[Bug tree-optimization/98512] [11/12 Regression] “#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored” ineffective in conjunction with alias attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98512 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||12.0 Resolution|---

[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 98871, which changed state. Bug 98871 Summary: Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/98871] Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/88443] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overflow warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443 Bug 88443 depends on bug 102969, which changed state. Bug 102969 Summary: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails after r12-4726 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102969 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/102969] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails after r12-4726

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102969 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/103200] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr91333.c scan-assembler-times vmovapd|vmovsd 3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103200 Bug ID: 103200 Summary: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr91333.c scan-assembler-times vmovapd|vmovsd 3 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug testsuite/100655] 'g++.dg/tsan/pthread_cond_clockwait.C' FAILs due to 'pthread_cond_clockwait' missing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100655 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Keyw

[Bug jit/103199] New: FAIL: ../jit/docs/examples/tut04-toyvm/toyvm.c, initial compilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103199 Bug ID: 103199 Summary: FAIL: ../jit/docs/examples/tut04-toyvm/toyvm.c, initial compilation Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/92879] [10/11 Regression] incorrect warning of __builtin_memset offset is out of the bounds on zero-size allocation and initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92879 --- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor --- The test fails everywhere. It regressed with r12-5107 (see pr102690). The solution was to xfail it (to your point in pr101674).

[Bug tree-optimization/103173] strncpy output may be truncated copying 32 bytes from a string of length 1439 (bogus) [-Werror=stringop-truncation]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103173 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org St

[Bug tree-optimization/103176] -foptimize-strlen causes stringop-overflow warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103176 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/103161] [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103161 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug testsuite/103161] [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103161 --- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor --- Aaah, never mind. The test depends on the unspecified order of argument evaluation. Doh!

[Bug testsuite/103161] [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103161 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- I bet you can't see the failures because they depend on fixes in a patch that hasn't been committed yet: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-November/583735.html But I wonder if there actually i

[Bug testsuite/103161] [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103161 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |testsuite --- Comment #5 from Martin Seb

[Bug middle-end/101917] [11 Regression] Spurious -Wstringop-overread with -flto when passing zero sized arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101917 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|fortran

[Bug tree-optimization/103161] [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103161 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/88232] Please implement -Winfinite-recursion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88232 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |middle-end Keywords|

[Bug c++/56189] Infinite recursion with noexcept when instantiating function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56189 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/59702] Infinite recursion in a late-specified return type of a function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59702 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/103145] [11 Regression] bogus -Wstringop-overread with an array argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103145 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|False positive of |[11 Regression] bogus

[Bug tree-optimization/103145] False positive of -Wstringop-overread on gcc-11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103145 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.3.0, 12.0 Blocks|

[Bug fortran/101919] Inconsistent -Wstringop-overread warning with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101919 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||97048 CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/102513] [10.11.12 Regression] Many false positive warnings with recursive function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102513 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||10.3.0, 11.2.0, 12.0 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/103143] [12 Regression] ICE due to infinite recursion in pointer-query.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103143 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor

[Bug bootstrap/102831] [12 regression] Spurious -Wparentheses etc. warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102831 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #6) If it's reliably reproducible (ideally with a cross), can you attach a translation unit and the options to use to reproduce it with?

[Bug tree-optimization/102690] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- It was backported here: g:19dcea67ac40cfdeb396fa264ebbe04fbe61fdc0

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 --- Comment #15 from Martin Sebor --- The call is made from the strlen pass which still does apparently use EVRP. I believe Aldy's been moving it away from it (some of his changes are still pending) as have I, so things are still in flux. I do

[Bug middle-end/101397] [11 Regression] spurious warning writing to the result of stpcpy minus 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101397 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||103143 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor

[Bug middle-end/103143] [12 Regression] ICE due to infinite recursion in pointer-query.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103143 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Keywords|

[Bug middle-end/103143] New: [12 Regression] ICE due to infinite recursion in pointer-query.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103143 Bug ID: 103143 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE due to infinite recursion in pointer-query.cc Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 --- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor --- Here's a reduced test case that reproduces the problem with an x86_64-linux GCC in ILP32 mode: $ cat pr103121.C && gcc -O2 -S -Wall -m32 pr103121.C typedef typeof (sizeof 0) size_t; struct tree_node { co

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 --- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor --- Okay, here's my question: when I call range_of_expr (vr, _4, stmt) with stmt being 'grp_name_37 = __builtin_alloca (_4)' in BB 4, should I not expect the result to be either VR_VARYING or [0, +INF]? What I

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor --- Sorry, I've been having trouble with GDB and so I'm running two GDB sessions and I have been mixing output from both of them. I see the warning for the store to *_23 in BB 13, not for BB 12. Here's a fresh

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- The [1, 1] range comes from a call to qry->range_of_expr (vr, exp, stmt) in in get_size_range() in pointer-query.cc: (gdb) p debug(gimple_bb(stmt)) [local count: 118111600]: _4 = _1 + 1; grp_name_37 = __bui

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --

[Bug tree-optimization/103121] [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/102831] [12 regression] Spurious -Wparentheses etc. warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102831 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- I have been testing the following changes to deal with other location and warning related problems. They might be worth giving a try to see if they help with this issue as well. diff --git a/gcc/diagnostic

[Bug tree-optimization/103111] bogus stringop overflow warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103111 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/102967] confusing location in -Waddress for a subexpression of a ternary expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102967 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- Both for the purposes of the warning (which can be more restrictive than what the language considers valid), and in the C language, the semantics of the -> expression depend on the first operand designating a

[Bug c/102967] confusing location in -Waddress for a subexpression of a ternary expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102967 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- The expression pa->c is only valid if pa points to a valid object.

[Bug c/103056] attribute access "none" is not ignored as it should

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103056 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug middle-end/103036] incorrect #pragma GCC diagnostic suppression for macro expansion and -Wuninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103036 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Blocks|

[Bug middle-end/103036] New: incorrect #pragma GCC diagnostic suppression for macro expansion and -Wuninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103036 Bug ID: 103036 Summary: incorrect #pragma GCC diagnostic suppression for macro expansion and -Wuninitialized Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug c/63272] GCC should warn when using pointer to dead scoped variable within the same function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63272 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/102996] No warning on dereferencing of uninitialized pointer in an array, in a loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102996 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Compo

[Bug tree-optimization/102960] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in sign_mask, at wide-int.h:855 in GCC 10.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102960 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug translation/90041] Command line option without proper quoting in translation message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90041 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- As Jakub says in comment #2, this problem is not in a diagnostic format string that the -Wformat checker sees.

[Bug translation/93836] teach xgettext what HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT means

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93836 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mliska at suse dot cz --- Comment #5 from

[Bug translation/93836] teach xgettext what HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT means

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93836 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/102969] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails after r12-4726

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102969 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks|

[Bug c/102967] confusing location in -Waddress for a subexpression of a ternary expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102967 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug c/102965] C11 atomic functions accept incompatible arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102965 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid See Also|

[Bug c/102965] New: C11 atomic functions accept incompatible arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102965 Bug ID: 102965 Summary: C11 atomic functions accept incompatible arguments Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug testsuite/102964] [12 regression] libgomp.c/doacross-1.c fails after r12-4725

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102964 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-10-27 Keywords|

[Bug go/91992] gcc/testsuite/go/index0-out.x SEGV and spinlock during testsuite run

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91992 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug testsuite/102904] go testsuite does not always cause a timeout

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102904 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org See

[Bug tree-optimization/102960] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: in sign_mask, at wide-int.h:855 in GCC 10.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102960 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail|

[Bug tree-optimization/84774] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wrestrict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84774 Bug 84774 depends on bug 102919, which changed state. Bug 102919 Summary: spurious -Wrestrict warning for sprintf into the same member array as argument plus offset https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102919 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/102919] spurious -Wrestrict warning for sprintf into the same member array as argument plus offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102919 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 102453, which changed state. Bug 102453 Summary: buffer overflow by atomic built-ins not diagnosed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102453 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/102453] buffer overflow by atomic built-ins not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102453 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/102958] std::u8string suboptimal compared to std::string, triggers warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102958 --- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor --- Something similar afflicts libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/capacity/1.cc but that test is too contrived to matter in practice.

