[Bug other/101425] [12 Regression] AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow at candidates_list_and_hint since r12-1903-gaf9987e817f54806

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101425 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug other/101425] New: [12 Regression] AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow at candidates_list_and_hint since r12-1903-gaf9987e817f54806

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101425 Bug ID: 101425 Summary: [12 Regression] AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow at candidates_list_and_hint since r12-1903-gaf9987e817f54806 Product: gcc Version:

[Bug target/101424] [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2771 since r12-2085-gf65878178ab05180

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101424 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-12 Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/101424] New: [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2771 since r12-2085-gf65878178ab05180

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101424 Bug ID: 101424 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2771 since r12-2085-gf65878178ab05180 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Ke

[Bug tree-optimization/101423] [12 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:7113 since r12-1951-ga3aaba68405751ba

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101423 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Created attachment 51134 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51134&action=edit GCDA profile

[Bug tree-optimization/101423] New: [12 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:7113 since r12-1951-ga3aaba68405751ba

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101423 Bug ID: 101423 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:7113 since r12-1951-ga3aaba68405751ba Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONF

[Bug target/100909] [12 Regression] powerpc64le: Regression causing unexpected error with IBM long double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100909 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- > Hi Martin, any status on how your patch worked out? Hello. Waiting for Segher to reply and I've just pinged that right now.

[Bug ipa/101354] [11/12 regression] naked function mishandled - store optimized away

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101354 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug c++/101331] [12 Regression] ICE in sanitize_coverage_p, at asan.h:259

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101331 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug target/101324] powerpc64le: hashst appears before mflr at -O1 or higher

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101324 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC|mliska at suse dot cz |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ev

[Bug jit/87808] gcc_lib_dir is missing from libgccjit's search path when driver is not installed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87808 Sergei Trofimovich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comme

[Bug fortran/100917] Bind(c): errors handling long double real

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100917 --- Comment #6 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- I've been thinking some more about this issue. It seems to me that a "proper" solution is either (1) Add a kind field to the GFC descriptor or (2) Do away with GFC descriptors and use the C descr

[Bug inline-asm/101422] register variable uninitialised before passing to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101422 --- Comment #5 from Simon Willcocks --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > (In reply to Simon Willcocks from comment #2) > > That's not an accurate description of the problem; the value of the variable > > is being passed, not its add

[Bug inline-asm/101422] register variable uninitialised before passing to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101422 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pins

[Bug inline-asm/101422] register variable uninitialised before passing to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101422 --- Comment #3 from Simon Willcocks --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) But thanks for your quick response!

[Bug inline-asm/101422] register variable uninitialised before passing to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101422 Simon Willcocks changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Simon Willc

[Bug inline-asm/101422] register variable uninitialised before passing to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101422 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/101422] New: register variable uninitialised before passing to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101422 Bug ID: 101422 Summary: register variable uninitialised before passing to asm Product: gcc Version: 10.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Com

[Bug c++/101421] New: ICE: in lookup_template_class_1, at cp/pt.c:10005

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101421 Bug ID: 101421 Summary: ICE: in lookup_template_class_1, at cp/pt.c:10005 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug c++/101420] ICE in build_special_member_call, at cp/call.c:10179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101420 --- Comment #2 from Avi Kivity --- Simplified command line: g++ -march=westmere --std=c++20 -fext-numeric-literals ice.cc

[Bug c++/101420] ICE in build_special_member_call, at cp/call.c:10179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101420 --- Comment #1 from Avi Kivity --- File is in https://scratch.scylladb.com/ice.cc (too large to upload to bugzilla). I'll try to reduce it a little.

[Bug c++/101420] New: ICE in build_special_member_call, at cp/call.c:10179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101420 Bug ID: 101420 Summary: ICE in build_special_member_call, at cp/call.c:10179 Product: gcc Version: 11.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Comp

[Bug c/101419] New: collapsing memset() calls can break __builtin_object_size()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101419 Bug ID: 101419 Summary: collapsing memset() calls can break __builtin_object_size() Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug gcov-profile/101418] New: [Gcov] there is the executed line code in dead code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101418 Bug ID: 101418 Summary: [Gcov] there is the executed line code in dead code Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug gcov-profile/101417] New: [Gcov] an unexecuted if statement leads to incorrect coverage of a return statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101417 Bug ID: 101417 Summary: [Gcov] an unexecuted if statement leads to incorrect coverage of a return statement Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug gcov-profile/101416] New: [Gcov] wrong coverage for an if statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101416 Bug ID: 101416 Summary: [Gcov] wrong coverage for an if statement Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: gcov-p

[Bug middle-end/101415] New: [12 Regression] Bogus -Warray-bounds warning with stpcpy

^~ with -O2 -Wall on x86-64 gcc version 12.0.0 20210711 (experimental) [master revision :97a8a2829:269256f33c51222167ad461f775d5468bb5ecaf5]. The warning is bogus because stpcpy returns a pointer to the NUL byte, which is not at the first byte of __nisgroup after the stpcpy. Th

[Bug c++/101361] Bogus -Wstringop-overread warning with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361 --- Comment #2 from Theodore.Papadopoulo at inria dot fr --- Same problem here with the attached test case and gcc version 11.1.1 20210531 (Red Hat 11.1.1-3).

[Bug c++/101361] Bogus -Wstringop-overread warning with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361 Theodore.Papadopoulo at inria dot fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Theodore.Papadopou

[Bug libstdc++/101406] poor codegen for shared_ptr copy & destory, compared to boost::shared_ptr and libc++'s implementation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101406 --- Comment #1 from Marc Mutz --- Comparison to the other two major standard library implementations: https://godbolt.org/z/crPo44rxo

[Bug gcov-profile/101414] New: [Gcov] a label statement has incorrect coverage due to an if statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101414 Bug ID: 101414 Summary: [Gcov] a label statement has incorrect coverage due to an if statement Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug gcov-profile/101413] New: [Gcov] wrong coverage for a return statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101413 Bug ID: 101413 Summary: [Gcov] wrong coverage for a return statement Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: gco

[Bug gcov-profile/101412] New: [Gcov] an if statement leads to incorrect coverage of the case statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101412 Bug ID: 101412 Summary: [Gcov] an if statement leads to incorrect coverage of the case statement Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug libstdc++/101411] New: missing constraint in std::as_writable_bytes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101411 Bug ID: 101411 Summary: missing constraint in std::as_writable_bytes Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lib

[Bug gcov-profile/101410] New: [Gcov] wrong coverage for a "default" statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101410 Bug ID: 101410 Summary: [Gcov] wrong coverage for a "default" statement Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: