[Bug c++/102184] New: Explicit template instantiation is wrongly considered as specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102184 Bug ID: 102184 Summary: Explicit template instantiation is wrongly considered as specialization Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/102182] Runtime error for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float16.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102182 --- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu --- during pass_expand we got (debug_insn 24 23 0 (debug_marker) "test1.c":10:3 -1 (nil)) ;; fv2.1_3 ={v} fv2; (insn 25 24 0 (set (reg:HF 84 [ fv2.1_3 ]) (mem/v/c:HF (symbol_ref:SI ("fv2.1") [flags

[Bug middle-end/102183] New: sccvn compare predicated result issue in vn_nary_op_insert_into

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102183 Bug ID: 102183 Summary: sccvn compare predicated result issue in vn_nary_op_insert_into Product: gcc Version: tree-ssa Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/50994] wanted: interface for querying cache size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50994 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/44089] [vect256] gfortran.dg/vect/pr33301.f failed with -O3 -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44089 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Status|UNC

[Bug target/102182] Runtime error for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float16.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102182 --- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu --- Reproduced case. #include int main (void) { static volatile unsigned int ivin, ivout; static volatile _Float16 fv1, fv2; ivin = ((unsigned int)1); fv1 = ((unsigned int)1); fv2 = ivin; ivout = fv2;

[Bug target/29778] missed optimization: model missing vec_pack/unpack idioms for ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29778 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/17217] not removing removal of nested structs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17217 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|2005-01-25 03:37:

[Bug target/102182] Runtime error for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float16.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102182 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #1

[Bug target/102182] New: Runtime error for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float16.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102182 Bug ID: 102182 Summary: Runtime error for gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-float16.c Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code

[Bug c++/83060] ICE on valid C++ code: in ignore_overflows, at cp/cvt.c:583

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83060 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.4 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/96280] g++.dg/cpp2a/nontype-subob1.C FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96280 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/102166] [i386] AMX intrinsics and macros not defined in C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102166 --- Comment #12 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:259945a0a4880b66f93f71eebe70f78c91e02d5e commit r11-8953-g259945a0a4880b66f93f71eebe70f78c91e02d5e Author: liuhongt Date:

[Bug target/102166] [i386] AMX intrinsics and macros not defined in C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102166 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:de6795bbf58c7085933a1f86a88d8193ea72e26b commit r12-3323-gde6795bbf58c7085933a1f86a88d8193ea72e26b Author: liuhongt Date: Thu Sep

[Bug middle-end/101157] [12 regression] ICE compiling gcc.target/powerpc/stack-limit.c after r12-1702

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101157 --- Comment #6 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- The stack limit test case mostly has worked since just after this was opened (one short span where it failed again) but I don't know what fixed it. The other test case has worked fine since just

[Bug middle-end/24049] [4.1 regression] compiler error: Segmentation fault In function 'DESX_CBCUpdate'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24049 Bug 24049 depends on bug 21805, which changed state. Bug 21805 Summary: loop optimizers are not GC safe https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21805 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/21805] loop optimizers are not GC safe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21805 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Keywords|

[Bug middle-end/101157] [12 regression] ICE compiling gcc.target/powerpc/stack-limit.c after r12-1702

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101157 --- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner --- Are the ppc tests and s390 bootstrap still broken?

[Bug target/97142] __builtin_fmod not optimized on POWER

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97142 --- Comment #15 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Patch updated: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/578740.html

[Bug target/101849] MMA built-in dies with a verify_gimple failed error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101849 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/101849] MMA built-in dies with a verify_gimple failed error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101849 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:de2114d2f1792beae55dccb512c4c521b934e72b commit r10-10091-gde2114d2f1792beae55dccb512c4c521b934e72b Author: Peter Bergner

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] [11 Regression] arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct fails at -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||11.2.0 Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947 Bug 53947 depends on bug 98908, which changed state. Bug 98908 Summary: [11 Regression] arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct fails at -O3 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 What|R

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] [11 Regression] arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct fails at -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Failure to optimize |[11 Regression] arithmetic

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 --- Comment #9 from Gabriel Ravier --- PS: I had missed at the time that the bug wasn't present in GCC 10/9/8 though, so perhaps it should be considered as having been a GCC 11 regression that got fixed in trunk ?

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 --- Comment #8 from Gabriel Ravier --- Well, fixing a bug filed in 2021 in GCC 9 seems quite hard. Are you confused about the nature of the bug ? The first example in the description *is* the one whose optimization the bug is about, and it is the

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947 Bug 53947 depends on bug 98908, which changed state. Bug 98908 Summary: Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug testsuite/88697] New test case gcc.target/powerpc/pr88457.c in r267307 fails because of glibc requirement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88697 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/82477] New testcase cold-1.c fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82477 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug testsuite/66831] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/iinline-attr-2.c scan-assembler p2align

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66831 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/53665] test g++.dg/abi/mangle50.C has duplicate scan-assembler lines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53665 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug testsuite/53981] gcc.dg/20020201-1.c fails with Android NDK

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53981 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug testsuite/53981] gcc.dg/20020201-1.c fails with Android NDK

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53981 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 --- Comment #6 from Gabriel Ravier --- Also the second example wasn't misoptimized, on the contrary it was the most reasonable portable function I could write that would work equivalently to the first *and* that GCC would optimize ideally.

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 --- Comment #5 from Gabriel Ravier --- It may have been doing it in GCC 8 (and 9, and 10), but it didn't in 11, and presumably this was also the case in trunk back in February.

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- The second function is able to be optimized since GCC 9 with bswap producing: load_dst_16 = MEM [(unsigned char *)&x];

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinsk

[Bug testsuite/41666] FAIL: g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/ scan-assembler-times "main".*external name 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41666 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/98908] Failure to optimize arithmetic involving struct members into operating on the entire struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98908 --- Comment #2 from Gabriel Ravier --- This seems to have been fixed in trunk.

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100917 --- Comment #8 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- There is a workaround for this included in commit 93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 that doesn't fully solve the problem: when "long double" and "float128" are different types with the s

[Bug fortran/100914] Bind(c): errors handling complex

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100914 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug testsuite/68969] gcc.dg/vect/pr66636.c and gcc.dg/vect/pr68305.c have the wrong condition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68969 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug testsuite/98874] PowerPC test gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/pr80108-1.f90 uses wrong dg-options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98874 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-09-02 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug testsuite/90720] g++.dg/lto/alias-1 FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90720 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/100914] Bind(c): errors handling complex

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100914 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 commit r12-3321-g93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 Author: Sandra Loosemore Dat

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100917 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 commit r12-3321-g93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 Author: Sandra Loosemore Dat

[Bug fortran/100907] Bind(c): failure handling wide character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100907 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 commit r12-3321-g93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 Author: Sandra Loosemore Dat

[Bug fortran/100916] Bind(c): CFI_type_other unimplemented.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100916 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 commit r12-3321-g93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 Author: Sandra Loosemore Dat

[Bug fortran/100911] Bind(c): failure handling C_PTR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100911 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 commit r12-3321-g93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 Author: Sandra Loosemore Dat

[Bug fortran/100915] Bind(c): failure handling C_FUNPTR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100915 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 commit r12-3321-g93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 Author: Sandra Loosemore Dat

[Bug libstdc++/102181] std::advance and std::views::iota don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102181 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org Ev

[Bug target/96791] ICE in convert_mode_scalar, at expr.c:412

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96791 --- Comment #25 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #24) > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #23) > > Anyway, patch in testing. > > Did your patch fix the problem or do we need to take another run at th

[Bug target/97142] __builtin_fmod not optimized on POWER

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97142 --- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #13) > (In reply to luoxhu from comment #12) > > Patch submitted: > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-April/568143.html > > Looks like Will r

[Bug target/95969] Use of __builtin_aarch64_im_lane_boundsi in AArch64 arm_neon.h interferes with gimple optimisation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95969 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #51397|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/96791] ICE in convert_mode_scalar, at expr.c:412

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96791 --- Comment #24 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #23) > Anyway, patch in testing. Did your patch fix the problem or do we need to take another run at this?

[Bug libstdc++/102181] std::advance and std::views::iota don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102181 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/97142] __builtin_fmod not optimized on POWER

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97142 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma

[Bug libstdc++/102181] std::advance and std::views::iota don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102181 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/iterator/advance says "InputIt must meet the requirements of LegacyInputIterator." https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/named_req/InputIterator gives a sample concept you ca

[Bug libstdc++/102181] std::advance and std::views::iota don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102181 --- Comment #3 from Raffael Casagrande --- thanks for the fast response. I can switch over to std::ranges::advance. MSVC compiles the snippet without problems...

[Bug libstdc++/102181] std::advance and std::views::iota don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102181 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- You need to use std::ranges::advance here, because iota_view is "special". The reason std::advance doesn't work is that the type of v.begin() does not meet the Cpp17InputIterator requirements, because its

[Bug libstdc++/102181] std::advance and std::views::iota don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102181 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- It compiles with -std=gnu++20 but not -std=c++20

[Bug target/102173] [12 Regression] ICEs gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/general-c/type_redef_1.c after recent error recovery patch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102173 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch URL|

[Bug target/95969] Use of __builtin_aarch64_im_lane_boundsi in AArch64 arm_neon.h interferes with gimple optimisation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95969 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- Testcases that fail: gcc.target/aarch64/vmov_n_1.c at -O1:t.c: In function ‘test_vmov_n_f32’: t.c:165:10: error: missing definition for SSA_NAME: .MEM_161 in statement: # VUSE <.MEM_161> _162 = BIT_FIELD_REF

[Bug libstdc++/102181] New: std::advance and std::views::iota don't work

to v = std::ranges::iota_view(static_cast(0), static_cast(100)); auto b = v.begin(); std::advance(b, static_cast(1)); } gcc version: 12.0.0 20210901 (experimental) Error messages: /opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20210902/include/c++/12.0.0/bits/stl_iterator_base_funcs.h: In instantiation of '

[Bug fortran/102180] New: Improve checking of assume size array spec

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102180 Bug ID: 102180 Summary: Improve checking of assume size array spec Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fo

[Bug target/102173] [12 Regression] ICEs gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/general-c/type_redef_1.c after recent error recovery patch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102173 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #2) > Appeared after r12-3278 g:823685221de986afb729910a6f2237f07a377f17 Yes caused by r12-3278.

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 102179, which changed state. Bug 102179 Summary: ICE during dom: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102179 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/102152] [12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst in cprop_operand, at tree-ssa-dom.c:1715

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102152 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/102179] ICE during dom: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102179 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug tree-optimization/102179] New: ICE during dom: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102179 Bug ID: 102179 Summary: ICE during dom: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/101849] MMA built-in dies with a verify_gimple failed error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101849 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:585667735e9fb7a38357a84d4d25206a8ccec576 commit r11-8951-g585667735e9fb7a38357a84d4d25206a8ccec576 Author: Peter Bergner

[Bug fortran/93834] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in trans_caf_is_present, at fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:8469

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93834 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot

[Bug target/102154] [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 since r12-3277-gd2874d905647a1d146dafa60199d440e837adc4d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102154 --- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #13) > Is this also the cause of several libstdc++ FAILs on ppc64le? Yes. I have asked for reversion of g:d2874d905647:

[Bug c++/102177] Implement C++17 P0418R2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102177 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dba1ab212292839572fda60df00965e094a11252 commit r12-3317-gdba1ab212292839572fda60df00965e094a11252 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug pch/71934] pch cannot be disabled so gcc cannot be position independent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug target/87198] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2304

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/102154] [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 since r12-3277-gd2874d905647a1d146dafa60199d440e837adc4d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102154 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely --- Is this also the cause of several libstdc++ FAILs on ppc64le? /home/jwakely/build/powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h:2936: error: unrecognizable insn: (insn 11 10 12 2 (set

[Bug target/96127] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2294

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96127 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Andreas, do you need to backport this, or should it be closed as fixed for 11.0?

[Bug tree-optimization/96615] Failure to optimize out loop that eventually ends but has no side effects involving decrease of loop counter using an unsigned operation and the loop being done through r

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96615 --- Comment #3 from Gabriel Ravier --- It seems to be optimized into nothing as of right now

[Bug tree-optimization/102178] New: SPECFP 2006 470.lbm regressions on AMD Zen CPUs after r12-897-gde56f95afaaa22

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102178 Bug ID: 102178 Summary: SPECFP 2006 470.lbm regressions on AMD Zen CPUs after r12-897-gde56f95afaaa22 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/95187] Failure to optimize bool check into consecutive literals

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95187 --- Comment #3 from Gabriel Ravier --- Seems to be fixed since GCC 11

[Bug tree-optimization/17506] [4.0/4.1 Regression] warning about uninitialized variable points to wrong location

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17506 --- Comment #37 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9695e1c23be5b5c55d572ced152897313ddb96ae commit r12-3315-g9695e1c23be5b5c55d572ced152897313ddb96ae Author: Martin Sebor Date: Thu

[Bug testsuite/37182] [4.4 Regression] Revision 139286 caused gcc.dg/pr17506.c and gcc.dg/uninit-15.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37182 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9695e1c23be5b5c55d572ced152897313ddb96ae commit r12-3315-g9695e1c23be5b5c55d572ced152897313ddb96ae Author: Martin Sebor Date: Thu

[Bug c++/102177] Implement C++17 P0418R2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102177 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 51406 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51406&action=edit gcc12-pr102177.patch Untested patch to remove the warning and just use maximum for success if weaker than fail

[Bug c++/102177] Implement C++17 P0418R2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102177 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug target/61359] GCC Bootstrap comparison failures on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.23

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61359 --- Comment #7 from Larkin Nickle --- For anyone finding this in the future, I'm guessing 32-bit builds of GCC on HP-UX+PA-RISC were just broken for a while. Building 5.5.0 with libquadmath enabled worked fine.

[Bug c++/102177] Implement C++17 P0418R2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102177 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-09-02 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/102177] New: Implement C++17 P0418R2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102177 Bug ID: 102177 Summary: Implement C++17 P0418R2 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee:

[Bug middle-end/102162] Byte-wise access optimized away at -O1 and above

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102162 --- Comment #31 from deller at gmx dot de --- Richard suggested that adding a compiler optimization barrier (__asm__ ("" : "+r" (__pptr))) might fix the problem. I tested the attached patch and it works nicely.

[Bug middle-end/102162] Byte-wise access optimized away at -O1 and above

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102162 --- Comment #30 from deller at gmx dot de --- Created attachment 51405 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51405&action=edit Linux kernel patch to add compiler optimization barrier Linux kernel boots sucessfully with this patch

[Bug pch/71934] pch cannot be disabled so gcc cannot be position independent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 fr

[Bug c++/96286] Unhelpful errors after a failed static_assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96286 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #5) > I get better results if I add the static_assert to __uninitialized_copy_a, > so we hit it before queuing any further instantiations. I actually need to check t

[Bug tree-optimization/102176] BB SLP scalar costing is off with extern promoted nodes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102176 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 51404 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51404&action=edit patch This brute-force approach of re-computing something like PURE_SLP_STMT minus the set of defs used in ex

[Bug target/102173] [12 Regression] ICEs gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/general-c/type_redef_1.c after recent error recovery patch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102173 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/96286] Unhelpful errors after a failed static_assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96286 --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 51403 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51403&action=edit patch to stop compiling a function after static_assert

[Bug c++/96286] Unhelpful errors after a failed static_assert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96286 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 51402 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51402&action=edit patch to silence constexpr issues with erroneous functions Here are a couple of other commits I tried to reduce

[Bug tree-optimization/102176] BB SLP scalar costing is off with extern promoted nodes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102176 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- So in this case we have _2 = _1 * a_11(D) still pure_slp even though it does not participate in any vectorized SLP node. Unfortunately marking of PURE_SLP_STMTs happens before analyzing operations (the vec

[Bug tree-optimization/102176] BB SLP scalar costing is off with extern promoted nodes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102176 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/102176] New: BB SLP scalar costing is off with extern promoted nodes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102176 Bug ID: 102176 Summary: BB SLP scalar costing is off with extern promoted nodes Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

  1   2   >