https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114790
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
I'm going to kick off a reduction but don't count on me either, as I hate doing
LTO ones.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114790
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58000
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58000&action=edit
reduced-a.b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114790
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58001
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58001&action=edit
reduced-b.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114790
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
`g++-14 -fPIC -O2 -flto -flto-partition=1to1 -shared
-Wl,--version-script=ze.exports reduced-a.ii reduced-b.ii`
it violates ODR though:
```
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/14/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114790
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE when building |[11/12/13/14 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114790
--- Comment #12 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58017
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58017&action=edit
tracing_imp.cpp.ii-reduced
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114790
--- Comment #13 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58018
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58018&action=edit
tracing_copy_imp.cpp.ii-reduced
Attached another attempt...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114872
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Some ideas:
* Could you maybe give a reproducer for the runtime crash?
* Any chance you'd be willing to try bisect element.i with pragmas to
disable/enable optimisation for chunks of it, to find the miscompiled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114872
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
element.i is unfortunatley huge. It's hard to analyse things without a
standalone testcase, but it's even harder without _something_ one can run.
I'd suggest:
1) giving instructions to reproduce the crash assum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114872
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
unfortunately*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114872
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
also maybe obvious, but if you can find something from the cython testsuite, or
at least some other heavy use of cython, which fails, that may be a good
direction.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114872
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
also, do asan and ubsan give anything?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114895
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> So besides maybe no way to reproduce the failure the source still has the
> issue
> described.
Sorry, not following -- jakub's attached one has #define _FILE_OFFSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114918
Bug ID: 114918
Summary: ICE when building gcl with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-checking
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114918
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58082
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58082&action=edit
block.i.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114918
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
oops:
> We also had a rep
We had another report of this, curiously again lisp, for ecl with
https://bugs.gentoo.org/931081. I haven't investigated that at all though.
Maybe it's a bundled copy of gcl in there o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114895
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
Ah, sorry, you meant GCC sources, not configure test source. ack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114918
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Reduced (!):
```
typedef struct lispunion *object;
struct lispunion {};
object Icall_gen_error_handler_noreturn() __attribute__((noreturn));
volatile object sLblock;
void(Fblock)(volatile object) { Icall_gen_err
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114919
Bug ID: 114919
Summary: ICE when building ecl with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-checking
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114919
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
reducing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114918
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
*** Bug 114919 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114919
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114927
Bug ID: 114927
Summary: ICE when building Emacs with -std=c23 -flto (error:
‘TYPE_CANONICAL’ has different ‘TYPE_CANONICAL’)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114927
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uecker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114930
Bug ID: 114930
Summary: ICE in fld_incomplete_type_of when building libwebp
with -std=c23 -flto
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114930
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
reduced:
```
typedef struct WebPPicture WebPPicture;
typedef int (*WebPProgressHook)(const WebPPicture *);
WebPProgressHook progress_hook;
struct WebPPicture {
} WebPGetColorPalette(const struct WebPPicture *);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114931
Bug ID: 114931
Summary: ICE in get_alias_set when building tcl with -std=c23
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114931
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
With -Wuninitialized, it dies in an earlier pass:
```
# gcc -c tclStubLib.i -std=c23 -Wuninitialized
during GIMPLE pass: early_uninit
/var/tmp/portage/dev-lang/tcl-8.6.14/work/tcl8.6.14/generic/tclStubLib.c: In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114930
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in |[14/15 regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114931
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
```
struct Tcl_Obj;
void(Tcl_FreeInternalRepProc)(struct Tcl_Obj *);
typedef struct Tcl_Obj {
} Tcl_Obj;
struct {
void (*tclFreeObj)(Tcl_Obj *);
} Tcl_InitStubs;
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114956
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Segmentation fault with |[11/12/13/14/15 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114948
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
Summar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114965
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment #8 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114971
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114952
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jemarch at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114971
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114931
--- Comment #20 from Sam James ---
*** Bug 114971 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
Summar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114989
Bug ID: 114989
Summary: Compile time hog when building paml
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114989
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58131
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58131&action=edit
codeml.i
codeml.i from the same project is not great either but it's way less
interesting, I think, because it's l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112868
--- Comment #16 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #14)
> (In reply to Niels Möller from comment #13)
> > I'm not that familiar with gcc development procedures. Do I understand you
> > correctly, that a fix for this bug w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115010
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115041
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115040
Bug ID: 115040
Summary: Missed optimization opportunity in std::find
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115040
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > clang lowers both the calls to (w)memchr
>
> Is that with libc++ or libstdc++?
It's libc++. Checked locally too..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88545
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54179
--- Comment #40 from Sam James ---
That came up at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111600#c29.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115050
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
Keyword
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Dale Weiler from comment #0)
> I've isolated what appears to be an unsound __builtin_memset optimization
> applied by gcc 14.1.1 on a hash function in a cryptographic library where it
> writes one b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
With Clang, I get:
```
¢ clang /tmp/foo.c -o /tmp/foo
$ /tmp/foo
1886221359
0
0
0
0
0
0
-733536256
```
and
```
$ clang /tmp/foo.c -o /tmp/foo -fsanitize=address,undefined
$ /tmp/foo
1886221359
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
I was just about to comment that, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
Isn't there still an uninitialised read?
