https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110381
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #12)
> The new testcase (gcc.dg/vect/pr110381.c) fails:
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr110381.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr110381.c execut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110381
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c0439218eb79aa0293291aed92453a59db8c6e85
commit r14-2207-gc0439218eb79aa0293291aed92453a59db8c6e85
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110443
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110494
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110252
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 110494 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110494
Bug ID: 110494
Summary: [14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110493
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |c++
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110493
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |---
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71962
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 110493 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110493
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110493
Bug ID: 110493
Summary: 'is not a constant expression' for function-local
static std::initializer_list with
fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92752
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c12c47d0c5c40df6e5eeb8625d4708c8a42dbe0
commit r10-11483-g8c12c47d0c5c40df6e5eeb8625d4708c8a42dbe0
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97420
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ad42219766d0e67bede2c9bd94c98082cde42518
commit r10-11482-gad42219766d0e67bede2c9bd94c98082cde42518
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108672
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110492
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 55431
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55431&action=edit
testcase
Next time please attach or paste inline the code instead of posting just a link
to godbolt.org .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108672
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b22cf5f0321f6425a357c06647a4366d99ddac61
commit r14-2206-gb22cf5f0321f6425a357c06647a4366d99ddac61
Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109435
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by YunQiang Su :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e20abdb749d0c0c8552da998ff8ec139b830f5eb
commit r14-2205-ge20abdb749d0c0c8552da998ff8ec139b830f5eb
Author: Jovan Dmitrovic
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108672
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110492
Bug ID: 110492
Summary: Attempted optimization of switch statement pessimizes
it instead
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110491
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228
--- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 110491 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
c-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../configure --disable-multilib --disable-bootstrap
--enable-languages=c,c++
--prefix=/zdata/shaoli/compilers/ccbuilder-compilers/gcc-5f590ee3174cf6058ac882c3a84a96ae639349c8
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 14.0.0 20230629 (experimental) (GCC)
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110198
Benjamin Priour changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110198
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Benjamin Priour :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1eb90f46c16453f72dc119ba20b07053a15b452d
commit r14-2203-g1eb90f46c16453f72dc119ba20b07053a15b452d
Author: benjamin priour
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110443
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
/* Optimize
# x_5 in range [cst1, cst2] where cst2 = cst1 + 1
x_5 ? cstN ? cst4 : cst3
# op is == or != and N is 1 or 2
to r_6 = x_5 + (min (cst3, cst4) - cst1) or
r_6 = (min (cst3, cst4) + cs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110149
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110239
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2d40cd2f199e32f185d4b72db2043e91313ab7f2
commit r13-7511-g2d40cd2f199e32f185d4b72db2043e91313ab7f2
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110149
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ae7cdc8c0f5278e7941f1de7c72ffe9f1fed2775
commit r13-7510-gae7cdc8c0f5278e7941f1de7c72ffe9f1fed2775
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109741
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dbd4acd72274f3b3d542ebf68f9962eda8f8b769
commit r13-7509-gdbd4acd72274f3b3d542ebf68f9962eda8f8b769
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100285
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:132015b9c6c9f9156ff31f7d66ba92cf01d0bc90
commit r13-7508-g132015b9c6c9f9156ff31f7d66ba92cf01d0bc90
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52799
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52997b14311726447850341ecaf286b68587ff32
commit r13-7505-g52997b14311726447850341ecaf286b68587ff32
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110478
palmer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||palmer at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110490
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I was wrong about where the problem was but not wrong about the missed
optimization.
Anyways the issue is in expression_expensive_p where the issue of clzdi2 and
not having clzsi2 ...
expression_expensive_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110490
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |tree-optimization
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9dc18fca431626404b0692c689a2e103666e7adb
commit r14-2202-g9dc18fca431626404b0692c689a2e103666e7adb
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110490
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110490
Bug ID: 110490
Summary: tree-ssa/clz-* and tree-ssa/ctz-* fail on s390x with
arch14
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110483
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks for filing this; sorry about the failures.
What's the endianness of the hosts that this is happening on?
Is there a machine in the GCC compile farm that this happens on?
The row of indices is is cr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110468
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9479da4515f7d019b4ef282d0e21536431c44f71
commit r14-2199-g9479da4515f7d019b4ef282d0e21536431c44f71
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110463
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd8a1be04d4cdbfefea457b99ed8404d77b35dd6
commit r14-2198-gfd8a1be04d4cdbfefea457b99ed8404d77b35dd6
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #30 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
BTW: you can get a traceback on FP exceptions by adding to the linker options:
-ffpe-trap=zero,overflow,invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94355
--- Comment #15 from Benjamin Priour ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14)
> [...snip...]
>
> See the -fcheck-new option:
>
> Check that the pointer returned by "operator new" is non-null before
> attempting to modify the storage
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110489
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
So I took a look at the sources, there are very many small functions.
This might be the reason why dump files Timevar takes a long time, it is called
for each pass and for each function. Maybe that can be im
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86277
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a023e688186ea4cd284f5d269f2ecde9f80438c
commit r13-7501-g1a023e688186ea4cd284f5d269f2ecde9f80438c
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86277
--- Comment #35 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:74ef4221b5ebb1122349ad48422ddc40e98c267d
commit r13-7502-g74ef4221b5ebb1122349ad48422ddc40e98c267d
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83904
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a023e688186ea4cd284f5d269f2ecde9f80438c
commit r13-7501-g1a023e688186ea4cd284f5d269f2ecde9f80438c
Author: Harald Anlauf
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110489
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The only ones that stick out are:
dump files : 1.07 ( 4%) 0.24 ( 5%) 1.58 ( 5%)
0 ( 0%)
integrated RA : 1.75 ( 7%) 0.11 ( 2%) 2.10 ( 7%)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #29 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #28)
> Update: recompiling that file with 13-branch fails for me, too.
> Playing with the one-line patch for pr86277 makes no difference, fortunately.
>
> Compiling the fil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110489
Bug ID: 110489
Summary: Slow building virtual.c.i from p11-kit
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-time-hog
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #28 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Update: recompiling that file with 13-branch fails for me, too.
Playing with the one-line patch for pr86277 makes no difference, fortunately.
Compiling the file with gfortran-12 seems to work ok
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110488
Bug ID: 110488
Summary: Legal deferred constant rejected
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107852
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's not a crash, it's a warning. And it looks like a separate problem, since
it comes from vector::reserve not vector::insert. Please file a new bug for it
instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|invalid wide Boolean value |[12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Part of the issue is what does TYPE_PRECISION on BOOLEAN_TYPE really mean.
there are many more of these issues all over GCC about boolean types assuming
being TYPE_PRECISION == 1 even and such.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487
Bug ID: 110487
Summary: invalid wide Boolean value
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #27 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #26)
> It is included here:
> https://www.desy.de/~reuter/downloads/repro002.tar.xz
> I am working on a smaller example right now.
Good. I can reproduce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107852
--- Comment #17 from Rogério de Souza Moraes
---
Created attachment 55428
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55428&action=edit
Preprocessed file for GCC 13.1.0 bug
This is the preprocessed file (*.i*) that triggers the bug re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107852
Rogério de Souza Moraes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rogerio.souza at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #26 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #25)
> Unfortunately, there is no main.f90, which is needed to build whizard.
>
Indeed, sorry, cf. below
> The Makefile needs to be modified to take into account that pyt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110419
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It appears that the issue could be studied with the following code:
program p
implicit none
integer :: a = 65
call val ("A", char(a))
contains
subroutine val (x, c)
character(kind=1),
++ --disable-werror
--disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 14.0.0 20230629 (experimental) [master r14-924-gd709841ae0f] (GCC)
[642] %
[642] % gcctk -O2 -fselective-scheduling2 -fno-tree-pre small.c
[643] % ./a.out
34
[644] % gcctk -O2 small.c
[645
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #25 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #24)
> Here is a first reproducer without the need for OCaml, unfortunately a bit
> too big to be uploaded, here is the link:
> https://www.desy.de/~reuter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77650
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Qing Zhao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:070a6bf0bdc6761ad77ac97404c98f00a7007d54
commit r14-2197-g070a6bf0bdc6761ad77ac97404c98f00a7007d54
Author: Qing Zhao
Date: Thu Jun 29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #55416|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110432
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #10)
> do all the other (I guess non-embedded) platforms now have init priority
> support?
