https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115914
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115914
Bug ID: 115914
Summary: SIGSEGV when std::generator co_yield different ranges
of elements
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.1.0, 10.5.0
Summary|ICE w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
```
#pragma GCC push_options
#pragma GCC diagnostic warning "-Wundef"
#pragma GCC pop_options
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115883
--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
>From r15-2024-ga01b40c047334c (disabling late-combine for CRIS), you'll need
-flate-combine-instructions to expose the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109927
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |middle-end
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Surrounding hb.hh does it, which makes sense given how much pragma fun it does:
https://github.com/harfbuzz/harfbuzz/blob/main/src/hb.hh.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
It was fine until I moved the push_options+optimize above the include block.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
Bug ID: 115913
Summary: ICE with pragma GCC pop_options (‘global_options’ are
modified in local context)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69350
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #0)
> (that won't be
> possible for GNU/Linux unless/until we stop defining _GNU_SOURCE implicitly).
Which is PR 11196 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115912
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>From https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115877#c2 :
"Based on what I'm seeing, we may have a problem with vectors as well -- worth
keeping mind if there's additional bug reports against ext-dce."
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115912
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115912
Bug ID: 115912
Summary: [15 regression] Harfbuzz testsuite fails
(mvar_partial_instance test) since
r15-1901-g98914f9eba5f19
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115911
Bug ID: 115911
Summary: [OpenMP]gcc rejects valid user defined openmp
reduction in template class with default argument
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68524
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65866
--- Comment #8 from Matthijs van Duin ---
(In reply to Yuxuan Shui from comment #7)
> IIUC now wrong codegen has all been fixed? so the only thing left should be
> the diagnostic bug?
It seems so yes, the combined testcase in Bug 70796 comment 5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102623
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.1.0
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115910
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I should mention this was noticed while seeing if PR 102580 was fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115910
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115910
Bug ID: 115910
Summary: [15 Regression] ((unsigned)x)/3 with a range for
(unsigned)x that does not have the sign bit set seems
to produce much worse code
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102580
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Gabriel Ravier from comment #8)
> Seems to be fixed on trunk ?
Actually it is worse on the trunk for the casting case. Let me file that
seperately.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102623
--- Comment #3 from Gabriel Ravier ---
Seems fixed on trunk ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102580
--- Comment #8 from Gabriel Ravier ---
Seems to be fixed on trunk ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115887
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-07-13
Host|x86_64-pc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95762
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95762
--- Comment #6 from Gabriel Ravier ---
Seems fixed on trunk ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95230
--- Comment #6 from Gabriel Ravier ---
Oh oops, I was looking at -O3 output instead of -O2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95230
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Gabriel Ravier from comment #4)
> Seems to be fixed on trunk ?
The loop is still there:
.L2:
add w1, w1, 1
cmp w1, 32
bne .L2
[local count: 1018683651]:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #38 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #35)
> Unless the "old enough glibc" won't be able to build latest GCC. Even glibc
> 2.25 (which is centos stucks with).
File a bug or write a patch. I'm not sure how y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95230
--- Comment #4 from Gabriel Ravier ---
Seems to be fixed on trunk ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115909
Bug ID: 115909
Summary: C++20 operator<=> explicitly defaulted but defined as
deleted after first declaration does not error
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52659
--- Comment #5 from Mital Ashok ---
(It compiles with a warning, but that is not promoted to an error even with
-pedantic, and the example shows how I think that accepting it even as an
extension is harmful)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52659
Mital Ashok changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mital at mitalashok dot co.uk
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #36 from cqwrteur ---
Also, it is a waste of energy and time to build the same compiler on different
machines over and over again instead of just building one, packaging it and
distributed it among many machines. Plus Cloud servers h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #35 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #34)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #29)
> > I don't know how you do that. It is impossible to upgrade glibc on any of my
> > linux distributions. I tried ubuntu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114727
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115109
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.0
--- Comment #12 from ue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115502
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
As far as I'm concerned, all of these issues are now fixed and I haven't hit
them since.
I was leaving it to you and Jakub in case there were some followups needed or
something.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115502
--- Comment #10 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Can this be closed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115696
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #34 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #29)
> I don't know how you do that. It is impossible to upgrade glibc on any of my
> linux distributions. I tried ubuntu, arch linux. Neither of them allows me
> to upg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115889
--- Comment #7 from Levy Hsu ---
It appears that vect-partial-vector-usage=2 causes short int type V32HI falls
into vpermt2_sepcial_bf16_shuffle_ while the original one was intended
for bf16, will investigate.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #33 from cqwrteur ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Configure-Terms.html
"If build and target are the same, but host is different, you are using a cross
compiler to build a cross compiler that produces code for the machine y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #32 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #31)
> > Why not? It has to pull libraries and headers from somewhere (note that I
> > do not know what "crossback" means).
> >
> > Note that there is desire to not predefine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #31 from cqwrteur ---
> Why not? It has to pull libraries and headers from somewhere (note that I
> do not know what "crossback" means).
>
> Note that there is desire to not predefine _GNU_SOURCE in C++ modes. See
> the PRs Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #30 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #29)
> (In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #28)
> > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #26)
> > > > The c++ frontend has defined _GNU_Source since at least 2001.
> > >
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #28 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #26)
> > The c++ frontend has defined _GNU_Source since at least 2001.
>
> You are de facto, breaking abi without any good reason. You break
> cross-compiling for linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115903
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #22 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #20)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #17)
> > Then why? Why does it define _ISOC2X_SOURCE? C++ is not even C.
>
> "it"? presuming you mean glibc, because _GNU_SOU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #20 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #17)
> Then why? Why does it define _ISOC2X_SOURCE? C++ is not even C.
"it"? presuming you mean glibc, because _GNU_SOURCES enables all features,
including the C2X spe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #18 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #16)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #10)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> > > There is NO fix inside gcc/libstdc++.
> > > THe only fix is your build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #12)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> > There is NO fix inside gcc/libstdc++.
> > THe only fix is your build of GCC (which includes the target libraries)
> > nee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #12 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> There is NO fix inside gcc/libstdc++.
> THe only fix is your build of GCC (which includes the target libraries)
> needs to be build against the oldest version of gli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #11 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> There is NO fix inside gcc/libstdc++.
> THe only fix is your build of GCC (which includes the target libraries)
> needs to be build against the oldest version of gli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #10 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> There is NO fix inside gcc/libstdc++.
> THe only fix is your build of GCC (which includes the target libraries)
> needs to be build against the oldest version of gli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115908
--- Comment #2 from Artyom Kolpakov ---
When I wrote about returning the reference, i meant the return type of
get_return_object(), and not the coroutine itself
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #9 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> There is NO fix inside gcc/libstdc++.
> THe only fix is your build of GCC (which includes the target libraries)
> needs to be build against the oldest version of glib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #7 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 58654
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58654&action=edit
patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115908
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58653
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58653&action=edit
testcase
Next time please attach or place inline the testcase rather than just link to
godbolt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Note while glibc is backwards compatibility, it is not forward compatible.
> So if you build against the newest version of glibc, it will always use the
> newest symb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115908
Bug ID: 115908
Summary: [coroutines] Wrong behavior of using
get_return_object() coroutines creation
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note while glibc is backwards compatibility, it is not forward compatible. So
if you build against the newest version of glibc, it will always use the newest
symbols and that is by design.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 58652
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58652&action=edit
dependency
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Bug ID: 115907
Summary: Libstdc++ and GCC itself should avoid glibc above 2.34
dependency
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115906
Bug ID: 115906
Summary: [coroutines] ICE when co_await used as default
argument in function declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115889
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||admin at levyhsu dot com
Su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115868
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115868
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abf3964711f05b6858d9775c3595ec2b45483e14
commit r15-2014-gabf3964711f05b6858d9775c3595ec2b45483e14
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115905
Bug ID: 115905
Summary: [coroutines] Wrong behavior of await_suspend()
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115901
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rsandifo at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115903
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115903
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Funny it looks like clang does the same thing for timestamp too :).
s/clang/flang/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115903
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115752
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
--- Comment #1 from Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Can't call immediate|[14/15 Regression] Can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115903
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the path to hit this is __TIMESTAMP__ .
/* Generate __TIMESTAMP__ string, that represents
the date and time of the last modification
of the current
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115903
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-07-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115904
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo