https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
--- Comment #18 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> So in uninit1 we have:
> if (_6691 != 0)
> goto ; [5.50%]
> else
> goto ; [94.50%]
>
>[local count: 17344687]:
> goto ; [100.00%]
>
>[l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
--- Comment #19 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #16)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15)
> > We totally missed the jump threading of 3->5->7 path and the 4->5->8 path.
>
> FAIL: path through PHI in b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
--- Comment #20 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #16)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15)
> > We totally missed the jump threading of 3->5->7 path and the 4->5->8 path.
>
> FAIL: path through PHI in b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102889
Bug ID: 102889
Summary: -funroll-loops generates incorrect codes from inline
assembly on aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102889
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||inline-asm
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102889
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Or this:
asm volatile("rbit %0,%0\n"
"clz %0,%0\n" : "=r" (val) : "0" (val) );
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #14)
> Created attachment 51650 [details]
> Little more reduced
>
> So FRE is able to figure out for the following:
> # _20 = PHI <0(2), 1(3)>
> # const_upper_2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102890
Bug ID: 102890
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in duplicate_and_interleave, at
tree-vect-slp.c:6173
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102885
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102880
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51652
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51652&action=edit
not working patch
OK, that's definitely a too simplistic idea, the basic assessment still holds
though. CD-D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102891
Bug ID: 102891
Summary: Passing real part of complex type component using
w%z%re to a subroutine gives erroneous value of dummy
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79405
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102881
Ivan Sorokin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vanyacpp at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102889
--- Comment #3 from ariel at amazon dot com ---
Thanks for pointing out my mistake
ession algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.0 20211022 (experimental) (GCC)
Introduced with
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=01b5038718056b024b370b74a874fbd92c5bbab3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
Bug ID: 102893
Summary: [8/9/10/11/12 Regression] CDDCE does not detect empty
infinite nested loops
Product: gcc
Version: 8.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102894
Bug ID: 102894
Summary: make_any is not SFINAE-friendly
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: accepts-invalid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
--- Comment #22 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fe8475c500939011b90504304aec61bf6f48ac7d
commit r12-4625-gfe8475c500939011b90504304aec61bf6f48ac7d
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
This should fix the missed CSE Andrew noticed, not sure if it is enough to
aovid the bogus diagnostic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102892
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Maybe a duplicate of PR102879?
ign 4,,10
.p2align 3
.L9:
.cfi_restore_state
movl$2, b(%rip)
jmp .L7
.cfi_endproc
gcc-trunk -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.0 20211022 (experimen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102890
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102171
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102895
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
Bug ID: 102896
Summary: src/moxie/ffi.c:239:arrayIndexOutOfBounds
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libffi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102895
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> There's identical IL before the vrp2 pass (the one after strlen) but on the
> GCC 11 branch vrp2 eliminates the call to foo while on trunk it does not.
>
> On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102897
Bug ID: 102897
Summary: [12 Regression] simplify_permutation ICEs on assert
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102897
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92621
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #22 from Tobias Burnus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2a9a98a369528c8689ecb68db576f8e7dc2fa45
commit r12-4627-gc2a9a98a369528c8689ecb68db576f8e7dc2fa45
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102890
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
Target M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102890
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #2)
> Does it happen in libffi upstream?
>
> https://github.com/libffi/libffi
Yes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Then, please file it here: https://github.com/libffi/libffi/issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96870
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> Then, please file it here: https://github.com/libffi/libffi/issues.
Done.
https://github.com/libffi/libffi/issues/666
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |MOVED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Thanks for the fix!
This was reported to us by a user of the arm embedded toolchains that was
upgrading from gcc 7. We won't be releasing any new releases for GCC 8 and 9,
but may be for 10 and 11 is cer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102503
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100907
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100907
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
In both case I get
FAIL! chrcmp: 66 != 65281
FAIL! chrcmp: 66 != 65281
FAIL! chrcmp: 67 != 65282
FAIL! chrcmp: 68 != 65283
FAIL! chrcmp: 69 != 65284
FAIL! chrcmp: 70 != 65285
FAIL! chrcmp: 71 != 652
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100916
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100916
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102886
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102862
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 81981, which changed state.
Bug 81981 Summary: [8 Regression] -fsanitize=undefined makes a
-Wmaybe-uninitialized warning disappear
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102898
Bug ID: 102898
Summary: declaration of 'using Foo = enum class Foo' changes
meaning of 'Foo'
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102843
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100906
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7cb6d66bd52e884ff33c61e46a9ee9facc2ac60
commit r12-4628-gb7cb6d66bd52e884ff33c61e46a9ee9facc2ac60
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100906
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
Bug ID: 102899
Summary: Performing `delete this` within destructor in constant
evaluation results in infinitely recursive error
message
Product: gcc
Version: 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102503
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102900
Bug ID: 102900
Summary: ICE via gfc_class_data_get in alloc_comp_class_4.f03
with -fcheck=all
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100917
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102901
Bug ID: 102901
Summary: ICE (segfault) when compiling pdt_13.f03 with
-fcheck=all in gfc_check_pdt_dummy ->
structure_alloc_comps
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
-system-zlib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20211022 (experimental) [master r12-4624-gae5c540662e] (GCC)
[576] %
[576] % gcctk -O2 small.c; ./a.out
[577] %
[577] % gcctk -O3 small.c
[578] % timeout -s 9 10 ./a.out
Killed
[579] %
[579] % cat small.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #2 from friedkeenan at protonmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Why do you think this is a compiler bug?
> If you delete this, you invoke the destructor and then the operator delete,
> so when you do this i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Just compile your testcase with additional
-Dconstexpr= -Dconsteval= -D'static_assert(x)='
to see how it is compiled, there is that infinite recursion with all compilers
I've tried.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102900
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE via gfc_class_data_get |ICE via gfc_class_data_get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #4 from friedkeenan at protonmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Just compile your testcase with additional
> -Dconstexpr= -Dconsteval= -D'static_assert(x)='
> to see how it is compiled, there is that infini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102843
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102886
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I posted a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/582380.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102903
Bug ID: 102903
Summary: Invalid gfortran.dg testcases or wrong-code with
-fcheck=all -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c31d2d14f798dc7ca9cc078200d37113749ec3bd
commit r12-4629-gc31d2d14f798dc7ca9cc078200d37113749ec3bd
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
What I see is clang performing checks at a place it shouldn't.
It can be better seen on
struct Test {
constexpr Test() = default;
constexpr ~Test() {
delete this;
}
};
consteval bool te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102899
--- Comment #6 from friedkeenan at protonmail dot com ---
Well it says "being destroyed" not "already destroyed", because the object is
currently being destroyed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102904
Bug ID: 102904
Summary: go testsuite does not always cause a timeout
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101208
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102898
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||100810
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102897
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102905
Bug ID: 102905
Summary: [12 regression] several vector test cases fail on
power 7 after r12-4490
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102675
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102742
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:690180eb4b35df3f4b5def690878ecaeb5492e41
commit r12-4630-g690180eb4b35df3f4b5def690878ecaeb5492e41
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102742
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102816
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102675
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #6)
>
> Another possibility is to revert your patch so that others can bootstrap.
The problem won't go away as long as we keep syncing with upstream.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102508
--- Comment #2 from Iain Sandoe ---
thanks for the simplified test case.
As noted in pr98935, statement expressions are not handled (I deferred handling
them in the initial implementation since they are an extension)... however, it
is intended t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102627
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99922
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92482
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||everythingfunctional@proton
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98342
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102891
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102892
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102905
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98342
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Has this bug been fully fixed now, so that we can close it?
It seems so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 regression] r12-4526|[12 regression] r12-4526
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102817
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Strange. We happen to call gfc_free_shape with inconsistent data:
(gdb) p rank
$84 = 2
(gdb) p shape[1]
$85 = (mpz_t *) 0x0
Not good.
Interestingly the following works:
integer :: z(1,2) =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |testsuite
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102876
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo