https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107743
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107743
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116216
Bug ID: 116216
Summary: -Wstringop-overread in attribs.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116218
Bug ID: 116218
Summary: -Wformat-overflow in gengtype.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
Bug ID: 116219
Summary: [14/15 regression] -O2 -march=znver3
-gno-statement-frontiers -fcompare-debug failure when
building botan-3.2.0
Product: gcc
Version: 15.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
It's at r15-2707-g8256d5c0097dff but I was also still using -fno-tree-forwprop
when I hit it. (I'll drop that from my build flags now for the compare-debug
stuff.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
ah, sorry
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116220
Bug ID: 116220
Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialised in lto_obj_begin_section
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116220
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Am I missing something here?
libiberty's simple_object_elf_copy_lto_debug_sections also does:
```
dest = simple_object_write_create_section (dobj, pfnname[i - 1],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
I'm trying to reduce it but it's pretty slow going.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116213
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58818
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58818&action=edit
attempted-reduction.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116213
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-Wmaybe-uninitialized in|[14/15 regression]
|tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116215
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-Wstringop-overflow in |[12/13/14/15 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116216
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-Wstringop-overread in |[13/14/15 regression]
|at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116218
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
All versions I tried fail, although the diagnostic improved between 11 and 12:
11:
```
In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:970,
from
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-15.0./work/gcc-15.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116221
Bug ID: 116221
Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized in gfc_get_ha_symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116222
Bug ID: 116222
Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized in record_target_from_binfo in
ipa-devirt.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116221
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
The same issue shows up in a few other places:
```
In function ‘gfc_get_intrinsic_sub_symbol’,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106409
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC with LTO: Warning: |GCC with LTO:
|argument 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115428
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116213
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 regression] |[14/15 regression]
|-Wmay
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116225
Bug ID: 116225
Summary: Rust test failures with -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116225
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
e.g.
```
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-15.0./work/build/prev-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_stack.h:293:
void std::stack<_Tp, _Sequence>::pop() [with _Tp = unsigned int; _Sequence =
std::
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116215
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 regression]|[12/13/14/15 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112358
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||88443
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
The hope is that Qing's work at
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20240712140327.709430-1-qing.z...@oracle.com/
for PR109071 will make dupes easier to identify (and also help people
understand real bugs in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107743
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
See also r13-729-gc5c52372314911 for an earlier instance.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116226
Bug ID: 116226
Summary: ICE when building exp_aggr.adb with -Warray-bounds
(tree check: expected integer_cst, have ssa_name in
get_len, at ree.h:6509)
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116226
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58821
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58821&action=edit
gnat-crash.tar.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116226
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58822
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58822&action=edit
gnat-crash.tar.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116216
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58823
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58823&action=edit
reduced.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87926
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
See Also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116228
Bug ID: 116228
Summary: [14/15 regression] -fanalyzer ICE in
get_or_create_null_ptr, at
analyzer/region-model-manager.cc:271
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116214
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58825
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58825&action=edit
reduction-1.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116214
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58826
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58826&action=edit
reduction-2.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116214
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> Created attachment 58825 [details]
> reduction-1.ii
I originally had some convoluted switch to try add more edges but it turned out
none of that was needed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116215
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58827
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58827&action=edit
reduced.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116215
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> Created attachment 58827 [details]
> reduced.ii
I think this is wrong, actually.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91470
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 91470, which changed state.
Bug 91470 Summary: [12 Regression] bogus uninitialized warning in
trans-intrinsic.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91470
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91470
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.5|12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116214
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115912
--- Comment #21 from Sam James ---
Thanks Jeff!
BTW: I noticed
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-testresults/76fb66d4e2bd1493068cf531c73f5...@linux.ibm.com/T/#u
mentions the PR116037 test is failing on s390x but I haven't looked into it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106409
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #9)
> This is painfully noisy with LTO given how common this pattern is.
... even with building gcc itself:
```
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-15.0.0_pre20240804/work/gcc-15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101507
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91992
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116225
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
We should add a -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS build into the rust CI but we should also
really encourage at least one of the CI efforts on gcc-regressions etc to do
such a config too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116207
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116210
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
after your suggestion on IRC to tamper with GTY annotations, it looks like:
-static GTY((deletable)) hash_table *norm_cache;
+static GTY(()) hash_table *norm_cache;
stops the comparison issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116219
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> r14-998-gc5709fc87131be made some changes to how it is used.
Reverting this does not help on 14 even.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116235
Bug ID: 116235
Summary: Add ASAN annotations to ggc like we do for Valgrind
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: GC, internal-improvement
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116235
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
As an example, Emacs did
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit/?id=cb242bf1514ade34ab93b1db1ea7550093ae5839.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78971
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116235
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
I might try this even if it sounds like an OK idea, but I haven't yet played
with bootstrap-{asan,ubsan}, and I suspect that if I do, there'll be other
issues to handle first.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104277
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116214
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> Created attachment 58826 [details]
> reduction-2.ii
I can try bisect this/original if I need to but I'd prefer not to, as it's a
pain because of libstdc++ vs float128 v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116235
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90781
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111089
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-05
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91776
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70902
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
Per https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71657#c13, this might be ready
to revisit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71657
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87576
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Static analysis generating |Warnings
|errors on branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114105
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116220
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Do you see this with an LTO build?
Yeah.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116226
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
I just added a crude break on internal_error:
(gdb) bt
#0 _Z14internal_errorPKcz (gmsgid=0x5840fd48 "tree check: %s, have %s in
%s, at %s:%d") at
/usr/src/debug/sys-devel/gcc-15.0./gcc-15.0./gcc/di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116226
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
(gdb) bt
#0 internal_error(char const*, ...) (gmsgid=0x5840fd48 "tree check: %s,
have %s in %s, at %s:%d") at
/usr/src/debug/sys-devel/gcc-15.0./gcc-15.0./gcc/diagnostic-global-context.cc:486
#1 0x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116214
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
Yeah, it's particularly egregious, to the extent I thought I made a mistake
when reducing it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116243
Bug ID: 116243
Summary: Add ASAN annotations to std::string and friends
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116235
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116243
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
Bug ID: 116245
Summary: [15 regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr116037.c fails on
s390x
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
oh, it only fails for -m31 (s390)...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116163
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116163
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116043
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42910
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116210
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> This probably only shows up with _FORTIFY_SOURCE.
We should have this test run twice, maybe thrice if we ever sort out the
_GNU_SOURCE problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108379
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116148
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
I don't have my machine running atm (need to get new ram), could you check
which condition first fails?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116246
Bug ID: 116246
Summary: obstack could use ASAN and Valgrind annotations
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116246
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
We should check if we can use the (extended) malloc attributes as well. I
imagine there's a few missing parts for that in libiberty.
gnulib does not have these for its obstack but it does for e.g.
bitset_obstac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116247
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15] RISC-V:|[15 regression] RISC-V:
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116246
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55358
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55430
Bug 55430 depends on bug 55358, which changed state.
Bug 55358 Summary: Valgrind errors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55358
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88783
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
(In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70611
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
AFAIK, it's "just" the generic late-optimisation warnings issue in general, so
the warning isn't broken with LTO, it's just more likely to have be bogus
there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70611
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98922
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98922
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37080
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
See r5-5735-g01ca36af914385 and r14-8937-g53bb7145135c0c which may fix it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31233
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116249
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116200
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116250
Bug ID: 116250
Summary: Add ASAN/Valgrind annotations to vec
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: internal-improvement
Severity: normal
Pri
1501 - 1600 of 1725 matches
Mail list logo
