[Bug c++/52202] [C++11][DR 1376] Should not extend lifetime of temporary wrapped in static_cast to reference type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52202 --- Comment #5 from Jens Maurer --- Core issue 1299 resolved via http://wg21.link/p0727 does in fact lifetime-extend the temporary in the example. This bug report should therefore be closed without action. (If a test case is missing that lifetim

[Bug target/99905] [8/9/10/11 Regression] wrong code with -mno-mmx -mno-sse since r7-4540-gb229ab2a712ccd44

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99905 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10/11 Regression]

[Bug target/99924] [11 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040 since r11-6734-gad2603433853129e847cade5e269c6a5f889a020

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99924 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Known to fail|

[Bug target/99924] [11 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040 since r11-6734-gad2603433853129e847cade5e269c6a5f889a020

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99924 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug bootstrap/99920] [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug bootstrap/99920] [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Could you please attach preprocessed source so that I can try to look at it quickly with a cross-compiler? Thanks.

[Bug c/99872] [11 Regression] optimizations sometimes lead to missing asm prefixes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99872 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/99873] [11 Regression] GCC no longer makes as much use of ST3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99873 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener

[Bug c++/99845] gcc8: Overloaded operator new[](size_t, const std::nothrow_t&) is seg faulting when the allocation fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845 Keith Halligan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug sanitizer/99877] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Crash in GIMPLE pass:sanopt in huge function using OpenMP since r8-7544-gd838c2d5a8b1844c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99877 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.5 Priority|P3

[Bug tree-optimization/99880] [10/11 Regression] ICE in maybe_set_vectorized_backedge_value, at tree-vect-loop.c:9161 since r10-3711-g69f8c1aef5cdcc54

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99880 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/99926] New: Parameter packs and variadic arguments: Clang, gcc, and msvc differ on this one

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99926 Bug ID: 99926 Summary: Parameter packs and variadic arguments: Clang, gcc, and msvc differ on this one Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/99881] Regression compare -O2 -ftree-vectorize with -O2 on SKX/CLX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99881 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-* --- Comment #3 from Richard

[Bug tree-optimization/99887] Failure to optimize log2 pattern to clz

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99887 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/99887] Failure to optimize log2 pattern to clz

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99887 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug target/99905] [8/9/10/11 Regression] wrong code with -mno-mmx -mno-sse since r7-4540-gb229ab2a712ccd44

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99905 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/99908] SIMD: negating logical + if_else has a suboptimal codegen.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99908 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/99910] [11 Regression] g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_b.C ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99910 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug c++/99911] C++20 adl issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99911 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unknown |11.0 Keywords|

[Bug target/99748] MVE: Wrong code at -O0 with float to integer conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99748 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:16ea7f57891d3fe885ee55b2917208695e184714 commit r11-7999-g16ea7f57891d3fe885ee55b2917208695e184714 Author: Alex Coplan Date: Tue Ap

[Bug c++/99926] Parameter packs and variadic arguments: Clang, gcc, and msvc differ on this one

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99926 --- Comment #1 from Matt Hurd --- Just a correction to the commentary. The variadic after the pack is not unreachable as Richard Smith points out the following code can make the variadic argument reachable if you wrote such evil and it had a name

[Bug target/99748] MVE: Wrong code at -O0 with float to integer conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99748 --- Comment #5 from Alex Coplan --- Fixed on trunk so far, needs a backport to GCC 10.

[Bug c++/99911] C++20 adl issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99911 --- Comment #2 from Denis Yaroshevskiy --- Created attachment 50510 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50510&action=edit Test Case (-std=c++20 -O3)

[Bug c++/99911] C++20 adl issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99911 --- Comment #3 from Denis Yaroshevskiy --- Also removed catch dependency from godbolt if that was the issue: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/1YEoeeP93

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] New: [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 Bug ID: 99927 Summary: [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code

[Bug target/99912] Unnecessary / inefficient spilling of AVX2 ymm registers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99912 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Ke

[Bug c/99872] [11 Regression] optimizations sometimes lead to missing asm prefixes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99872 --- Comment #2 from jyong at gcc dot gnu.org --- No, its the internal compiler symbols like LC5 and _LC6 generated by GCC ignoring the underscore prefix setting for the target, causing GAS to emit them as external undefined symbols. LD fails to fi

[Bug tree-optimization/99918] [9/10/11 Regression] suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99918 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/99919] [9/10/11 Regression] bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized with a _Bool bit-field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99919 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.4

[Bug middle-end/99928] New: [OpenMP] reduction variable in combined target construct wrongly mapped as firstprivate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99928 Bug ID: 99928 Summary: [OpenMP] reduction variable in combined target construct wrongly mapped as firstprivate Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Ke

[Bug target/99924] [11 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040 since r11-6734-gad2603433853129e847cade5e269c6a5f889a020

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99924 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Assignee|un

[Bug tree-optimization/99873] [11 Regression] GCC no longer makes as much use of ST3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99873 --- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > We can also undo the splitting if SLP doesn't work out (keep the original > DR analysis chaining somewhere). Yeah, that sounds like something we s

[Bug target/99924] [11 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040 since r11-6734-gad2603433853129e847cade5e269c6a5f889a020

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99924 --- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Confirmed. I will have a look. It's interesting since the cost model needs to be disabled to reproduce it. It looks like when it is one of the load nodes al

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug middle-end/99928] [OpenMP] reduction variable in combined target construct wrongly mapped as firstprivate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99928 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yes, that is new in OpenMP 5.0, 4.5 didn't have it. Usually we do this in the gimplifier (gimplify_scan_omp_clauses), we also know there whether it is a combined construct or not. Look for the various spots w

[Bug target/99929] New: SVE: Wrong code at -O2 -ftree-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99929 Bug ID: 99929 Summary: SVE: Wrong code at -O2 -ftree-vectorize Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug bootstrap/99920] [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Can't reproduce btw, ../configure --enable-languages=c,fortran,c++ --with-cpu=power7 --enable-bootstrap --enable-multilib on gcc110.fsffrance.org built just fine.

[Bug target/99890] The -mstrict-align doesn't support the ARM targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99890 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/99908] SIMD: negating logical + if_else has a suboptimal codegen.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99908 --- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu --- I'm testing @@ -17759,6 +17759,35 @@ (define_insn "_pblendvb" (set_attr "btver2_decode" "vector,vector,vector") (set_attr "mode" "")]) +(define_split + [(set (match_operand:VI1_AVX2 0 "register_opera

[Bug c++/97900] [9/10 Regression] g++ crashes when instantiating a templated function with a template-type vector parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97900 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffc2331d7994d7fabb1f6ebed931024a9bbe69f2 commit r11-8000-gffc2331d7994d7fabb1f6ebed931024a9bbe69f2 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: Tu

[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka --- > The LTO minor saw a bump around Sep 10 last year already so the object files > must be younger or LTO should complain. > > I'm not aware of any specific change where we forgot the bumping but there > were >

[Bug target/99881] Regression compare -O2 -ftree-vectorize with -O2 on SKX/CLX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99881 --- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > But 2 element construction _should_ be cheap. What is missing is the move > cost from GPR to XMM regs (but we do not have a good idea whether the sources > are me

[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka --- > I only reacall backporting the streaming fixes early in gcc10 timeframe > (August) that was reason for the September bump. > Didn't we backport some new command line options/params breaking > streaming of opt

[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Any *.opt changes can break the streaming of optimization or target option nodes. And from experience with gcc plugins we have such changes ~ each month even on release branches.

Re: [Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

> Any *.opt changes can break the streaming of optimization or target option > nodes. > And from experience with gcc plugins we have such changes ~ each month even on > release branches. It may make sense to add a simple test to our regular testers that either the new revision can consume old objec

[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka --- > Any *.opt changes can break the streaming of optimization or target option > nodes. > And from experience with gcc plugins we have such changes ~ each month even on > release branches. It may make sense to ad

[Bug target/99924] [11 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040 since r11-6734-gad2603433853129e847cade5e269c6a5f889a020

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99924 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:58cd9fc8a61de09ba181c5ed5ac7fb91ec506414 commit r11-8001-g58cd9fc8a61de09ba181c5ed5ac7fb91ec506414 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9

[Bug target/99924] [11 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040 since r11-6734-gad2603433853129e847cade5e269c6a5f889a020

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99924 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/99930] New: Failure to optimize floating point -abs(x) in nontrivial code at -O2/3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99930 Bug ID: 99930 Summary: Failure to optimize floating point -abs(x) in nontrivial code at -O2/3 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/99931] New: Unnamed `struct` defined with `using` having internal linkage instead of external, unlike `typedef`, yielding different semantics for two

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99931 Bug ID: 99931 Summary: Unnamed `struct` defined with `using` having internal linkage instead of external, unlike `typedef`, yielding different semantics for two Product: gcc

[Bug target/99932] New: OpenACC/nvptx offloading execution regressions starting with CUDA 11.2-era Nvidia Driver 460.27.04

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99932 Bug ID: 99932 Summary: OpenACC/nvptx offloading execution regressions starting with CUDA 11.2-era Nvidia Driver 460.27.04 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/96573] [10 Regression] Regression in optimization on x86-64 with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96573 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bfeb36bd03c2168af263daa13370a20a96c42b5d commit r11-8002-gbfeb36bd03c2168af263daa13370a20a96c42b5d Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: Tu

[Bug target/99929] SVE: Wrong code at -O2 -ftree-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99929 --- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan --- Slightly cleaner testcase: #include static void e(short *g, short p2) { *g ^= p2; } static short m[23]; int main() { for (unsigned i = 0; i < 23; ++i) m[i] = 4; if (svaddv(svptrue_pat_b32(SV_VL1), svd

[Bug c/99872] [11 Regression] optimizations sometimes lead to missing asm prefixes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99872 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/99880] [10/11 Regression] ICE in maybe_set_vectorized_backedge_value, at tree-vect-loop.c:9161 since r10-3711-g69f8c1aef5cdcc54

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99880 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- So we're having a PHI latch value vectorized because it's used by the outer loop (vect_used_in_outer_by_reduction), but the vect_nested_cycle def PHI in the inner loop isn't relevant since it's vect_unused_i

[Bug other/99933] New: gcc/brig/brigfrontend/brig-function.cc: 4 * possible performance problem ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99933 Bug ID: 99933 Summary: gcc/brig/brigfrontend/brig-function.cc: 4 * possible performance problem ? Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 --- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka --- > Many of the *.opt changes are target specific, so you'd need to test it also > across all targets, and furthermore it depends on what exactly is being > saved/restored, many options might be at the same spot

[Bug c++/99934] New: bad_array_new_length thrown when non-throwing allocation function would have been used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99934 Bug ID: 99934 Summary: bad_array_new_length thrown when non-throwing allocation function would have been used Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Key

[Bug target/99872] [11 Regression] optimizations sometimes lead to missing asm prefixes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99872 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 50511 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50511&action=edit gcc11-pr99872.patch So perhaps this patch? I went through all ASM_OUTPUT_DEF definitions and all of them use as

[Bug c++/99845] gcc8: Overloaded operator new[](size_t, const std::nothrow_t&) is seg faulting when the allocation fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/99881] Regression compare -O2 -ftree-vectorize with -O2 on SKX/CLX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99881 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #4) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > But 2 element construction _should_ be cheap. What is missing is the move > > cost from GPR to XMM regs (but we d

[Bug rtl-optimization/99930] Failure to optimize floating point -abs(x) in nontrivial code at -O2/3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99930 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug rtl-optimization/99930] Failure to optimize floating point -abs(x) in nontrivial code at -O2/3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99930 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug other/99933] gcc/brig/brigfrontend/brig-function.cc: 4 * possible performance problem ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99933 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pekka.jaaskelainen@parmance

[Bug middle-end/99857] [11 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.c/declare-variant-1.c (test for excess errors) by r11-7926

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99857 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org L

[Bug tree-optimization/99880] [10/11 Regression] ICE in maybe_set_vectorized_backedge_value, at tree-vect-loop.c:9161 since r10-3711-g69f8c1aef5cdcc54

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99880 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e5c170e080399fb3d24a38bbfcd66bd4675abe53 commit r11-8005-ge5c170e080399fb3d24a38bbfcd66bd4675abe53 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/99880] [10 Regression] ICE in maybe_set_vectorized_backedge_value, at tree-vect-loop.c:9161 since r10-3711-g69f8c1aef5cdcc54

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99880 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11 Regression] ICE in |[10 Regression] ICE in

[Bug c++/99934] bad_array_new_length thrown when non-throwing allocation function would have been used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99934 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- For the non-global replaceable operator new call, we put the outer_nelts_check already into the size argument before we actually look up the call: tree errval = TYPE_MAX_VALUE (sizetype); if (cxx_

[Bug bootstrap/99920] [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|-

[Bug demangler/99935] New: Stack exhaustion demangling rust mangled name

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99935 Bug ID: 99935 Summary: Stack exhaustion demangling rust mangled name Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: dema

[Bug bootstrap/99920] [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, seurer at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 > > seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug c++/99936] New: FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header* on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936 Bug ID: 99936 Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header* on Darwin Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug target/99781] [11 Regression] ICE in partial_subreg_p, at rtl.h:3144

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99781 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Vladimir Makarov : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4bbd51afaa4a3c116fb538d912b35e126be80b41 commit r11-8008-g4bbd51afaa4a3c116fb538d912b35e126be80b41 Author: Vladimir N. Makarov D

[Bug bootstrap/99920] [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 10 doesn't require C++11 and so in theory everything from GCC 4.1 till GCC 11 should be supported as system compiler, perhaps we need some workaround for some known bugs somewhere (we have a couple of the

[Bug middle-end/99857] [11 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.c/declare-variant-1.c (test for excess errors) by r11-7926

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99857 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka --- > Honza stated that he's "looking into it", > . I do just got distracted by easter. Problem has to be release_body happening mid offloading st

[Bug c++/96780] debuginfo for std::move and std::forward isn't useful

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96780 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- I think that would be great.

[Bug other/99933] gcc/brig/brigfrontend/brig-function.cc: 4 * possible performance problem ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99933 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Assig

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Before combine it looks fine: (insn 23 22 105 6 (parallel [ (set (reg:SI 108) (udiv:SI (reg:SI 104) (reg/v:SI 102 [ var_6 ]))) (set (reg:SI 107)

[Bug c/99937] New: Optimization needed for ARM with single cycle multiplier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99937 Bug ID: 99937 Summary: Optimization needed for ARM with single cycle multiplier Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug libstdc++/99871] #includes inside push visibility scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99871 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wake

[Bug driver/99896] g++ drops -lc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896 Michael Matz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Trying 105, 107 -> 108: 105: r135:QI=0x1 107: flags:CCZ=cmp(r107:SI,0) 108: r96:QI={(flags:CCZ==0)?r107:SI#0:r135:QI} REG_DEAD r107:SI REG_DEAD flags:CC Failed to match this instruction: (p

[Bug target/99937] Optimization needed for ARM with single cycle multiplier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99937 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |target Keywords|

[Bug target/99937] Optimization needed for ARM with single cycle multiplier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99937 --- Comment #2 from mike.robins at talktalk dot net --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > You need to adjust RTX costing accordingly which likely means adding a new > subtarget tuning. Hi Richard Are you saying that this would have t

[Bug target/99912] Unnecessary / inefficient spilling of AVX2 ymm registers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99912 --- Comment #4 from Erik Schnetter --- I build with the compiler options /Users/eschnett/src/CarpetX/Cactus/view-compilers/bin/g++ -fopenmp -Wall -pipe -g -march=skylake -std=gnu++17 -O3 -fcx-limited-range -fexcess-precision=fast -fno-math-errn

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- It indeed goes wrong in the 105, 107 -> 108 try_combine, but at the start of that we have: (insn 105 23 106 6 (set (reg:QI 135) (const_int 1 [0x1])) "pr99927.c":13:24 77 {*movqi_internal} (nil))

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug c++/96873] Internal compiler error in alias_ctad_tweaks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96873 --- Comment #3 from Mateusz Pusz --- Are there any chances for it to be fixed for gcc-11 or gcc-10.3? This feature is essential for the Physical Units library for C++Next.

[Bug c++/96873] Internal compiler error in alias_ctad_tweaks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96873 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Yeah, hopefully for both.

[Bug c++/96873] Internal compiler error in alias_ctad_tweaks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96873 --- Comment #5 from Mateusz Pusz --- Thanks!

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/99938] New: Non-void function with no return statement: Either no or misleading warning is printed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99938 Bug ID: 99938 Summary: Non-void function with no return statement: Either no or misleading warning is printed Product: gcc Version: 10.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug c++/99938] Non-void function with no return statement: Either no or misleading warning is printed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99938 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic --- Comment #1 from Jonatha

[Bug tree-optimization/99927] [11 Regression] Maybe wrong code since r11-39-gf9e1ea10e657af9f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- distribute_notes has: /* If this register is set or clobbered in I3, put the note there unless there is one already. */ if (reg_set_p (XEXP (note, 0), PATTERN (i3)))

[Bug c++/99938] Non-void function with no return statement: Either no or misleading warning is printed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99938 --- Comment #2 from rschoe at de dot ibm.com --- Created attachment 50514 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50514&action=edit modified example (nullptr), which now shows a warning but wrong line number 11 wgen compiled with g++

[Bug other/99903] 32-bit x86 frontends randomly crash while reporting timing on Windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99903 --- Comment #3 from Alexey Izbyshev --- Crashes eventually occurred with both one- and two-processor affinity masks, so pinning GCC to a single core doesn't help. But I've tracked the reason down. When `get_time()` from `gcc/timevar.c` gets inli

[Bug c/99939] New: CMSE: -march=armv8.1-m.main+mve does not support correctly.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99939 Bug ID: 99939 Summary: CMSE: -march=armv8.1-m.main+mve does not support correctly. Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug bootstrap/99920] [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Resolution|INVALID

  1   2   >