[Bug target/106545] New: peephole.md seems like it should not exist

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106545 Bug ID: 106545 Summary: peephole.md seems like it should not exist Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal

[Bug target/106544] New: riscv_print_operand does not check to see if the operands are valid to do INTVAL on them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106544 Bug ID: 106544 Summary: riscv_print_operand does not check to see if the operands are valid to do INTVAL on them Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/106543] New: *sge_ uses operand 2 but there is no operand 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106543 Bug ID: 106543 Summary: *sge_ uses operand 2 but there is no operand 2 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Sev

[Bug c++/106542] -O2 sign-extended uint32 to uint64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106542 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/106542] -O2 sign-extended uint32 to uint64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106542 wuz73 at hotmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |--- Status|RESOLV

[Bug c++/106542] -O2 sign-extended uint32 to uint64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106542 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/99536] unexplained warning on "uninitialized value" in std::normal_distribution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99536 wuz73 at hotmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 99536, which changed state. Bug 99536 Summary: unexplained warning on "uninitialized value" in std::normal_distribution https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99536 What|Removed |

[Bug c++/106542] New: -O2 sign-extended uint32 to uint64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106542 Bug ID: 106542 Summary: -O2 sign-extended uint32 to uint64 Product: gcc Version: 9.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c/106537] GCC doesn't support -W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106537 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug analyzer/105887] [meta-bug] clang analyzer warnings that GCC's -fanalyzer could implement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105887 Bug 105887 depends on bug 105947, which changed state. Bug 105947 Summary: RFE: -fanalyzer should complain about jumps through NULL function pointers https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105947 What|Removed

[Bug analyzer/105947] RFE: -fanalyzer should complain about jumps through NULL function pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105947 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug analyzer/105947] RFE: -fanalyzer should complain about jumps through NULL function pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105947 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1a9168153d2bf12695844a9ca9f9fc1de8d1ddf commit r13-1979-ge1a9168153d2bf12695844a9ca9f9fc1de8d1ddf Author: David Malcolm Date: F

[Bug c++/106541] New: Missing -Wuninitialized on self initialization if external code is called earlier in the function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106541 Bug ID: 106541 Summary: Missing -Wuninitialized on self initialization if external code is called earlier in the function Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug tree-optimization/106513] [10/11/12/13 Regression] bswap pass misses that >>56 for signed types can be replicate the sign bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106513 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail|

[Bug c++/106520] 2+ index expressions in build_op_subscript are incorrectly interpreted as comma expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106520 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords|

[Bug lto/106540] New: [13 Regression] lto -g ICE in dwarf2out_register_external_die at dwarf2out.cc:6076

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106540 Bug ID: 106540 Summary: [13 Regression] lto -g ICE in dwarf2out_register_external_die at dwarf2out.cc:6076 Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sever

[Bug analyzer/106539] New: -fanalyzer doesn't consider that realloc could shrink the buffer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106539 Bug ID: 106539 Summary: -fanalyzer doesn't consider that realloc could shrink the buffer Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/65230] pretty-print inconsistent output for similar objects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65230 --- Comment #9 from Ulrich Drepper --- Created attachment 53419 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53419&action=edit diff -y of current and proposed output To compare the results more easily.

[Bug libstdc++/65230] pretty-print inconsistent output for similar objects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65230 Ulrich Drepper changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #53410|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c++/66290] wrong location for -Wunused-macros

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290 --- Comment #8 from Lewis Hyatt --- (In reply to Lewis Hyatt from comment #7) > The wrong location is fixed for GCC 13. Shall I leave the PR open for now, > since there was also the issue of getting a caret pointing to the name of > macro, rather

[Bug c/106537] GCC doesn't support -W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106537 --- Comment #2 from Jose E. Marchesi --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > This option is used in the kernel source tree for some BPF programs. > > Why not fix the sources? Seems not hard to add a cast or two. That's what I would

[Bug c++/106538] New: Reject-valid: Substitution failure causes error with unsatisfied constraint

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106538 Bug ID: 106538 Summary: Reject-valid: Substitution failure causes error with unsatisfied constraint Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: no

[Bug c/106537] GCC doesn't support -W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106537 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords|

[Bug c/106535] GCC doesn't reject non-constant initializer if -pedantic is specified but does so in any other circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106535 --- Comment #3 from Gabriel Ravier --- Considering the comment appears to be from 1993 (see commit d9fc6069c69564ce7fecd9ca0ce1bbe0b3c130ef), it having become wrong since then doesn't seem particularly surprising :p

