[Bug libstdc++/115585] --disable-libstdcxx-verbose causes undefined symbol: _ZSt21__glibcxx_assert_failPKciS0_S0_, version GLIBCXX_3.4.30

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115585 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm, why was libcppdap.so compiled with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG turned on in the first place?

[Bug libstdc++/115585] --disable-libstdcxx-verbose causes undefined symbol: _ZSt21__glibcxx_assert_failPKciS0_S0_, version GLIBCXX_3.4.30

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115585 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-14.1.0/libstdc++/manual/manual/configure.html --disable-libstdcxx-verbose By default, the library is configured to write descriptive messages to standard error for

[Bug c++/115557] Invalid NSDMI accepted for templates classes for a aggregate that binds to a temp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115557 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|initializing reference |Invalid NSDMI accepted for

[Bug ipa/115533] [12/13/14/15 regression] flac miscompiled with -O3 -march=znver2 -fipa-pta -fno-vect-cost-model since r12-3893-g6390c5047adb75

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115533 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/115583] [14/15 Regression] C++23: Call to consteval function in `if consteval` immediate function context rejected at -O1 since r14-4140

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115583 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/115581] could remove copy of struct if original otherwise not used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115581 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Barnabás Pőcze from comment #3) > Isn't your testcase a bit different? I guess my question is, why does gcc > feel the need to make a local copy of a by-value argument when calling a > function

[Bug target/115576] [14/15 regression] Worse code generated for simple struct conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115576 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |target --- Comment #3 from Andrew

[Bug c++/115580] [11/12/13/14/15 regression] null pointer warning from an unevaluated context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115580 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-21

[Bug middle-end/115581] could remove copy of struct if original otherwise not used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115581 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Note it looks like clang does some front-end optimization for converting the lambda into a function pointer because my example in comment #1 has the copy still there for clang/LLVM.

[Bug middle-end/115581] could remove copy of struct if original otherwise not used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115581 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug middle-end/115581] could remove copy of struct if original otherwise not used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115581 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|other

[Bug tree-optimization/115579] [15 regression] wrong code at -Os with "-fno-tree-sra" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-1391-g4b75ed33fa5fd6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115579 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- So looking into the code. The problem is the ordering. That is if the store to b is first things will just work. The loop to call execute_sm: execute_sm (loop, ref, aux_map, true, !first_p);

[Bug c++/115583] C++23: Call to consteval function in `if consteval` immediate function context rejected at -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115583 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/115579] [15 regression] wrong code at -Os with "-fno-tree-sra" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-1391-g4b75ed33fa5fd6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115579 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #3) > Perhaps the same or a related issue. It reproduces for -O{s,2,3}. It is the same due to -fno-tree-ch . -Os has a very restrictive version of that.

[Bug tree-optimization/115579] [15 regression] wrong code at -Os with "-fno-tree-sra" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-1391-g4b75ed33fa5fd6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115579 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-21

[Bug tree-optimization/115582] [15 regression] wrong code when accessing members of incompatible type structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115582 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|WAITING

[Bug tree-optimization/115582] [15 regression] wrong code when accessing members of incompatible type structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115582 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/115576] [14 regression] Worse code generated for simple struct conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115576 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|target |c++ --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/951] Documentation of compiler passes and sources very out of date

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=951 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #12) > Patch posted that might help with this a little bit: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-March/648306.html I don't know how much of that patch

[Bug middle-end/106870] ctrl_altering flag is not set correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106870 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-21

[Bug rtl-optimization/115573] ICE: verify_flow_info failed with no_reorder attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115573 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |rtl-optimization --- Comment #1 from

[Bug c++/100030] ICE: in dependent_type_p, at cp/pt.c:26757

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100030 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 100031 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c++/100031] ICE: in dependent_type_p, at cp/pt.c:26757

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100031 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/115571] New: `cmp * float` vs `tmp_bool * float` and better vectorization for `cmp * float`

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115571 Bug ID: 115571 Summary: `cmp * float` vs `tmp_bool * float` and better vectorization for `cmp * float` Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/115570] array subscript 'long unsigned int[0]' is partly outside array bounds of 'unsigned char[4]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Note there is also an alignment requirement that you violate with the assignment and access of the char array too.

[Bug middle-end/115570] array subscript 'long unsigned int[0]' is partly outside array bounds of 'unsigned char[4]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Note this code also violates C/C++ aliasing rules but that is a different issue.

[Bug middle-end/115570] array subscript 'long unsigned int[0]' is partly outside array bounds of 'unsigned char[4]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115570 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/115563] Unnecessary brackets prevent fortran vectorisation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Note I have a fix for this which I attached to PR 68855 and will be submitting it after the bootstrap/test finishes. Thanks again for the testcase and the decent bug report. It definitely was useful.

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 58477 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58477=edit Patch which I am testing

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 --- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski --- C version of the same: ``` void foo(_Complex float *a, int n) { for(int i = 0; i < n; i++) { _Complex float t; t = a[i]; t += 6.0; t = __builtin_assoc_barrier(t); a[i] = t; } } ```

[Bug target/115408] regression between gcc 13.3.0 and 14.1.0 using -mips16 and -minterlink-mips16

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115408 --- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to gagan sidhu (broly) from comment #11) > dear lad(ettes), > > i just want to take this opportunity to contrast this scenario, had the > equivalent occurred on the inferior, unjustifiably

[Bug c/115566] Arrays of character type initialized with parenthesized string literals shouldn't be diagnosed with -pedantic (at least in C23)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2004-July/144923.html

[Bug c/115566] Arrays of character type initialized with parenthesized string literals shouldn't be diagnosed with -pedantic (at least in C23)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Note HP's aCC errored out on this code even. So it was not just something GCC added to be extra pedantic either (this was mentioned in PR 11250 too).

[Bug c/115566] Arrays of character type initialized with parenthesized string literals shouldn't be diagnosed with -pedantic (at least in C23)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/115566] Arrays of character type initialized with parenthesized string literals shouldn't be diagnosed with -pedantic (at least in C23)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- >. Clang accepts this, even with -std=c89 -pedantic. Well that is definitely a clang issue. See PR 11250 which added this warning.

[Bug rtl-optimization/115568] wrong code at -O2 with "-fno-tree-sink -fno-tree-ter -fschedule-insns" on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115568 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I wonder if the scheduler is moving the divide (by zero) incorrectly.

[Bug c++/115567] Internal Compiler Error: Segmentation Fault during build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115567 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/115566] Arrays of character type initialized with parenthesized string literals shouldn't be diagnosed with -pedantic (at least in C23)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115566 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- /* If TYPE is an array type and EXPR is a parenthesized string constant, warn if pedantic that EXPR is being used to initialize an object of type TYPE. */ void maybe_warn_string_init (location_t

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- Note the handling of PAREN_EXPR in tree-complex.c has been inefficient since the tree code was added back in r0-85884-gdedd42d511b6e4 .

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- I wonder if lower complex should do a better job in the first place: that is from: _9 = _8 + __complex__ (6.0e+0, 1.0e+0); _11 = ((_9)); (*a_7(D))[_6] = _11; instead of producing: _9 = COMPLEX_EXPR

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Note a good testcase for this is (with `-O3 -ffast-math -fopenmp-simd`): ``` subroutine foo(a,n) complex (kind(1d0)) :: a(*) integer :: i,n !$OMP SIMD do i=1,n a(i)=(a(i)+(6d0,1d0)) enddo

[Bug fortran/115563] Unnecessary brackets prevent fortran vectorisation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Note the full IR: _9 = COMPLEX_EXPR <_15, _14>; _11 = ((_9)); _19 = REALPART_EXPR <_11>; _20 = IMAGPART_EXPR <_11>; REALPART_EXPR <(*a_7(D))[_6]> = _19; IMAGPART_EXPR <(*a_7(D))[_6]> = _20;

[Bug middle-end/68855] PAREN_EXPR not "ignored" where possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68855 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mjr19 at cam dot ac.uk --- Comment #4

[Bug fortran/115563] Unnecessary brackets prevent fortran vectorisation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug fortran/115563] Unnecessary brackets prevent fortran vectorisation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115563 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/85316] [meta-bug] VRP range propagation missed cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316 Bug 85316 depends on bug 11, which changed state. Bug 11 Summary: [Ranger] deduce 'a >= 0' from 'b << a' https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/31178] VRP can infer a range for b in a >> b and a << b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31178 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/115555] [Ranger] deduce 'a >= 0' from 'b << a'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/115555] [Ranger] deduce 'a >= 0' from 'b << a'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/109753] [13/14 Regression] pragma GCC target causes std::vector not to compile (always_inline on constructor)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||malat at debian dot org --- Comment

[Bug target/115556] error: this operation requires the SVE ISA extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115556 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug target/115556] error: this operation requires the SVE ISA extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115556 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||109753 --- Comment #5 from Andrew

[Bug target/115556] error: this operation requires the SVE ISA extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115556 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- The trunk error message might be better: ``` In file included from /opt/compiler-explorer/libs/highway/trunk/hwy/highway.h:588, from

[Bug libstdc++/51452] [DR 2116] is_nothrow_.*constructible bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452 --- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski --- Related to https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2886.html also.

[Bug c++/114844] A trivial but noexcept(false) destructor is incorrectly considered non-throwing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114844 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2886.html The DR report is still have not been accepted here ...

[Bug c++/115558] Trivial noexcept(false) default constructor does not make value initialization potentially throwing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115558 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/115558] Trivial noexcept(false) default constructor does not make value initialization potentially throwing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115558 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- See https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2019-09/msg00311.html .

[Bug tree-optimization/115304] gcc.dg/vect/slp-gap-1.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115304 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c/115549] ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl common’ structure, have ‘error_mark’ in common_handle_aligned_attribute, at c-family/c-attribs.cc:2665 with invalid aligned attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115549 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-checking Severity|normal

[Bug c/115552] wrong code at -O2 and above when strict-aliasing with uint128 and double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115552 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- So basically since main writes via a double type but then spookyhash_short reads via a uint64_t type there is an alias violation. Using an union to change the pointer type does not change there is an alias

[Bug c/115552] wrong code at -O2 and above when strict-aliasing with uint128 and double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115552 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/115547] `(a ^ c) & (a | c)` -> `a ^ c` not done on the gimple/tree level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115547 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv

[Bug tree-optimization/115547] New: `(a ^ c) & (a | c)` -> `a ^ c` not done on the gimple/tree level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115547 Bug ID: 115547 Summary: `(a ^ c) & (a | c)` -> `a ^ c` not done on the gimple/tree level Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug testsuite/115545] [15 regression] missing/excess errors after r15-1394

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115545 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to uecker from comment #3) > And I introduced a similar issue with PR115157. Except that was about enum where here we are talking about size of long. You could have tested on x86_64 with -m32 to

[Bug c++/87178] Compilation failure when program contains multiple variables allocated in particular section, and at least one variable is C++17 "inline"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nikhilg1 at uci dot edu --- Comment #10

[Bug c++/115546] [14.1.0 Regression] Section Type Conflict Error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115546 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/41091] Using section attribute in c and c++ function causes section type conflict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41091 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c++/87178] Compilation failure when program contains multiple variables allocated in particular section, and at least one variable is C++17 "inline"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9

[Bug c++/115546] [14.1.0 Regression] Section Type Conflict Error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115546 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/115546] [14.1.0 Regression] Section Type Conflict Error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115546 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- But starting with GCC 14, they are not ignored. In this case you have one variable that is in a comdat section named "A" and another one which is in a regular section named "A" which conflict.

[Bug c++/115546] [14.1.0 Regression] Section Type Conflict Error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115546 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- the section attribute was ignored before GCC 14.

