[Bug bootstrap/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #23 from Chris Clayton --- On 18/07/2022 19:13, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 > > Aldy Hernandez changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug bootstrap/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #20 from Chris Clayton --- On 08/07/2022 15:02, Chris Clayton wrote: > Hi > > On 04/07/2022 00:12, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 >> >> Andrew Pinski changed: >> >>

[Bug bootstrap/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #19 from Chris Clayton --- Hi On 04/07/2022 00:12, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 > > Andrew Pinski changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug bootstrap/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #18 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53256 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53256=edit git bisect log

[Bug bootstrap/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #17 from Chris Clayton --- I've cloned git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git and bisected between 13-20220626 (ff35dbc02092fbcd3d814fcd9fe8e871c3f741fd) and 13-20220619 (4390e7bfbc641a52c6192b448768dafdf4565527) as bad and good

[Bug bootstrap/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #16 from Chris Clayton --- I've tried two further build of gcc-13 using gcc-12-20220702. The gcc-13-20220703 snapshot fails with the same ICEs but the 20220619 snapshot builds successfully. So we have 13-20220626 and 13-20220703

[Bug bootstrap/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #15 from Chris Clayton --- On 04/07/2022 00:12, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 > > Andrew Pinski changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #12 from Chris Clayton --- I've just run the build again with gcc-11-20220701 and get the same set of ICEs. I've kept the files of diagnostics output by gcc and can provide them id they will be helpful.

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #11 from Chris Clayton --- On 03/07/2022 12:00, sch...@linux-m68k.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 > > --- Comment #10 from Andreas Schwab --- > How did you build the bootstrap compiler? > I

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #9 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53255 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53255=edit Error messages output to terminal

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #8 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53254 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53254=edit GCC diagnostics file 9

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #7 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53253 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53253=edit GCC diagnostics file 8

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #6 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53252 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53252=edit GCC diagnostics file 7

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #5 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53251 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53251=edit GCC diagnostics file 6

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #4 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53250 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53250=edit GCC diagnostics file 5

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #3 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53249 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53249=edit GCC diagnostics file 4

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #2 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53248 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53248=edit GCC diagnostics file 3

[Bug c/106172] Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106172 --- Comment #1 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 53247 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53247=edit GCC diagnostics file 2

[Bug c/106172] New: Multiple ICEs building gcc-13 with gcc-12

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: chris2553 at googlemail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 53246 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53246=edit GCC diagnostics file 1 I'm trying to build the gcc-13-20220626 snapshot with the

[Bug c++/105256] [9/10 Regression] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #33 from Chris Clayton --- On 20/04/2022 07:46, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 > > Jakub Jelinek changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug c++/105256] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #25 from Chris Clayton --- I went ahead and patched gcc-11-0220409 and with the resultant compiler have had two successful builds of firefox-99. I then reverted to the unpatched gcc and a build of firefox-99 failed with the same

[Bug c++/105256] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #24 from Chris Clayton --- I see the patch is for gcc-12. As I said in comment, I don't get the ICE with the latest gcc-12 snapshot, but is it worth me applying the patch to gcc-11 (with which I do get the ICE) and testing a build

[Bug c++/105256] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #17 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 52810 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52810=edit Compiler commands Finally got them by running running "ps ax" in a while true loop, grepping the output for the

[Bug c++/105256] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #6 from Chris Clayton --- I'm struggling to get the compiler command line. The build system is wrapped in a build tool called mach and I'm darned if I can find an argument that will cause it to report the command it is about to

[Bug c++/105256] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #5 from Chris Clayton --- The .ii file was huge so I've had to split it and then compress the parts

[Bug c++/105256] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #4 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 52804 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52804=edit Second Requested file - part2

[Bug c++/105256] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #3 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 52803 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52803=edit Second requested file - part1

[Bug c++/105256] ICE compiling firefox-99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105256 --- Comment #2 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 52802 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52802=edit First requested file

[Bug c++/105256] New: ICE compiling firefox-99

++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: chris2553 at googlemail dot com Target Milestone: --- I get the following ICE bump when compiling firefox-99.0 (and 99.0.1) with a gcc installation built from the gcc-11-20220409 snapshot. The same ICE occurs with gcc-11-20220402. 30:42.01

[Bug tree-optimization/97953] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #22 from Chris Clayton --- I've applied Richard's patch to the 20201122 snapshot and can happily report that the build now completes successfully. My thanks to Martin and Richard.

[Bug tree-optimization/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #13 from Chris Clayton --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #9) > Ok, so the question is: does it reproduce with the current master or now? Short answer: Yes, it does. A build done this morning (after pulling the latest

[Bug tree-optimization/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #12 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 49622 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49622=edit git bisect log

[Bug tree-optimization/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #11 from Chris Clayton --- I've finished the bisect and landed at: [chris:~/scratch/gcc-ICE/gcc]$ git bisect good bd87cc14ebdb6789e067fb1828d5808407c308b3 is the first bad commit commit bd87cc14ebdb6789e067fb1828d5808407c308b3

[Bug tree-optimization/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #8 from Chris Clayton --- Sorry, my last comment contains an error. git bisect start... reported 7 bisections would be needed not that there were only 7 commits.

[Bug tree-optimization/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #7 from Chris Clayton --- Yes, Richard's correct. I'm building from snapshot releases. That's why I used the term "snapshot releases" in comment 4. I've cloned git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git and am bisecting between

[Bug c/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #4 from Chris Clayton --- I've done a few more builds of snapshot releases of gcc-11. Using with gcc-10-20201122, I get the ICE building 11-2020115, but 11-20201108 and 20201101 both build successfully.

[Bug c/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #2 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 49612 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49612=edit Full build log

[Bug c/97953] ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97953 --- Comment #1 from Chris Clayton --- Created attachment 49611 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49611=edit Preprocessed source

[Bug c/97953] New: ICE (segfault) during GIMPLE pass: loopdone compiling libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:190:1

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: chris2553 at googlemail dot com Target Milestone: --- Building 11-20201122 (with gcc-10-20201121 or gcc-10-20201114) results in an ICE as follows: /home/chris

[Bug c++/62224] [4.9 Regression] Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62224 --- Comment #17 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- I can confirm that with Jason's code changes (referenced in comment 15) to gcc/cp/decl2.c and gcc/gimple-fold.c, the resultant compiler successfully builds qt-creator-3.2.0

[Bug c++/62224] [4.9 Regression] Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62224 --- Comment #12 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- Sorry, you'll have to stick with me here while a figure out what that means. I think you are saying that prior to r214208, the symbols definedMacros() and headerPaths() were

[Bug c++/62224] [4.9 Regression] Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62224 --- Comment #7 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- Created attachment 33439 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33439action=edit Pre-processed cppcodemodelinspectordialog cppcodemodelinspectordialog.ii

[Bug c++/62224] [4.9 Regression] Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62224 --- Comment #9 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- That seems odd to me, although I'm happy to be told I'm wrong. I base this on the fact that reverting the code change from r214208 permits a successful build. MoreOver, in both

[Bug c++/62224] [4.9 Regression] Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62224 --- Comment #5 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- I reverted the code change from r214208 with the following patch: --- gcc-4.9-20140827-orig/gcc/cp/decl2.c2014-08-20 02:54:40.0 +0100 +++ gcc-4.9-20140827/gcc

[Bug c++/62224] [4.9 Regression] Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62224 --- Comment #3 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- Yes, the preprocessed file is the one providing the unresolved references. It surely won't be a surprise to anyone to here that the same failure occurs when building

[Bug c++/62224] New: Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: chris2553 at googlemail dot com Building qt-creator-3.2.0 with this week's 4.9.2 (21040820) snapshot fails. Building it with last week's 4.9.2 (20140813) snapshot succeeds. My system is a 32 bit user space running on a 64 bit 3.16.1

[Bug c++/62224] Possible regression in gcc-4.9-20140820

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62224 --- Comment #1 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- Created attachment 33377 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33377action=edit Preprocessed source file ETOOBIG on uncompressed attachment. Now compressed

[Bug rtl-optimization/61215] [4.9/4.10 Regression] ICE in gen_add2_insn, at optabs.c:4718 when building wine-1.7.19

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61215 --- Comment #7 from Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com --- I can confirm that with Vladimir's patch applied to gcc-4.9-20140521, wine-1.7.19 now compiles successfully. Thanks everyone.

[Bug c/61215] New: ICE building wine-1.7.19 with gcc-4.9-20140514

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: chris2553 at googlemail dot com Created attachment 32815 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32815action=edit Preprcessed source file I've bumped into an ICE when building wine-1.7.19 with gcc-4.9-20140514

[Bug c/61215] ICE building wine-1.7.19 with gcc-4.9-20140514

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61215 Chris Clayton chris2553 at googlemail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||chris2553

[Bug tree-optimization/42773] [4.4 Regression] ICE with g++ from 4.4.3 20100112 (prerelease)

--- Comment #7 from chris2553 at googlemail dot com 2010-01-18 22:24 --- I can confirm that the patch at comment 4 has fixed the ICE. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42773

[Bug c++/42773] New: ICE with g++ from 4.4.3 20100112 (prerelease)

Version: 4.4.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: chris2553 at googlemail dot com GCC build triplet: i386-pc-linux GCC host triplet: i386-pc-linux GCC

[Bug c++/42773] ICE with g++ from 4.4.3 20100112 (prerelease)

--- Comment #1 from chris2553 at googlemail dot com 2010-01-17 10:29 --- Created an attachment (id=19631) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19631action=view) Preprocessed input Had to gzip the file because at 1.1Mb it was bounced by bugzilla. -- http

[Bug c/41955] New: ICE compiling today's linux kernel git snapshot

Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: chris2553 at googlemail dot com GCC build triplet: i386-pc-linux GCC host triplet: i386-pc-linux GCC target triplet: i386-pc-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41955

[Bug c/37384] Assembler error message when building vlc-0.9.1

--- Comment #5 from chris2553 at googlemail dot com 2008-09-09 17:50 --- Subject: Re: Assembler error message when building vlc-0.9.1 On Saturday 06 September 2008, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-06 21:39

[Bug c/37384] New: Assembler error message when building vlc-0.9.1

: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: chris2553 at googlemail dot com GCC build triplet: i386-pc-linux GCC host triplet: i386-pc-linux GCC target triplet: i386-pc-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla

[Bug c/37384] Assembler error message when building vlc-0.9.1

--- Comment #1 from chris2553 at googlemail dot com 2008-09-05 14:54 --- Created an attachment (id=16233) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16233action=view) Preprocessed file that triggers the problem -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37384

[Bug c++/30376] New: aspell-0.60.5 fails to build with -O3 on gcc-4.1.2 20061222 (prerelease)

Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: chris2553 at googlemail dot com GCC build triplet: 386-pc-linux GCC host triplet: i386-pc-linux GCC target triplet: 386-pc-linux

[Bug c++/30376] aspell-0.60.5 fails to build with -O3 on gcc-4.1.2 20061222 (prerelease)

--- Comment #2 from chris2553 at googlemail dot com 2007-01-05 05:56 --- Subject: Re: aspell-0.60.5 fails to build with -O3 on gcc-4.1.2 20061222 (prerelease) Thanks for the reply. On Thursday 04 January 2007 22:25, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #1 from