It's OK if they don't, as long as (1) the attribute tells the truth, and (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110478
--- Comment #4 from Bin Meng ---
I can't get the build to pass with the same configure scripts on current GCC
HEAD :(
--host=x86_64-linux-gnu --build=aarch64-linux --target=riscv64-linux
--enable-targets=all
--prefix=/home/arnd/cross/x86_64/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110432
--- Comment #10 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #9)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> > Patrick, we talked about this and IIRC your suggestion was to move the
> > __has_attribute check into configure,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110432
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110381
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110432
--- Comment #8 from Sascha Scandella ---
I've tested the proposed solution ...
#if !__has_attribute(__init_priority__) || defined __APPLE__
... and it works as expected. I had also done something similar before, so I
wasn't that surprised.
Le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110458
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-Warray-bounds=2 new false |[14 Regression]
|posi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110252
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 110475 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110475
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110419
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I just tried r14-2190-ge972bdce61cc52 on another BE machine and got:
spawn [open ...]
by value(kind=1): B
by value(kind=1): A
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110484
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101537
--- Comment #9 from wolter.hellmundvega at tevva dot com ---
Will the current fix be released when the C++ FE is patched as well or perhaps
before that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110462
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110479
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110462
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff29ee6af88f709e08ee467869d8c1b13889a724
commit r14-2191-gff29ee6af88f709e08ee467869d8c1b13889a724
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110472
--- Comment #2 from Ryan Holt ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I think it is just wrong iv-opt choices.
>
> Works just fine on aarch64-linux-gnu too:
> ubuntu@ubuntu:~/src/upstream-gcc-aarch64\# ~/upstream-gcc/bin/gcc t4.c -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110486
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The question is the second lamdba implicitly consteval or not ...
If it is, then the bug is dealing with that. That is adding consteval to the
second lamdba allows GCC to accept the code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110077
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> > One solution would be to just add the declaration to the header, and adjust
> > the exports so this new s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38341
wolter.hellmundvega at tevva dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wolter.hellmundvega
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110077
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> This affects aarch64 too:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-June/620335.html
> And probably other targets where long double uses binary128 re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110077
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> One solution would be to just add the declaration to the header, and adjust
> the exports so this new symbol is exported at GLIBCXX_3.4.32 not
> GLIBCXX_3.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #24 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Here is a first reproducer without the need for OCaml, unfortunately a bit too
big to be uploaded, here is the link:
https://www.desy.de/~reuter/downloads/repro001.tar.xz
the tarball contains Fortran files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110486
Bug ID: 110486
Summary: gcc rejects constant expression with consteval lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110077
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks for the quick response!
For x86 both these conditions are false:
#if defined(__STDCPP_FLOAT128_T__) &&
defined(_GLIBCXX_LDOUBLE_IS_IEEE_BINARY128)
...
#elif defined(__STDCPP_FLOAT128_T__) && defin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110077
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> This is going to be hard for me to figure out without access to a Solaris
> x86 system.
There's hope that at least one, maybe two, Solaris 11.4/x86 systems can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110077
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 55426
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55426&action=edit
32-bit i386-pc-solaris2.11 charconv.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110077
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is going to be hard for me to figure out without access to a Solaris x86
system.
Could you please attach the output of this command using GCC trunk on solaris
x86?
g++ -std=c++23 -include charconv -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110479
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #0)
> movl%edi, %ecx
This one? It is needed because SAL wants its count argument in %cl and first
argument is passed in %edi (mandated by x86_64 ABI).
Wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110485
Bug ID: 110485
Summary: vectorizing simd clone calls without loop masking
applied
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110468
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110457
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110484
--- Comment #1 from chenglulu ---
The following code modification problem can be solved：
--- a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.cc
@@ -1112,7 +1112,9 @@ loongarch_first_stack_step (struct loongarch_frame_i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110484
Bug ID: 110484
Summary: Spec2017 541 after adding the
'-flto-fomit-frame-pointer' optimization, after
optimizing the rnreg, directly replaced other
registers with
1 - 100 of 162 matches
Mail list logo
