[Bug libstdc++/95832] std::vector specialization leading std::variant ctor treating it as int rather than bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95832 --- Comment #1 from fiesh at zefix dot tv --- https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/variant/variant says that "If T_i is (possibly cv-qualified) bool, F(T_i) is only considered if std::decay_t (until C++20)std::remove_cvref_t (since C++20)

[Bug libstdc++/95832] New: std::vector specialization leading std::variant ctor treating it as int rather than bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95832 Bug ID: 95832 Summary: std::vector specialization leading std::variant ctor treating it as int rather than bool Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/95676] [armhf] g++ mis-compiles code at -O1 or above

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95676 --- Comment #3 from James McCoy --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #1) > So what do you think is wrong with the code? Sorry, I don't have time to > try to second guess what's going on. > > How did you configure the compiler? What

[Bug c++/95831] New: Wrong line number in " -Wconversion" warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95831 Bug ID: 95831 Summary: Wrong line number in " -Wconversion" warning message Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic Severity: normal

[Bug regression/95830] [11 regression][MIPS/MSA] internal compiler error: in do_store_flag, at expr.c:12247 start with gcc-11-1445-g502d63b6d61

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95830 Paul Hua changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10 regression][MIPS/MSA] |[11 regression][MIPS/MSA]

[Bug regression/95830] New: [10 regression][MIPS/MSA] internal compiler error: in do_store_flag, at expr.c:12247 start with gcc-11-1445-g502d63b6d61

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95830 Bug ID: 95830 Summary: [10 regression][MIPS/MSA] internal compiler error: in do_store_flag, at expr.c:12247 start with gcc-11-1445-g502d63b6d61 Product: gcc

[Bug middle-end/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- No problem (and no inconvenience either).

[Bug rtl-optimization/89310] Poor code generation returning float field from a struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89310 luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/92702] [F2008] (and hence [F2018]) Implement VALUE support for arrays + deferred-length parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92702 --- Comment #2 from Yao Liu --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1) > The following restriction of F2003 is also gone: > > C528 (R501) If the VALUE attribute is specified, the length type parameter > values shall be omitted or

[Bug middle-end/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 --- Comment #7 from Ferruh YIGIT --- Thanks Martin, explanation and sample clarified the issue for me. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.

[Bug middle-end/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |middle-end Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 95818, which changed state. Bug 95818 Summary: wrong "used uninitialized" warning https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 --- Comment #5 from Ferruh YIGIT --- Got it, 'iavf_ethdev.i' attached. I am able to reproduce with command [1] and got the output [2] using .i file. [1] /usr/local/gcc-latest/bin/gcc -m64 -pthread -march=native -O3 -Wall -Werror

[Bug c/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 --- Comment #4 from Ferruh YIGIT --- Created attachment 48772 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48772=edit preprocessed source

[Bug tree-optimization/95803] Failure to optimize strlen in certain situations properly, instead leading to weird code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95803 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Blocks|

[Bug tree-optimization/95760] ivopts with loop variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95760 --- Comment #2 from Jim Wilson --- I took another look, and it turns out that the should_duplicate_loop_header_p for size/speed is not the only issue. There is also an issue in tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c when computing iv costs. With speed, the +4

[Bug fortran/95829] Bogus error with additional blanks in type(*)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95829 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/95812] [10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_dep_resolver since r10-2114

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95812 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig --- Fix looks simple enough: diff --git a/gcc/fortran/dependency.c b/gcc/fortran/dependency.c index f6c68409e68..7edd5d9010d 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/dependency.c +++ b/gcc/fortran/dependency.c @@ -2031,10

[Bug fortran/95827] ICE in gfc_get_string, at fortran/iresolve.c:70

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95827 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/95826] ICE in gfc_match_decl_type_spec, at fortran/decl.c:4290

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95826 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug d/95198] [D] extern(C) private final functions should use 'local' linker attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95198 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/95829] New: Bogus error with additional blanks in type(*)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95829 Bug ID: 95829 Summary: Bogus error with additional blanks in type(*) Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/95828] New: ICE in resolve_select_rank, at fortran/resolve.c:9774

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95828 Bug ID: 95828 Summary: ICE in resolve_select_rank, at fortran/resolve.c:9774 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/95827] New: ICE in gfc_get_string, at fortran/iresolve.c:70

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95827 Bug ID: 95827 Summary: ICE in gfc_get_string, at fortran/iresolve.c:70 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/95826] New: ICE in gfc_match_decl_type_spec, at fortran/decl.c:4290

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95826 Bug ID: 95826 Summary: ICE in gfc_match_decl_type_spec, at fortran/decl.c:4290 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/93976] Implement P2082R1, Fixing CTAD for aggregates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93976 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-22

[Bug c++/95825] New: [7/8/9/10/11 Regression] boost::optional -Wuninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95825 Bug ID: 95825 Summary: [7/8/9/10/11 Regression] boost::optional -Wuninitialized Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug c++/95789] [10/11 Regression] Const method is allowed to return non-const reference on template class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95789 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/95707] ICE in finish_equivalences, at fortran/trans-common.c:1319

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95707 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4dd2fd9c4350529947fffc6bf257b5e22379554b commit r10-8341-g4dd2fd9c4350529947fffc6bf257b5e22379554b Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/95689] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in check_sym_interfaces, at fortran/interface.c:2015

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95689 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ece7b4d5f0cef0811ee1a0ebbf00ba41c5cf080c commit r10-8338-gece7b4d5f0cef0811ee1a0ebbf00ba41c5cf080c Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/95688] ICE in gfc_get_string, at fortran/iresolve.c:70

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95688 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9056a5f1874eb85c74e439c4058b1e5c936b commit r10-8340-g9056a5f1874eb85c74e439c4058b1e5c936b Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/95687] ICE in get_unique_hashed_string, at fortran/class.c:508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95687 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f067cc55d382c256308f85575bca3e42fe215541 commit r10-8339-gf067cc55d382c256308f85575bca3e42fe215541 Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug c/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- Richard said "complete", that is the whole .i file, not just one random function. If we cannot reproduce the issue by copying your code and compiling it, we can't do anything about your report.

[Bug fortran/95587] ICE in gfc_target_encode_expr, at fortran/target-memory.c:362

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95587 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c00ca04ba7e46d2d59e5a4f95ee7121cdc4ba224 commit r10-8337-gc00ca04ba7e46d2d59e5a4f95ee7121cdc4ba224 Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug bootstrap/95805] [11 regression] gcc/recog.h:301:30: error: too many arguments to function call, expected 1, have 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95805 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/95824] New: [coroutines] compiler crash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95824 Bug ID: 95824 Summary: [coroutines] compiler crash Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/95823] New: [coroutines] compiler internal error in captures_temporary,

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95823 Bug ID: 95823 Summary: [coroutines] compiler internal error in captures_temporary, Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/95819] ICE: Segmentation fault signal terminated program cc1plus

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95819 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/93788] Segfault caused by infinite loop in cc1plus

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93788 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||haoxintu at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/95822] New: [coroutines] compiler internal error with local object with noexcept false destructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95822 Bug ID: 95822 Summary: [coroutines] compiler internal error with local object with noexcept false destructor Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/95821] Failure to optimize strchr to use memchr for string constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95821 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug tree-optimization/95821] New: Failure to optimize strchr to use memchr for string constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95821 Bug ID: 95821 Summary: Failure to optimize strchr to use memchr for string constant Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 --- Comment #30 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Rafael Avila de Espindola from comment #29) > Created attachment 48771 [details] > Testcase without lambda coroutines > > I modified the testcase to also build with clang and not depend on async

[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 Rafael Avila de Espindola changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #48723|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c++/95726] ICE with aarch64 __Float32x4_t as template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95726 --- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Thanks for the pointers. Putting the mangled name in a target-specific attribute (like we do for SVE) seems to fix it. It actually also keeps the testcase in comment 4 “working”, which is

[Bug fortran/95614] ICE in build_field, at fortran/trans-common.c:301

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95614 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 09:10:25AM +, drikosev at gmail dot com wrote: > > --- Comment #3 from Ev Drikos --- > > Hello, > > Perhaps, an additional check in file resolve.c might be necessary, or > one

[Bug c++/95807] GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Haoxin Tu from comment #6) > My team nowadays are focusing on improving the quality of mature compilers. > We just developed a tool to test them and then found those bugs. Our method > might

[Bug tree-optimization/95761] [11 regression] ICE during GIMPLE pass: slp verify_ssa failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95761 --- Comment #6 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko --- r11-1582 PASS for me x_2.i and original (non-reduced) compilation

[Bug fortran/95708] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in resolve_fl_procedure, at fortran/resolve.c:13002

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95708 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:647340c92a042e8e6f7d004637f07060dbde49c0 commit r11-1586-g647340c92a042e8e6f7d004637f07060dbde49c0 Author: Mark Eggleston Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/95804] ice in generate_code_for_partition, at tree-loop-distribution.c:1323

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95804 --- Comment #3 from David Binderman --- (In reply to bin cheng from comment #2) > Whew, this part IS can of worms. Will investigate it. Great. The testcase I provided came from a C source code generator called ccg. Here is another C test

[Bug c++/95820] ICE in splice_late_return_type, at cp/pt.c:29034

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95820 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-22

[Bug c++/95768] [11 Regression] -march=sandybridge -O2 -Wall crashes as 'during GIMPLE pass: uninit ... Segmentation fault'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95768 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 --- Comment #2 from Ferruh YIGIT --- .i output [1] and .s output [2] below, please let me know if the request was something else. [1] int iavf_dev_link_update(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, __attribute__((__unused__)) int wait_to_complete) {

[Bug c++/95820] ICE in splice_late_return_type, at cp/pt.c:29034

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95820 --- Comment #1 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Haoxin Tu from comment #0) > $g++ -w -fpermissive small.cc Here is a mistake, and it should be $g++ -w -fpermissive bug.cc

[Bug c++/95768] [11 Regression] -march=sandybridge -O2 -Wall crashes as 'during GIMPLE pass: uninit ... Segmentation fault'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95768 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/95820] New: ICE in splice_late_return_type, at cp/pt.c:29034

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95820 Bug ID: 95820 Summary: ICE in splice_late_return_type, at cp/pt.c:29034 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code Severity: normal

[Bug c++/95819] New: ICE: Segmentation fault signal terminated program cc1plus

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95819 Bug ID: 95819 Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault signal terminated program cc1plus Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug c/95777] Allow specifying more than one target options at the same time in target and target_clones attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95777 --- Comment #3 from Yichao Yu --- And for backward compatibility maybe `target_clones("(sse4.1,arch=core2),default")` would work?

[Bug c++/95807] GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 --- Comment #6 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5) > What practical impact does this have on any real world code? > Why should we spend time on that, rather than the million other things we > have to fix? Hi,

[Bug c++/95054] internal compiler error while overloading class constructor using variadic templates constraint by c++20 concepts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95054 Marcel Breyer changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/94260] Specific friend function inside c++20 concept-constrained class template triggers 'not usable in a constant expression' error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94260 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-22 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/95262] Taking address of function pointer doesn't do full concept overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95262 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/95791] Unnecessary vzeroupper when only using zmm16 through zmm31

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95791 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c/95777] Allow specifying more than one target options at the same time in target and target_clones attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95777 --- Comment #2 from Yichao Yu --- I only tested this with `target_clones` and it seems that I misread the document for `target`. So this is only an issue with `target_clones` attribute. `target` support this just fine. So to be more clear,

[Bug ipa/95775] Command line argument for target_clones?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95775 --- Comment #2 from Yichao Yu --- > But it will blow up code-size considerably. > So without some major work I don't think simply slapping target_clones on > each function is going to fly in practice. I mean, it'll blow up not much more than

[Bug c++/95807] GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/95798] [10/11 Regression] Initialization code --- suboptimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95798 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Partially related, using the following -O2 -fno-ipa-icf: void foo (int x, int *p) { p[x + 1] = 1; } void bar (int x, int *p) { p[x + 1UL] = 1; } void baz (int x, int *p) { unsigned long l = x; l++;

[Bug c/95818] wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||24639 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/95818] New: wrong "used uninitialized" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95818 Bug ID: 95818 Summary: wrong "used uninitialized" warning Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/95791] Unnecessary vzeroupper when only using zmm16 through zmm31

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95791 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9302421e71e85b4d3766a534ed9e1c4ae1e7a6ca commit r11-1585-g9302421e71e85b4d3766a534ed9e1c4ae1e7a6ca Author: H.J. Lu Date: Sat Jun 20

[Bug fortran/95585] ICE in gfc_check_reshape, at fortran/check.c:4751

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95585 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d9aed5f1ccffc019ddf980e349caa3d092755cb4 commit r11-1584-gd9aed5f1ccffc019ddf980e349caa3d092755cb4 Author: Mark Eggleston Date:

[Bug bootstrap/94998] [10 Regression] GCC 10 won't configure for host=x86, build!=host, linker=bfd due to CET

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug bootstrap/94998] [10 Regression] GCC 10 won't configure for host=x86, build!=host, linker=bfd due to CET

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c7ae01349f779f1d4e66d8831052ee59f9c948b commit r10-8336-g2c7ae01349f779f1d4e66d8831052ee59f9c948b Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue

[Bug tree-optimization/95817] New: Failure to optimize shift with constant to compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95817 Bug ID: 95817 Summary: Failure to optimize shift with constant to compare Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/95792] Failure to optimize assignment of struct members to memset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95792 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug fortran/42693] Missing gcc-internal-format on messages from gfc_arith_error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42693 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d57bf2315e024ada3393ad967e8f632121383c9c commit r11-1583-gd57bf2315e024ada3393ad967e8f632121383c9c Author: Mark Eggleston Date:

[Bug target/95798] [10/11 Regression] Initialization code --- suboptimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95798 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Perhaps the change should be guarded on single_use?

[Bug target/95798] [10/11 Regression] Initialization code --- suboptimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95798 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Summary|Initialization

[Bug target/95816] New: Aarch64 jumps between Hot/Cold sections use possibly clobbered registers x16/x17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95816 Bug ID: 95816 Summary: Aarch64 jumps between Hot/Cold sections use possibly clobbered registers x16/x17 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug demangler/95815] New: Infinite recursive error about "demangle_args" "demangle_nested_args" in libiberty when running cxxfilt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95815 Bug ID: 95815 Summary: Infinite recursive error about "demangle_args" "demangle_nested_args" in libiberty when running cxxfilt Product: gcc Version: unknown

[Bug target/95814] New: Failure to optimize __builtin_ia32_rsqrtss properly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95814 Bug ID: 95814 Summary: Failure to optimize __builtin_ia32_rsqrtss properly Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/95770] [11 Regression] ice during GIMPLE pass: slp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95770 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/95770] [11 Regression] ice during GIMPLE pass: slp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95770 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cf07eea8429c923b7eb884ffc1b267c80a0a839c commit r11-1582-gcf07eea8429c923b7eb884ffc1b267c80a0a839c Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug c++/95807] GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 --- Comment #4 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > The ill-formed template is not diagnosed unless you instantiate it. > That is allowed by the standard. Thank you Jonathan, thanks for your response. As other

[Bug middle-end/95810] Spurious UBSan warning when computing the opposite of the absolute value of INT_MIN

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95810 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 48769 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48769=edit gcc11-pr95810.patch Untested fix.

[Bug c++/95807] GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Haoxin Tu from comment #2) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > I think it is rejected at instanition time. > > Hi, Andrew. Shouldn't it be rejected at compiling time? It could

[Bug fortran/95812] [10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_dep_resolver since r10-2114

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95812 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug middle-end/95810] Spurious UBSan warning when computing the opposite of the absolute value of INT_MIN

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95810 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc

[Bug c++/95813] New: Making static member function a coroutine may cause "defined but not used" warning for destroy(frame*) function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95813 Bug ID: 95813 Summary: Making static member function a coroutine may cause "defined but not used" warning for destroy(frame*) function Product: gcc Version:

[Bug fortran/95614] ICE in build_field, at fortran/trans-common.c:301

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95614 Ev Drikos changed: What|Removed |Added CC||drikosev at gmail dot com --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/95804] ice in generate_code_for_partition, at tree-loop-distribution.c:1323

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95804 --- Comment #2 from bin cheng --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Confirmed. We seem to end up with a reduction partition not in the last > position thus miss some required partition merging. Sorry for the breakage. Whew, this

[Bug bootstrap/94998] GCC 10 won't configure for host=x86, build!=host, linker=bfd due to CET

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener

[Bug middle-end/95810] Spurious UBSan warning when computing the opposite of the absolute value of INT_MIN

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95810 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |middle-end --- Comment #1 from Andrew

[Bug other/95811] configure fails when crossing to x86_64: checking for CET support...configure: error: cannot run test program while cross compiling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95811 Sergei Trofimovich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/94998] GCC 10 won't configure for host=x86, build!=host, linker=bfd due to CET

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998 Sergei Trofimovich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||slyfox at inbox dot ru --- Comment

[Bug fortran/95812] [10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_dep_resolver since r10-2114

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95812 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Keywords|

[Bug bootstrap/95805] [11 regression] gcc/recog.h:301:30: error: too many arguments to function call, expected 1, have 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95805 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC|rsandifo at sources dot redhat.com |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/95804] ice in generate_code_for_partition, at tree-loop-distribution.c:1323

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95804 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unknown |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/95801] Optimiser does not exploit the fact that an integer divisor cannot be zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95801 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 48768 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48768=edit prototype Here is the WIP patch, work is suspended. There may be a duplicate bug about this.

[Bug tree-optimization/95801] Optimiser does not exploit the fact that an integer divisor cannot be zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95801 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- I have a patch exploiting this but it faces some correctness issues in the propagators where some of them instantiate the assumptions before simplifying the stmts themselves.

  1   2   >