```
$ valgrind /tmp/foo
[...]
==814922==
1886221359
1
0
0
0
0
0
==814922== Use of uninitialised value of size 8
==814922==at 0x48F7D3A: _itoa_word (_itoa.c:183)
==81
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
The issue is we need a program which no UB which has the bad symptoms.
I can fix it up but that doesn't mean it has the symptoms you originally saw
which made you report a bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-05-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96059
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|59859 |
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115029
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115024
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115071
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115025
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115101
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[wrong code] with -O1 |[11/12/13/14/15 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115128
Bug ID: 115128
Summary: [15 regression] ICE when building aflplusplus
(internal compiler error: in type, at
value-range.h:983)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115129
Bug ID: 115129
Summary: [12/13/14/15 regression] ICE on recursive realloc call
with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-inva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115128
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Reduction is nearly done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115128
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
Reduced:
```
long XXH3_len_4to8_64b_len, XXH3_len_0to16_64b___trans_tmp_3,
XXH3_mix2Accs_acc,
XXH3_64bits_internal___trans_tmp_8;
typedef unsigned long XXH3_hashLong64_f();
void *XXH3_64bits_internal_input;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115128
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction |
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Bit mor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115131
Bug ID: 115131
Summary: [15 regression] ICE when building (external) rtl88x2bu
kernel module (in verify_range, at value-range.cc:677)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115131
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58223
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58223&action=edit
rtw_recv.i.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115131
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
I'm reducing it now, but attached a partial reduction.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115131
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
Reduced:
```
struct recv_frame_hdr {
int *adapter
};
union recv_frame {
struct recv_frame_hdr u
};
char *_rtw_init_recv_priv_precvpriv_0;
int _rtw_init_recv_priv_padapter, _rtw_init_recv_priv_i;
void _rtw_in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
Bug ID: 115137
Summary: [15 regression] Miscompilation of wget (test suite
hangs)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Notable bits:
* -fno-strict-aliasing makes no difference
* -fno-strict-overflow stops the hang
* -fsanitize=address,undefined shows nothing with < GCC 15
* With GCC 15 only, I get
```
$ ./z
url.c:1575:41: runti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
I have a reduction still running but I didn't do much manual analysis other
than doing enough to remove its dependency on other files + remove the need for
LTO (which was originally required).
I haven't yet bis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115131
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
thank you aldy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> Bisect says r15-580-gf3e5f4c58591f5.
(Still fails on trunk as of r15-634-gb59de4113262f2.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115141
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Dupe of PR115110?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Reduced further:
```
enum { a } b;
char *c;
int d, e;
static void f(char *g, char *h) {
char a[1024];
c = a;
for (; g < h; g++)
if (b)
++d;
}
int main() { f("somepage.html", "" + e); }
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
```
char *c;
int b, d, e;
static void f(char *g, char *h) {
char a[1024] = {};
c = a;
for (; g < h; g++)
if (b)
++d;
}
int main() { f("somepage.html", "" + e); }
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #6)
> ```
> char *c;
> int b, d, e;
>
> static void f(char *g, char *h) {
> char a[1024] = {};
> c = a;
> for (; g < h; g++)
> if (b)
> ++d;
> }
>
> int main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
The original is:
```
append_uri_pathel (fname_len_check,
fname_len_check + strlen (fname_len_check), true, &temp_fnres);
[...]
/* Walk the PATHEL string and check how many characters we'll need
to quo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115137
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58233
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58233&action=edit
reduced.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114927
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114930
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
I'm bisecting.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112868
--- Comment #17 from Sam James ---
PR113652 remains a problem and I guess it's more of a problem for landing this
change in a release, as it means PR113652 will affect more people.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
yep, r14-3432-gddd64a6ec3b38e fixed it on trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115056
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||88443, 56456
Component|rtl-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115135
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |ipa
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
(In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115135
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
(godbolt is great for this, btw)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
Bug ID: 115191
Summary: [15 regression] ICE when building stklos (in
verify_range, at value-range.cc:1526)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58267
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58267&action=edit
socket.i
I'm reducing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Just -O1 is enough.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
```
typedef void *SCM;
void set_socket_io_ports();
void STk_socket_accept(SCM line_buffered) {
if (!line_buffered)
line_buffered = (SCM)3;
set_socket_io_ports(line_buffered != 1);
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115192
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 58270
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58270&action=edit
bisect-me.cxx
I'll bisect with attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115192
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 regression] -O3 |[11/12/13/14/15 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115196
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
See r14-10227-g5b96d547ce71b8.
801 - 900 of 1965 matches
Mail list logo