[Bug tree-optimization/102958] New: std::u8string suboptimal compared to std::string, triggers warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102958 Bug ID: 102958 Summary: std::u8string suboptimal compared to std::string, triggers warnings Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/102955] New: assembler errors when bootstrapping with #pragma optimize "0"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102955 Bug ID: 102955 Summary: assembler errors when bootstrapping with #pragma optimize "0" Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/102951] New: failure to optimize MIN_EXPR of subobject addresses of the same object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102951 Bug ID: 102951 Summary: failure to optimize MIN_EXPR of subobject addresses of the same object Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/102934] missing warning passing address of first member to free()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102934 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0

[Bug middle-end/102934] New: missing warning passing address of first member to free()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102934 Bug ID: 102934 Summary: missing warning passing address of first member to free() Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug tree-optimization/102238] missing -Wrestrict for sprintf into the same member array as argument plus offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102238 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/102919] spurious -Wrestrict warning for sprintf into the same member array as argument plus offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102919 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/102919] spurious -Wrestrict warning for sprintf into the same member array as argument plus offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102919 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/102919] New: spurious -Wrestrict warning for sprintf into the same member array as argument plus offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102919 Bug ID: 102919 Summary: spurious -Wrestrict warning for sprintf into the same member array as argument plus offset Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/102867] [12 Regression] -Waddress from macro expansion in readelf.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102867 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[12 Regression] Waddress|[12 Regression] -Waddress

[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 81981, which changed state. Bug 81981 Summary: [8 Regression] -fsanitize=undefined makes a -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning disappear https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981 What|Removed

[Bug sanitizer/81981] [8 Regression] -fsanitize=undefined makes a -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning disappear

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||12.0 Known to work|

[Bug middle-end/102887] wrong warning location with macro expansion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102887 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/102887] New: wrong warning location with macro expansion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102887 Bug ID: 102887 Summary: wrong warning location with macro expansion Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: midd

[Bug c/102867] [12 Regression] Waddress complaint in readelf.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102867 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/102849] New: missing warning for unsigned bitfield tests for negativity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102849 Bug ID: 102849 Summary: missing warning for unsigned bitfield tests for negativity Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug c/102848] New: missing warning for bitfield overflow in C

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102848 Bug ID: 102848 Summary: missing warning for bitfield overflow in C Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug bootstrap/102828] [12 Regression] ODR violation in gimple-predicate-analysis.h since g:94c12ffac234

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102828 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/102810] [11/12 Regression] Bogus Wstringop-overread passing a smaller array to an array parameter without a bound

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102810 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confi

[Bug tree-optimization/102759] [12 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault in maybe_check_access_sizes since r12-2976-gb48d4e6818674898

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102759 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|diagnostic |ice-on-valid-code Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/102744] [12 regression] -O2 vectorization causes Wzero-length-array-bounds-2.c to fail on arc-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102744 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org Last recon

[Bug rtl-optimization/102733] missing fs:0 store when followed by one to gs:0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102733 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- A couple of data points: I see the same behavior for any constant address (not just null). Clang 12 behaves the same as GCC, but Clang 13 emits both stores, suggesting they fixed it as a bug: https://godb

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 102630, which changed state. Bug 102630 Summary: [12 Regression] Spurious -Warray-bounds with named address space https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102630 What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/102630] [12 Regression] Spurious -Warray-bounds with named address space

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102630 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/102733] New: missing fs:0 store when followed by one to gs:0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102733 Bug ID: 102733 Summary: missing fs:0 store when followed by one to gs:0 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/102731] inconsistent handling of dereferncing a null pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102731 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||56456, 88443 Keywords|

[Bug middle-end/102731] New: inconsistent handling of dereferncing a null pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102731 Bug ID: 102731 Summary: inconsistent handling of dereferncing a null pointer Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug tree-optimization/99580] False positive -Warray-bounds with nested loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99580 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2021-03-14 00:00:00 |2021-10-13 Summary|False posit

[Bug c++/102726] Does not warn for enum constant in boolean context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102726 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-10-13 Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug testsuite/102720] [12 regression] gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ldist-strlen-1.c and ldist-strlen-2.c fail after r12-4234

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102720 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-10-13 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug middle-end/101836] __builtin_object_size(P->M, 1) where M is an array and the last member of a struct fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Component|c

[Bug c/101836] __builtin_object_size(P->M, 1) where M is an array and the last member of a struct fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-10-13 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug other/102718] New: gtype-desc.c function redefinition error for gt_ggc_xxx (int_hash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102718 Bug ID: 102718 Summary: gtype-desc.c function redefinition error for gt_ggc_xxx (int_hash&) Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/102700] [12 Regression] wrong location in -Wuninitialized after -O2 vectorization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102700 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-10-12 CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/102706] [12 regression] -O2 vectorization causes regression in Warray-bounds-48.c on many targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102706 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||crazylht at gmail dot com Keyw

[Bug middle-end/102697] [12 Regression] overflow warning missing after -O2 vectorization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102697 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[Diagnostics] overflow |[12 Regression] overflow

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >