[Bug tree-optimization/110702] [12 Regression] Wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu (regression since GCC-12.2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110702 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aegges at web dot de --- Comment #9 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/111517] [12/13 Regression] Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization since r12-5915-ge93809f62363ba

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111517 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/111533] [14 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'const_int' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1934

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111533 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Target|

[Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Hm, but the COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS variable is only used for communicating between the driver and the linker, the options therein are individually passed to the program execved? You are maybe looking for the

[Bug tree-optimization/110817] [14 Regression] wrong code with vector compares and vector lowering

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110817 --- Comment #21 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 111534 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/111534] [14 Regression] wrong code with -mgeneral-regs-only and vector compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111534 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/111534] New: [14 Regression] wrong code with -mgeneral-regs-only and vector compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111534 Bug ID: 111534 Summary: [14 Regression] wrong code with -mgeneral-regs-only and vector compare Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-c

[Bug target/111451] RISC-V: Missed optimization of vrgather.vv into vrgatherei16.vv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111451 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Li Xu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ed05db7cee8f92604b5d7761713b7a7161e0db0 commit r14-4219-g0ed05db7cee8f92604b5d7761713b7a7161e0db0 Author: xuli Date: Fri Sep 22 01:25:3

[Bug c++/111532] tuple get accesses through base element type in constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111532 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 55965 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55965&action=edit Reduced testcase It is __no_unique_address__ and empty base class related ...

[Bug target/111533] New: [14 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'const_int' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1934

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111533 Bug ID: 111533 Summary: [14 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'const_int' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1934 Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/111531] Bound member function with multiple inheritance documentation should be clearer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111531 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Bound member function |Bound member function with

[Bug c++/111531] Bound member function (-Wno-pmf-conversions) with multiple inheritance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111531 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||documentation --- Comment #1 from Andre

[Bug c++/111532] New: tuple get accesses through base element type in constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111532 Bug ID: 111532 Summary: tuple get accesses through base element type in constant expression Product: gcc Version: 13.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/111531] New: Bound member function (-Wno-pmf-conversions) with multiple inheritance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111531 Bug ID: 111531 Summary: Bound member function (-Wno-pmf-conversions) with multiple inheritance Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug modula2/111530] New: Unable to build GM2 standard library on BSD due to a `getopt_long_only' GNU extension dependency

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111530 Bug ID: 111530 Summary: Unable to build GM2 standard library on BSD due to a `getopt_long_only' GNU extension dependency Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/108964] Attribute (multi-) target should be implemented for C front-end (not only c++)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108964 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/111529] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE on bool conversion in an unrolled loop condition inside template lambda nested in another template scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||8.3.0 See Also|

[Bug c++/111529] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE on bool conversion in an unrolled loop condition inside template lambda nested in another template scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work|10.1.0 | --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---

[Bug c++/111529] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE on bool conversion in an unrolled loop condition inside template lambda nested in another template scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529 --- Comment #2 from Maxim Plyushkin --- It appears that this regression happened between 8.3 and 8.4, not between 10.1 and 11.1.

[Bug c++/111529] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE on bool conversion in an unrolled loop condition inside template lambda nested in another template scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Known to fail|

[Bug c++/111529] New: ICE on bool conversion in an unrolled loop condition inside template lambda nested in another template scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529 Bug ID: 111529 Summary: ICE on bool conversion in an unrolled loop condition inside template lambda nested in another template scope Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0

[Bug target/111528] aarch64: Test gfortran.dg/pr80494.f90 fails with -fstack-protector-strong with gcc-13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111528 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- I see the ICE even with r13-7827-g4bb1ae3c13ce4f in the tree.

[Bug target/111528] aarch64: Test gfortran.dg/pr80494.f90 fails with -fstack-protector-strong with gcc-13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111528 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Should have been fixed with: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=4bb1ae3c13ce4fb72129229de66f5ffbcd45fe4c

[Bug target/111528] New: aarch64: Test gfortran.dg/pr80494.f90 fails with -fstack-protector-strong with gcc-13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111528 Bug ID: 111528 Summary: aarch64: Test gfortran.dg/pr80494.f90 fails with -fstack-protector-strong with gcc-13 Product: gcc Version: 13.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527 Bug ID: 111527 Summary: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/111517] [12/13 Regression] Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization since r12-5915-ge93809f62363ba

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111517 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- r0-126272-g8fdc414d439bc7148e079d27220e59 adds check_loadstore but IVOPTS can sometimes produce these TARGET_MEM_REF with 0 as first operand ...

[Bug tree-optimization/111517] [12/13 Regression] Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization since r12-5915-ge93809f62363ba

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111517 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|11.5|12.4

[Bug c/111526] inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/111526] inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug c/111526] inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm, somehow the value of warn_c11_c2x_compat is being changed from -1 to 0 ... and not being changed back, maybe a __extension__ is happening incorrectly.

[Bug tree-optimization/111517] [12/13 Regression] Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111517 Theodoros Theodoridis changed: What|Removed |Added CC||theodort at inf dot ethz.ch ---

[Bug c/111526] inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 --- Comment #4 from Pádraig Brady --- Interestingly, gcc 13 _does_ warn with -Wc11-c2x-compat, but does not warn with -Wpedantic

[Bug c/111526] inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 --- Comment #3 from Pádraig Brady --- Created attachment 55964 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55964&action=edit coreutils tail.c compilation unit This should warn with -Wpedantic, but doesn't on gcc 13

[Bug c/111526] inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Can you attach the original preprocessed source where you get no warning and you think you should. Others can reduce it.

[Bug c/111526] inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-09-21 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug c/111526] New: inconsistent handling of declaration after label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111526 Bug ID: 111526 Summary: inconsistent handling of declaration after label Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/111525] Inconsistent Wsign-compare in c++ with ubsan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111525 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- >-Wno-error=array-bounds and -Wno-error=format-overflow are necessary as these >warnings have known issues under ubsan. Actually all warnings have issues with sanitizers enabled. The manual is clear there

[Bug c++/111525] Inconsistent Wsign-compare in c++ with ubsan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111525 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/111525] New: Inconsistent Wsign-compare in c++ with ubsan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111525 Bug ID: 111525 Summary: Inconsistent Wsign-compare in c++ with ubsan Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/111524] Missing support for inline namespace in spellcheck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111524 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-09-21 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug c++/111524] New: Missing support for inline namespace in spellcheck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111524 Bug ID: 111524 Summary: Missing support for inline namespace in spellcheck Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug middle-end/111523] Unexpected performance regression with -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero for e.g. systemctl unmask

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111523 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||siddhesh at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug middle-end/111523] New: Unexpected performance regression with -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero for e.g. systemctl unmask

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111523 Bug ID: 111523 Summary: Unexpected performance regression with -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero for e.g. systemctl unmask Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/111517] [12/13 Regression] Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111517 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-09-21 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug c++/111517] [12/13 Regression] Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111517 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Optimization -O1 removes|[12/13 Regression] |n

[Bug target/111518] relro protection not working in riscv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111518 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/111520] [14 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: probability of edge 3->8 not initialized) with -O -fsignaling-nans -fharden-compares -fnon-call-exceptions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111520 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/111519] [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org P

[Bug tree-optimization/111515] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-4089-gd45ddc2c04e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111515 --- Comment #3 from Theodoros Theodoridis --- I'm re-reducing the case so that the missed optimization does not depend on inlining to main (the bisection will stay the same). I'll post the updated code soon.

[Bug target/111522] Different code path for static initialization with flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111522 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/111519] [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/111519] [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.3 Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/111515] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-4089-gd45ddc2c04e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111515 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Looks like an early jump threading happens in n and then the size differences causes inlining heurstics not to chose the function for inlining because it is inlining into `main`. If we change main to `f` or

[Bug tree-optimization/111515] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-4089-gd45ddc2c04e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111515 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-09-21 Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/111521] Polymorphic variable loses information about the actual type assigned when passed as function result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111521 --- Comment #1 from Davide Cesari --- An update: By replacing the line list_getcurr => this%curr%getval() with CLASS(*),POINTER :: l_p l_p => this%curr%getval() list_getcurr => l_p i.e. assigning the upper function result to a temporary loc

