Lyon gcc/ * config/arm/vec-common.md (smin3): Use VDQWH iterator. (smax3): Likewise. --- gcc/config/arm/vec-common.md | 12

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR97122 - Spurious FINAL ... must be in the specification part of a MODULE

Hi Paul, On 5/9/23 17:51, Paul Richard Thomas via Gcc-patches wrote: Hi All, Thanks to Steve Kargl for the fix. It caused finalize_8.f03 to fail because this testcase checked that finalizable derived types could not be specified in a submodule. I have replaced the original test with a test of

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

* David Edelsohn: > Yes, GCC has two, distinct user groups / use cases, but GCC also has a > very unique and crucial role, as the foundation for a large portion of > the GNU/Linux and FOSS software ecosystem. This proposal is missing a > motivation for this change, especially making new errors

[Bug testsuite/109793] New: new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr108950.c from r11-10752-gd4cbcb9e45c6d4 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109793 Bug ID: 109793 Summary: new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr108950.c from r11-10752-gd4cbcb9e45c6d4 fails Product: gcc Version: 11.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/18487] Warnings for pure and const functions that are not actually pure or const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18487 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c/109792] RFE: Warn about misuse of "pure" attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109792 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c/109792] RFE: Warn about misuse of "pure" attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109792 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords|

[Bug c/109792] New: RFE: Warn about misuse of "pure" attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109792 Bug ID: 109792 Summary: RFE: Warn about misuse of "pure" attribute Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[PATCH 1/2] aarch64: Fix cut-&-pasto in aarch64-sve2-acle-asm.exp

aarch64-sve2-acle-asm.exp tried to prevent --with-cpu/tune from affecting the results, but it used sve_flags rather than sve2_flags. This was a silent failure when running the full testsuite, but was a fatal error when running the harness individually. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, pushed to

Re: [PATCH] c++: noexcept-spec from nested class confusion [PR109761]

On 5/9/23 12:35, Patrick Palka wrote: When processing a noexcept-spec from a nested class after completion of the outer class (since a noexcept-spec is a complete-class context), we pass to noexcept_override_late_checks the outer class type instead of the nested class type, which leads to bogus

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

* Sam James: > Florian Weimer writes: > >> * Richard Biener: >> Am 09.05.2023 um 14:16 schrieb Florian Weimer via Gcc : TL;DR: This message is about turning implicit-int, implicit-function-declaration, and possibly int-conversion into errors for GCC 14. >>> >>> I

RE: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf

> -Original Message- > From: Christophe Lyon > Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 6:33 PM > To: Kyrylo Tkachov ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; > Richard Earnshaw ; Richard Sandiford > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf > > > > On 5/9/23 19:31, Kyrylo Tkachov

Re: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf

On 5/9/23 19:31, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote: -Original Message- From: Christophe Lyon Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 6:18 PM To: Kyrylo Tkachov ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Earnshaw ; Richard Sandiford Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf On 5/9/23

RE: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf

> -Original Message- > From: Christophe Lyon > Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 6:18 PM > To: Kyrylo Tkachov ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; > Richard Earnshaw ; Richard Sandiford > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf > > > > On 5/9/23 15:48, Kyrylo Tkachov

Re: Support parallel testing in libgomp, part II [PR66005]

Thomas, On Fri, 5 May 2023 10:59:31 +0200 Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Worth noting is that with nvptx offloading, there is one execution test case > that times out ('libgomp.fortran/reverse-offload-5.f90'). This effectively > stalls progress for almost 5 min: Short of fixing it for real you

[Bug tree-optimization/109791] -Wstringop-overflow warning with -O3 and _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109791 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- The exact command line for a generic x86_64-linux-gnu compiler: -O2 -fvect-cost-model=dynamic -Wstringop-overflow -D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0 -march=x86-64-v2

Re: [PATCH] c++: error-recovery ICE with unstable satisfaction [PR109752]

On 5/9/23 12:35, Patrick Palka wrote: After diagnosing and recovering from unstable satisfaction, it's possible to evaluate an atom for the first time noisily rather than quietly. The satisfaction cache tries to handle this situation gracefully, but apparently not gracefully enough: we inserted

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

Jason Merrill writes: > On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 12:45 PM Florian Weimer via Gcc > wrote: >> >> * Richard Biener: >> >> > > Am 09.05.2023 um 18:13 schrieb David Edelsohn : >> > > >> > > On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 12:07 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > On Tue, May 09, 2023 at

[Bug modula2/109779] isolib SkipLine skips the first character of the successive line

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109779 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

Re: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf

On 5/9/23 15:48, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote: -Original Message- From: Christophe Lyon Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 1:19 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Kyrylo Tkachov ; Richard Earnshaw ; Richard Sandiford Cc: Christophe Lyon Subject: [PATCH 06/16] arm: add smax/smin expanders for v*hf

Re: [PATCH] c++: Reject attributes without arguments used as pack expansion [PR109756]

On 5/9/23 04:12, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! The following testcase shows we silently accept (and ignore) attributes without arguments used as pack expansions. This is because we call make_pack_expansion and that starts with if (!arg || arg == error_mark_node) return arg; Now, an

[Bug modula2/109779] isolib SkipLine skips the first character of the successive line

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109779 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:434dade5a11f63533cbf6059a862856c9b11c711 commit r14-620-g434dade5a11f63533cbf6059a862856c9b11c711 Author: Gaius Mulley Date: Tue

Re: More C type errors by default for GCC 14

On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 17:56, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Cc: Jonathan Wakely , gcc@gcc.gnu.org > > Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 18:38:05 +0200 > > From: Arsen Arsenović via Gcc > > > > You're actively dismissing the benefit. > > Which benefit? > > No one has yet explained why a warning about this is not

  1   2   3   >