[Bug testsuite/115545] [15 regression] missing/excess errors after r15-1394

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115545 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-18

[Bug testsuite/115545] [15 regression] missing/excess errors after r15-1394

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115545 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.0

[Bug other/115545] [15 regression] missing/excess errors after r15-1394

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115545 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[15 regression] |[15 regression]

[Bug tree-optimization/115544] ICE: in lower_complexexpr_stmt, at gimple-lower-bitint.cc:4719 with -O -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-forwprop and _BitInt() __builtin_mul_overflow()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115544 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Note the gimple stmt/complex_expr in this case: _6 = COMPLEX_EXPR ; where _6 is fully unused. Complex lowering changes: _6 = COMPLEX_EXPR ; _2 = REALPART_EXPR <_6>; into: _6 = COMPLEX_EXPR ;

[Bug tree-optimization/115544] ICE: in lower_complexexpr_stmt, at gimple-lower-bitint.cc:4719 with -O -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-forwprop and _BitInt() __builtin_mul_overflow()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115544 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-18

[Bug tree-optimization/115544] ICE: in lower_complexexpr_stmt, at gimple-lower-bitint.cc:4719 with -O -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-forwprop and _BitInt() __builtin_mul_overflow()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115544 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Host|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |

[Bug middle-end/115534] intermediate stack use not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115534 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- This might be improved by https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/654819.html . Or it might be the case the vectorizer case needs to be improved afterwards. But I think that is the

[Bug middle-end/115534] intermediate stack use not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115534 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-18

[Bug middle-end/32667] block copy with exact overlap is expanded as memcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32667 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv

[Bug c++/85723] [C++17][DR 1496] __is_trivial intrinsic fails with no trivial non-deleted default c'tor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85723 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > And again, causing PR 115522 oh and clang has not implemented this DR either which made me think that was more of a libstdc++ issue :).

[Bug middle-end/32667] block copy with exact overlap is expanded as memcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32667 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikulas at artax dot karlin.mff.cu

[Bug middle-end/115541] gcc generates calls to memcpy that violate the memcpy specification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115541 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug middle-end/115539] Misoptimization of application at -O2 -g on x86-64 causing segfaults on valid memory accesses where it works on both clang and gcc at -g (no -O2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115539 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |middle-end Keywords|

[Bug middle-end/115534] intermediate stack use not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115534 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |middle-end Severity|normal

[Bug tree-optimization/115534] intermediate stack use not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115534 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I suspect there is a dup of this already. See the bug which I made this one blocking for a list of related bugs.

[Bug tree-optimization/115531] vectorizer generates inefficient code for masked conditional update loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115531 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Maybe ifcvt can produce a masked store version if this pattern ... Maybe add another argument to .MASK_STORE to say it was originally unconditional store? Or

[Bug tree-optimization/115531] vectorizer generates inefficient code for masked conditional update loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115531 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/115531] vectorizer generates inefficient code for masked conditional update loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115531 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-18 See Also|

[Bug middle-end/115530] ICE: in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.cc:1741 with simd attribute and tm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115530 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code --- Comment #1 from

[Bug tree-optimization/115529] Optimization with "bit mask and compare equality" ((x & C1) == C2), ((x | C3) == C4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115529 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >((x | C3) == C4) shows up in PR 86975, see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86975#c2 .

[Bug tree-optimization/97405] ICE in get_or_alloc_expr_for in code hoisting with SVE intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97405 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/97405] ICE in get_or_alloc_expr_for in code hoisting with SVE intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97405 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/115501] [13/14/15 Regression] ICE: in build_call_a with dynamic_cast after invalid definition of __cxxabiv1::__dynamic_cast since r13-3299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115501 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/115527] -ftrivial-auto-var-init appears to clobber explicit initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115527 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-06-17

[Bug fortran/115528] [15 regression] segmentation fault in legacy F77 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115528 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/115526] [14/15 regression] invalid assember emitted for alpha, "Error: duplicate !tlsgd!62"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115526 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- beq $10,$L293 lda $13,_Py_tss_tstate($29) !tlsgd!62 ... $L293: lda $16,1($31) ldq $27,Balloc($29) !literal!78 jsr $26,($27),0

[Bug target/115526] [14/15 regression] invalid assember emitted for alpha, "Error: duplicate !tlsgd!62"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115526 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.2

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >