https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53902
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://www.illumos.org/issues/3800
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |MOVED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93931
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||8.4.0, 9.3.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95028
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93931
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fytch at protonmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 95028, which changed state.
Bug 95028 Summary: ICE in g++ (Arch Linux 9.3.0-1) 9.3.0 with captured OMP
reduce clause in lambda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95028
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98715
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58646
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alserkli at inbox dot ru
--- Comment #14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16994
Bug 16994 depends on bug 98715, which changed state.
Bug 98715 Summary: ICE in make_decl_rtl with double variable length array (VLA)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98715
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102551
Bug ID: 102551
Summary: Failing compile-time comparison of std::type_info
addresses
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102551
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid, wrong-code
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102551
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102496
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:701075864ac4d1c6cec936d10f9cfc2aeb8c1699
commit r12-4032-g701075864ac4d1c6cec936d10f9cfc2aeb8c1699
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102548
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64697
--- Comment #25 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:021ad8e5cf9ab66e1a0a41dce3a54586facb86e0
commit r12-4036-g021ad8e5cf9ab66e1a0a41dce3a54586facb86e0
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64697
--- Comment #26 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:618b7cb3b3fb4d2d92434d31ea8b6746ffef2572
commit r11-9049-g618b7cb3b3fb4d2d92434d31ea8b6746ffef2572
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64697
--- Comment #27 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:48e24ff39b16c072cd58bdad1a5668794453af5f
commit r10-10158-g48e24ff39b16c072cd58bdad1a5668794453af5f
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64697
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102546
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-01
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102546
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> I think it's similar to in the other PR, with old EVRP when visiting BB 8
BTW, which is this other PR, so I may see if my work for this PR fixes that
one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102546
--- Comment #7 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #6)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > I think it's similar to in the other PR, with old EVRP when visiting BB 8
>
> BTW, which is this other PR, so I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102460
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Thanks! So it's really a Fortran issue
(gdb) p startloc.line
$8 = 7
(gdb) p end_line
$9 = 6
Can please anybody from Fortran FE guys help me here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85146
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77869
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67164
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91538
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83138
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97050
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.3.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97468
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tangyixuan at mail dot
dlut.edu.cn
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63578
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppluzhnikov at google dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94437
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97377
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gatk555 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102515
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=99
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71740
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||6.1.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71740
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102515
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 51529
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51529&action=edit
gcc12-pr102515.patch
I have one too, even bootstrapped/regtested overnight, just didn't get to
writing new tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101914
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
GCC 6 rejected the code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86661
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.5 |9.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102515
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 51529 [details]
> gcc12-pr102515.patch
>
> I have one too, even bootstrapped/regtested overnight, just didn't get to
> writing new testcases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102515
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51530
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51530&action=edit
patch
For reference, this is my patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12277
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101043
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-06-14 00:00:00 |2021-10-1
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102447
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102445
Bug 102445 depends on bug 102447, which changed state.
Bug 102447 Summary: std::regex incorrectly accepts invalid bracket expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102447
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101043
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101239
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||24663
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101343
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95317
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tim at ngus dot net
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102544
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Stubbs ---
That output shows that we have the correct libgomp and rocm is installed and
working. Libgomp initialized the GCN plugin, but did not attempt to initialize
the device (the next message in the output should h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102542
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeffreyalaw at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102552
Bug ID: 102552
Summary: i386 failing tests after
r12-4038-g6de9f0c13b27c34336587da19d03200f8cc6bcd5
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102552
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Maybe binutils version difference?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102542
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #5)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #4)
> > On Thu, 30 Sep 2021, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> Thanks for the loop explanation. It's quite help
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102515
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c1a633d96926357155d4702b66f8a0ec856a81f
commit r12-4042-g9c1a633d96926357155d4702b66f8a0ec856a81f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102496
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 regression] extern |[11 regression] extern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102504
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102546
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod ---
On 10/1/21 5:18 AM, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102546
>
> Aldy Hernandez changed:
>
> What|Removed |Added
> -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102538
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Testcase for the wrong-code:
struct X { union { char r8[8]; int r32[2]; }; };
struct Y { X v[1]; };
Y x = { { { .r32 = { 5, 6 } } } };
int
main ()
{
if (x.v[0].r32[0] != 5 || x.v[0].r32[1] != 6)
__bui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102552
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
No, it's related to fact that:
bool
parse_optimize_options (tree args, bool attr_p)
{
...
/* Build up argv vector. Just in case the string is stored away, use garbage
collected strings. */
vec_saf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102552
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Oh, it's because it calls eventually decode_cmdline_options_to_array that skips
the first argument (program name).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102552
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5051fad8582fcbdd0844232b5a8c4e856be5e5a4
commit r12-4045-g5051fad8582fcbdd0844232b5a8c4e856be5e5a4
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102552
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102553
Bug ID: 102553
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault for struct
based parameter of template
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102553
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||unlvsur at live dot com
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102553
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-01
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102507
Indu Bhagat changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ibhagat at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102553
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102542
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:46 PM rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
> > Could I inconvenience you to tweak this function with your insight? It's a
> > tiny function, and it seems you're much more qualified
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102538
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102538
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, the above mentioned reshape* change results in the r32 index of d->cur
being ignored when recursing into the anonymous union.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102553
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> Can you compile it with clang?
yes I can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102553
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> Can you compile it with clang?
msvc, clang they all work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101783
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7c99923f8c544ec07109e8333acb2c2388c38a1b
commit r12-4051-g7c99923f8c544ec07109e8333acb2c2388c38a1b
Author: qingzhe huang
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102554
Bug ID: 102554
Summary: [ 10/11/12 Regresion ] Inlining missed at -O3 with
non-default --param=early-inlining-insns and pragma
optimize
Product: gcc
Version: 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86968
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86968
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90378
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 90378, which changed state.
Bug 90378 Summary: [9/10/11/12 regression] -Os -flto miscompiles 454.calculix
after r266385 on Arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90378
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102555
Bug ID: 102555
Summary: missing -Waddress comparing &p[0] to zero
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #15 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> Because the variable doesn't need to be addressable.
>
> OK, so the issue is likely that we're probing the lhs with EXPAND_WRITE but
> when we ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102556
Bug ID: 102556
Summary: equality comparison of a [static N] parameter to null
not folded
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102557
Bug ID: 102557
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault signal
terminated program cc1plus (indefinite recursion in
modref_ref_node::insert_access)
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102558
Bug ID: 102558
Summary: missing warning comparing T[static N] to null
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #16 from Qing Zhao ---
> On Oct 1, 2021, at 1:51 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
> wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
>
> --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
> Because the variable doesn't need to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102557
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
Semi-reduced testcase for the reference:
#include
void
test01 (char *mname)
{
std::istringstream iss;
iss.str (mname);
iss.str (mname);
}
% g++-12.0.0 -std=c++20 -O3 -fopenacc --param max-inline-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102559
Bug ID: 102559
Summary: missing warning comparing result of a nonnull function
to null
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102544
--- Comment #4 from miko at predsci dot com ---
The result is:
v is -1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100734
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by John David Anglin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:356390c14aa70a95c15845512f2381b627cf9a96
commit r11-9051-g356390c14aa70a95c15845512f2381b627cf9a96
Author: John David
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102544
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Stubbs ---
Sorry, I should have said to compile with -fopenacc.
If you did do that, please post the GCN_DEBUG output.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102283
--- Comment #5 from Giuseppe D'Angelo ---
(Sorry for the delay)
Thank you for the analysis. I'm now not really sure if GCC is doing something
wrong (vs Clang/MSVC). Feel free to close/suspend this task if you strongly
believe GCC is right here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102373
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by John David Anglin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f1710910087fb1f4a7706e9ce838163ffcbc50b4
commit r12-4058-gf1710910087fb1f4a7706e9ce838163ffcbc50b4
Author: John David Anglin
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102373
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by John David Anglin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aac3b6a7e3a7b810005343e62e6822338fcb85d4
commit r11-9052-gaac3b6a7e3a7b810005343e62e6822338fcb85d4
Author: John David
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102373
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102103
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4dc7ce6fb3917958d1a6036d8acf2953b9c1b868
commit r12-4059-g4dc7ce6fb3917958d1a6036d8acf2953b9c1b868
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102103
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33925
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot
gnu.org
1 - 100 of 170 matches
Mail list logo
