}
int main() {}
***
gcc version:
$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 11.0.1 20210226 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICUL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93353
--- Comment #5 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4)
> I cannot get the reduced testcase to fail. Are any special options needed?
If you've been asking me: no, the compiler invocation posted in comment 0 is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99277
--- Comment #6 from Thiago Macieira ---
We don't have to delay the release. Either of these two patches give us one
more year to get it right:
--- libstdc++-v3/include/bits/atomic_wait.h
+++ libstdc++-v3/include/bits/atomic_wait.h
@@ -32,9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090
--- Comment #5 from Jim Wilson ---
I tested it with a riscv-gnu-toolchain build and check. The 4 -gsplit-dwarf
testcases that fail without the patch work with the patch.
I also tried a build and check with -gsplit-dwarf enabled by default and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99277
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99291
--- Comment #4 from Roland Illig ---
and another one, this time in aarch64.c:
> error ("%<%s%> must be by itself for %<-mharden-sls=%>", str);
This should be %qs as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99291
--- Comment #3 from Roland Illig ---
same file, another one:
> "version of `g` will be omitted, please "
This is far from any coding conventions and should rather be %.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99291
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
Plus, there is a typo:
> %<-march=%s%>: Extension `%s' appear more than one time.
Either it must be 'Extensions' or 'appears'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99291
--- Comment #1 from Roland Illig ---
similarly in common/config/riscv/riscv-common.c:
> %<-march=%s%>: Extension `%s' appear more than one time.
The `%s' is obsolete and should be replaced with %qs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99293
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93353
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I cannot get the reduced testcase to fail. Are any special options needed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99295
--- Comment #1 from Roland Illig ---
The sentence s3 refers to "this property" as well, and for calloc, the
documentation had been wrong for GCC 4 already since that function returns
zero-initalized memory, not uninitialized memory.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99295
Bug ID: 99295
Summary: documentation on __attribute__((malloc)) is wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99282
--- Comment #2 from Fangrui Song ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> There is the __GCC_HAVE_DWARF2_CFI_ASM predefined macro that tells if .cfi*
> directives are used or not. And, inline asm that wishes to be usable in
> both can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49070
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.4 |8.6
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99294
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99294
Bug ID: 99294
Summary: [modules] tdef-inst-1 fails with -fno-module-lazy
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98979
--- Comment #11 from David Edelsohn ---
The failures have been resolved on AIX.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99277
--- Comment #4 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> We've done things this way for years. When C++20 support is no longer
> experimental is when the ABI will be fixed.
Based on the discussion, I've removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93340
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2259e712a6348bd23586dde06cc874a35fdc53c3
commit r9-9252-g2259e712a6348bd23586dde06cc874a35fdc53c3
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93340
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c5ba7770768ed0a7b5d61a3a2fa1625d98be351f
commit r10-9391-gc5ba7770768ed0a7b5d61a3a2fa1625d98be351f
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Making it work is desirable in any case. But, the emitted debug sections will
be in various spots less compact when .uleb128/.sleb128 don't support
non-constant operands.
Though, I'm afraid the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yes. https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2451/62722451/build.log
is the failed i686 bootstrap and
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2553/62722553/build.log is one
with your patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98979
--- Comment #10 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I looked at the most recent powerpc64 runs (all varieties) and it is no longer
failing there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka ---
> FYI, I have today bootstrapped it as well in rpm build on
> {x86_64,i686,powerpc64le}-linux, both your patch and just trunk without the
> workaround I've been using before. The latter failed to bootstrap
> FYI, I have today bootstrapped it as well in rpm build on
> {x86_64,i686,powerpc64le}-linux, both your patch and just trunk without the
> workaround I've been using before. The latter failed to bootstrap on i686
> and passed it on x86_64 and powerpc64le, the former passed bootstrap on all
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
FYI, I have today bootstrapped it as well in rpm build on
{x86_64,i686,powerpc64le}-linux, both your patch and just trunk without the
workaround I've been using before. The latter failed to bootstrap on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Honza, any progress with this?
> If you want, I can test the patch too...
Sorry, it bootstrapped, so I will commit it.
Honza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99293
--- Comment #1 from Steven Munroe ---
Created attachment 50264
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50264=edit
Compile test for simplied test case
Download vec_dummy.c and vec_int128_ppc.h into a local directory and compile
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99293
Bug ID: 99293
Summary: Built-in vec_splat generates sub-optimal code for
-mcpu=power10
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99292
Bug ID: 99292
Summary: FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr98096.c -O0 (test for
excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090
--- Comment #2 from Jim Wilson ---
Yes we could have partial uleb128 support. There is only a problem if at least
one label is in the code section.
There is another proposed solution to add special relaxable relocations for
uleb128 but the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99291
Bug ID: 99291
Summary: maybe_warn_pass_by_reference uses outdated format
string
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99288
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 50262
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50262=edit
gcc11-pr99288.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99288
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97680
--- Comment #10 from Qing Zhao ---
> but it will still fail on all targets but x86_64 (and now powerpc). Qinzhao,
> what's the list of targets this is supported?
I believe that the targets that currently support this feature are:
x86-64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99287
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99290
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-26
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99287
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99290
Bug ID: 99290
Summary: std::filesystem::copy does not always report errors
for recursion
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Answering my own question:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Types.html
INTEGER_TYPE
Used to represent the various integral types, including char, short, int,
long, and long long. This code is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99289
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
On windows, it should get emulated with LockFile win32 api to lock files. Or it
is trash.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99289
Bug ID: 99289
Summary: Process safety issues of libstdc++ verbose
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Possibly a dumb question, but how am I meant to get at the size in bits of a
bitfield? TYPE_SIZE appears to be expressed in bytes, rather than bits (or
maybe I messed up when debugging?)
On a 1-bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99288
--- Comment #1 from Roland Illig ---
same in ipa-devirt.c:
> inform (this_enum.vals[j].locus,
> "name %qs is defined to " HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_DEC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99288
Bug ID: 99288
Summary: xgettext does not get HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_UNSIGNED
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97855
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98979
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> Has this been fixed?
The XFAIL of comment 7 should have fixed the intermittent fails.
* * *
The proper fix was:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99233
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99230
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
I guess cris-elf simply has different type sizes / bitfield layout here. The
dumps hint at sizeof (ubits) == 1 for cris. So you should eventually get
the same on x86_64 when you use unsigned char : ...;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99180
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98996
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98528
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Summary|[11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99277
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] C++2a |C++2a synchronisation is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98979
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #8 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98973
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, this is likely a latent issue, the store-motion code didn't change since
ages and the bisected rev. likely just changed the input to the pass.
So the dump difference is
-(note 76 75 217 19 [bb 19]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 99246, which changed state.
Bug 99246 Summary: [modules] ICE in write_location, at cp/module.cc:15687
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99246
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98718
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
*** Bug 99246 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99246
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98718
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexander.lelyakin@googlema
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 99237, which changed state.
Bug 99237 Summary: [modules] internal compiler error: in write_macro_maps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99237
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99237
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98860
--- Comment #36 from Hannes Domani ---
Note: This is a binutils/ld bug:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27268
And I've sent a patch there:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2021-February/115434.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98920
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #35 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98827
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98803
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98800
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.0|12.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98590
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Looks like the fix was approved here
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-February/564929.html but not yet
committed.
::string_view{
std::source_location::current().function_name() };
}
auto main()->int {
constexpr auto s = f();
constexpr auto x = s.find("int");
}
error message: In file included from
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20210226/include/c++/11.0.1/st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98528
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Any update?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98527
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98318
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Honza, any progress with this?
If you want, I can test the patch too...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99277
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97680
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97680
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64*-linux-gnu,powerp |arm
|c-apple-darwin,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97679
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97490
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95757
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||85316
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99199
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99194
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99123
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98891
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.0|10.3
Summary|[11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71812
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90319
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|10.0, 9.0 |10.1.0, 10.2.0, 9.3.1
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99281
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.0
Known to fail|11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99281
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c173346aac4a66ad3747f380f2f0c97d2dbf8973
commit r11-7420-gc173346aac4a66ad3747f380f2f0c97d2dbf8973
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99282
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99286
Bug ID: 99286
Summary: ivopts don't select the best candidates with -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234
--- Comment #18 from Liu Hao ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #17)
>
> That would certainly need : "xmm5" in clobbers (etc.).
> And isn't really portable anyway, the compiler can choose to put
> anything into %xmm6 in between that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99254
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Liu Hao from comment #15)
> Thanks. The 'Final fix' looks good to me.
>
> I applied it locally and built GCC. With a debugger, I verified that after
> the try-catch statement, all non-volatile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98942
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