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 Tamar Christina changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1878ab3650d8c646a4db364df388adaec2a29870 commit r13-1975-g1878ab3650d8c646a4db364df388adaec2a29870 Author: Tamar Christina Date

[Bug tree-optimization/106322] tree-vectorize: Wrong code at O2 level (-fno-tree-vectorize is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106322 --- Comment #15 from Mathieu Malaterre --- (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #11) > (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #10) > > The reason the test fails with gcc-12 is that gcc-12 enabled > > auto-vectorisation for -O2. > > I can

[Bug c/106537] New: GCC doesn't support -W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106537 Bug ID: 106537 Summary: GCC doesn't support -W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/106514] [12/13 Regression] ranger slowness in path query

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106514 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:47964e766270f349f5b171bcd68ff7c1e60d85d8 commit r13-1973-g47964e766270f349f5b171bcd68ff7c1e60d85d8 Author: Aldy Hernandez Date:

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina --- (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #6) > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5) > > On Fri, 5 Aug 2022, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 Tamar Christina changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #3) > Thanks for the repro, could you tell me what target I need to use or what > configure options to build amdgcn-amdhsa? See https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Offloading#

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5) > On Fri, 5 Aug 2022, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 > > > > --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 5 Aug 2022, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 > > --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus --- > Seems as if the ICE is fixed for that file

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus --- Seems as if the ICE is fixed for that file by reverting the following commit: commit r13-1963-gc832ec4c3ec4853ad89ff3b0dbf6e9454e75e8cc middle-end: Fix phi-ssa assertion triggers. [PR106519]

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina --- Thanks for the repro, could you tell me what target I need to use or what configure options to build amdgcn-amdhsa?

[Bug middle-end/105762] [12/13 Regression] -Warray-bounds false positives for integer-to-pointer casts since r12-2132-ga110855667782dac

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105762 Ivan Sorokin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vanyacpp at gmail dot com --- Comment #4

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus --- Created attachment 53416 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53416&action=edit Reduced testcase - fails with cc1 -O2 inp.i Reduced inputfile attached. Full code has the full ICE output: s

[Bug target/106536] New: P9: gcc does not detect setb pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106536 Bug ID: 106536 Summary: P9: gcc does not detect setb pattern Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug c/106535] GCC doesn't reject non-constant initializer if -pedantic is specified but does so in any other circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106535 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFI

[Bug tree-optimization/106533] loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106533 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/106533] loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106533 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:36bc2a8f24f9c8f6eb2c579d520d7fc73a113ae1 commit r13-1972-g36bc2a8f24f9c8f6eb2c579d520d7fc73a113ae1 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug c/106535] GCC doesn't reject non-constant initializer if -pedantic is specified but does so in any other circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106535 Gabriel Ravier changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid, |

[Bug c/106535] New: GCC doesn't reject non-constant initializer if -pedantic is specified but does so in any other circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106535 Bug ID: 106535 Summary: GCC doesn't reject non-constant initializer if -pedantic is specified but does so in any other circumstances Product: gcc Version: 13.0

[Bug target/106529] existence of sincos is assumed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106529 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Thomas Klausner from comment #4) > a) there is no conflict since there is no builtin or otherwise sincos() > function > b) it is not declared in math.h As it says, it's a built-in function au

[Bug middle-end/106534] [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/106534] New: [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106534 Bug ID: 106534 Summary: [13 Regression][gcn] ICE 'verify_ssa failed' / 'error: definition in block 18 does not dominate use in block 19' during libgfortran bootstrap Produc

[Bug tree-optimization/106533] loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106533 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc

[Bug c++/104493] OpenMP offload map cannot handle const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104493 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/106533] loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106533 --- Comment #3 from Vineet Gupta --- FWIW this was seen with riscv64 build of gcc, but same tree behavior seen with aarch64 gcc 12.1. For single copy-loop src, final output is inline copy loop -->8-- [local count: 1063004409]: # j_131 = P

[Bug tree-optimization/106533] loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106533 --- Comment #2 from Vineet Gupta --- Original stream benchmark [1] at https://github.com/jeffhammond/STREAM

[Bug tree-optimization/106533] loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106533 Vineet Gupta changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vineetg at rivosinc dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/106533] New: loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106533 Bug ID: 106533 Summary: loop distribution not distributing inner loop (to memcpy) when perfect loop nest Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severit