[Bug target/111522] New: Different code path for static initialization with flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111522 Bug ID: 111522 Summary: Different code path for static initialization with flto Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug c++/111516] parameter passing note is not actionable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111516 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic --- Comment #1 from Jonath

[Bug fortran/111521] New: Polymorphic variable loses information about the actual type assigned when passed as function result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111521 Bug ID: 111521 Summary: Polymorphic variable loses information about the actual type assigned when passed as function result Product: gcc Version: 13.2.1 Status: UNCONFI

[Bug tree-optimization/111520] New: [14 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: probability of edge 3->8 not initialized) with -O -fsignaling-nans -fharden-compares -fnon-call-exceptions

ion algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 14.0.0 20230921 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug target/110622] x87: Miscompilation at O2 level (O1 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 --- Comment #16 from Mathieu Malaterre --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #15) > (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #14) > > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13) > > > (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #12) > > >

[Bug target/110622] x87: Miscompilation at O2 level (O1 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 --- Comment #15 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #14) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13) > > (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #12) > > > I am seeing a difference in result (log1p computation)

[Bug target/110622] x87: Miscompilation at O2 level (O1 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 --- Comment #14 from Mathieu Malaterre --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13) > (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #12) > > I am seeing a difference in result (log1p computation) in the range: > > > > 4318952042648305665 - 0x

[Bug middle-end/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323 --- Comment #230 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 110622 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/110622] x87: Miscompilation at O2 level (O1 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug c/111518] relro protection not working in riscv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111518 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- That's a linker bug, please report to https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/.

[Bug tree-optimization/111519] New: [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519 Bug ID: 111519 Summary: [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sever

[Bug c/111518] relro protection not working in riscv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111518 palmer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||palmer at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug c/111518] New: relro protection not working in riscv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111518 Bug ID: 111518 Summary: relro protection not working in riscv Product: gcc Version: 13.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug libstdc++/111327] std::bind_front (and std::not_fn) doesn't always perfectly forward according to value category of the call wrapper object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111327 Jiang An changed: What|Removed |Added CC||de34 at live dot cn --- Comment #5 from Jian

[Bug libstdc++/111511] Incorrect ADL in std::to_array in GCC 11/12/13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111511 --- Comment #5 from Jiang An --- (In reply to m.cencora from comment #2) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > > (In reply to Jiang An from comment #0) > > > Not sure whether this should be WONTFIX since the implementation is > > > f

[Bug c++/111517] New: Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111517 Bug ID: 111517 Summary: Optimization -O1 removes necessary loop for initialization Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/111425] ia64: ICE in net/ipv4/fib_semantics.c:1621:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111425 --- Comment #6 from Frank Scheiner --- Dear Richard, would it be helpful to bisect this problem or is it already known where and when the problem was introduced? I anyhow wanted to look into how those cross-compilers over at [1] are built and

[Bug libstdc++/111511] Incorrect ADL in std::to_array in GCC 11/12/13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111511 --- Comment #4 from m.cencora at gmail dot com --- Ack

[Bug libstdc++/111511] Incorrect ADL in std::to_array in GCC 11/12/13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111511 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Until all supported compilers implement it, that won't be simpler. We'll still need the memcpy version as a fallback. And it probably generated exactly the same code, although I haven't checked.

[Bug libstdc++/111511] Incorrect ADL in std::to_array in GCC 11/12/13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111511 m.cencora at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m.cencora at gmail dot com

[Bug c++/111516] New: parameter passing note is not actionable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111516 Bug ID: 111516 Summary: parameter passing note is not actionable Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug modula2/111510] Modula-2 runtime ICE on arm-linux-gnueabihf: iso/RTentity.mod:245:in findChildAndParent has caused internal runtime error, RTentity is either corrupt or the module storage has no

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111510 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-09-21 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/111428] RISC-V vector: Flaky segfault in {min|max}val_char_{1|2}.f90

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111428 --- Comment #2 from Robin Dapp --- Reproduced locally. The identical binary sometimes works and sometimes doesn't so it must be a race...

[Bug target/110622] x87: Miscompilation at O2 level (O1 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 --- Comment #12 from Mathieu Malaterre --- I am seeing a difference in result (log1p computation) in the range: 4318952042648305665 - 0x1.1p-64 4368493837572636672 - 0x1.002p-53 the other values seems to match expectation of log1p

[Bug target/110622] x87: Miscompilation at O2 level (O1 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 --- Comment #11 from Mathieu Malaterre --- Typical setup: g++ -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -DHIDESYMPTOM -std=c++11 -g -m32 -fexcess-precision=fast -O2 -o works math_test.cc -Wfatal-errors -Wall -Wextra -Wpedantic -

[Bug target/110622] x87: Miscompilation at O2 level (O1 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 --- Comment #10 from Mathieu Malaterre --- Created attachment 55959 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55959&action=edit cvise reduced test case

[Bug target/110622] x86: Miscompilation at O1 level (O0 is working)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110622 Mathieu Malaterre changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|DUPLICATE |--- Status|RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/111515] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-4089-gd45ddc2c04e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111515 Bug ID: 111515 Summary: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-4089-gd45ddc2c04e Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: no

[Bug target/110751] RISC-V: Suport undefined value that allows VSETVL PASS use TA/MA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110751 --- Comment #44 from JuzheZhong --- Fixed on the trunk. Hi, LiXu. Could you verify it with trunk GCC and close this PR? Thanks

[Bug target/110751] RISC-V: Suport undefined value that allows VSETVL PASS use TA/MA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110751 --- Comment #43 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Lehua Ding : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9b5b2c9f95056f97cf95f0e8d970015aa586497b commit r14-4194-g9b5b2c9f95056f97cf95f0e8d970015aa586497b Author: Juzhe-Zhong Date: Thu Se

[Bug target/111451] RISC-V: Missed optimization of vrgather.vv into vrgatherei16.vv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111451 JuzheZhong changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug target/111450] RISC-V: Missed optimized for strided load/store with stride = element width

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111450 JuzheZhong changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/111486] [14 Regression] ICE: in require, at machmode.h:313 with -O2 -march=rv64iv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111486 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Lehua Ding : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:38048fc501b3d53fc38c701ae4625024cd93bd1d commit r14-4193-g38048fc501b3d53fc38c701ae4625024cd93bd1d Author: Juzhe-Zhong Date: Thu Sep

[Bug target/111451] RISC-V: Missed optimization of vrgather.vv into vrgatherei16.vv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111451 JuzheZhong changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/111514] [14 Regression] ICE: in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111514 --- Comment #2 from Shaohua Li --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I suspect r14-4192-g4d80863d7f93c0a839d1fe5 fixed this ... I checked the commit r14-4192-g4d80863d7f93c0a839d1fe5, and it indeed fixed the issue.

[Bug c++/111512] GCC's __builtin_memcpy can trigger ADL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111512 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-09-21 Status|UNCONFI

[Bug tree-optimization/111469] [14 Regression] Wrong code at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu since r14-573-g69f1a8af45

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111469 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma

[Bug libstdc++/111511] Incorrect ADL in std::to_array in GCC 11/12/13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111511 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/111513] Incorrect -Wformat-overflow warning when using UBSAN with gettext()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111513 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Weißschuh --- Thanks for the quick response Andrew! I'll probably disable -Werror then. FYI: If I drop the `#include ` and instead declare `dcgettext` on my own, adding `__attribute__((returns_nonnull)), the issue

[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 --- Comment #5 from Jiu Fu Guo --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > I suspect r14-4192-g4d80863d7f93c0a839d1fe5 fixed this ... Yes, I reproduced this issue on ppc64le, and the fix r14-4192 seems to work fine.

[Bug tree-optimization/111482] [14 Regression] ice in lower_bound with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111482 Jiu Fu Guo changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 --- Comment #4 from Sam James --- trying..

[Bug tree-optimization/111495] [14 regression] ICE in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 when building LLVM 17.0.1 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2d6e8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111495 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I suspect r14-4192-g4d80863d7f93c0a839d1fe5 fixed this ...

[Bug tree-optimization/111514] [14 Regression] ICE: in lower_bound, at value-range.h:1078 since r14-3644-g1aceceb1e2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111514 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Keywords|

  1   2   >