[Bug lto/106700] [13 Regression] O_NONBLOCK does not exist for x86_64-w64-mingw32 host

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106700 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma

[Bug tree-optimization/106698] `-O2 -flto` cause linker warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106698 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Component|ada

[Bug bootstrap/106700] New: O_NONBLOCK does not exist for x86_64-w64-mingw32 host

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106700 Bug ID: 106700 Summary: O_NONBLOCK does not exist for x86_64-w64-mingw32 host Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug libstdc++/106676] [C++20] Automatic iterator_category detection misbehaves when `::reference` is an rvalue reference, refuses to accept a forward iterator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106676 --- Comment #1 from Egor --- I was told this is a wording defect. The `cpp17-forward-iterator` exposition-only concept in https://eel.is/c++draft/iterator.traits only permits lvalue references.

[Bug middle-end/99578] [11 Regression] gcc-11 -Warray-bounds or -Wstringop-overread warning when accessing a pointer from integer literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578 --- Comment #43 from Yann Droneaud --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #37) > Fixed on the trunk so far, temporarily by differentiating between < 4KB > addresses which are still handled like GCC 11 did for warning purposes, and > >= 4KB

[Bug middle-end/99578] [11 Regression] gcc-11 -Warray-bounds or -Wstringop-overread warning when accessing a pointer from integer literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yann at droneaud dot fr --- Comment #42

[Bug c/106699] Since gcc 12, deferencing constant literal addresses triggers -Warray-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106699 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c/106699] New: Since gcc 12, deferencing constant literal addresses triggers -Warray-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106699 Bug ID: 106699 Summary: Since gcc 12, deferencing constant literal addresses triggers -Warray-bounds warning Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/46539] libquadmath: Add -static-libquadmath

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46539 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd899c7de36d19ddf18e3bfab4a0c150096e2368 commit r13-2129-gdd899c7de36d19ddf18e3bfab4a0c150096e2368 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug fortran/106557] nesting intrinsics ibset and transfer gives wrong result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106557 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot

[Bug ada/106698] New: `-O2 -flto` cause linker warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106698 Bug ID: 106698 Summary: `-O2 -flto` cause linker warning Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada

[Bug fortran/106684] inconsistent array initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID

[Bug target/99161] Suboptimal SVE code for ld4/st4 MLA code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99161 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- All of these patterns use ?& for the output operand but I get the feeling that the ? should be on the input operand instead.

[Bug target/106694] Redundant move instructions in ARM SVE intrinsics use cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106694 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||99161 --- Comment #3 from Andrew

[Bug target/106694] Redundant move instructions in ARM SVE intrinsics use cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106694 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||106146 --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug target/106694] Redundant move instructions in ARM SVE intrinsics use cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106694 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- This is backend issue: //(insn 27 31 28 (set (reg/v:VNx2DI 37 v5 [orig:98 v0 ] [98]) //(unspec:VNx2DI [ //(reg:VNx2BI 68 p0 [orig:105 pg ] [105]) //(plus:VNx2DI

[Bug target/106694] Redundant move instructions in ARM SVE intrinsics use cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106694 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ra Severity|normal

[Bug c++/106648] [C++23] P2071 - Named universal character escapes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106648 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #53478|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c++/106567] [13 Regression] An array with a dependent type and initializer-deduced bound is treated as an array of unknown bound when captured in a lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106567 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||johanneskauffmann at hotmail dot c

[Bug c++/106697] error: range-based 'for' expression of type 'const int []' has incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106697 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/94920] Failure to optimize abs pattern from arithmetic with selected operands based on comparisons with 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94920 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Paul Hua from comment #5) > > Yes, we should do. This also fails the ABS_EXPR scan-tree-dump on LoongArch. And on riscv32. I will look into that failure later this week.

[Bug c++/106696] Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106696 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Undefined code at runtime means exactly that if you don't invoke undefined code you won't have a security issue. There are other bugs recording this same issue. Also the trunk changes behavior for -O0 to

[Bug c++/106696] Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106696 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/106696] Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106696 Stefan Kneifel changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Stefan

[Bug c++/106696] Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106696 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Component|ipa

[Bug libstdc++/105562] [12 Regression] std::function::_M_invoker may be used uninitialized in std::regex move with -fno-strict-aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105562 Sven Hesse changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sven.hesse at drmccoy dot de --- Comment

[Bug c++/106697] New: error: range-based 'for' expression of type 'const int []' has incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106697 Bug ID: 106697 Summary: error: range-based 'for' expression of type 'const int []' has incomplete type Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug ipa/106696] New: Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106696 Bug ID: 106696 Summary: Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing Product: gcc Version: 12.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/106695] New: Regression 11,12: Explicit copy constructor does not work for a parameter passed via std::async

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106695 Bug ID: 106695 Summary: Regression 11,12: Explicit copy constructor does not work for a parameter passed via std::async Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/106609] [12/13 Regression] sh3eb-elf cross compiler is being miscompiled since r12-1525-g3155d51bfd1de8b6c4645

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609 --- Comment #12 from Mikael Pettersson --- I tried compiling the gcc-13 cross compiler using the broken gcc-12 host compiler and -mtune-ctrl=^use_bt but that didn't help. I then tried rebuilding the broken gcc-12 host compiler with the new

[Bug c++/106645] [C++23] P2290R3 - Delimited escape sequences

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106645 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e9dd050e0ccd644c3bb6d6538dc6187157f6b3e8 commit r13-2127-ge9dd050e0ccd644c3bb6d6538dc6187157f6b3e8 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug middle-end/106692] [10/11/12/13 Regression] Cray pointer comparison wrongly optimized away

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106692 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/106689] gcc crash while compiling a generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106689 --- Comment #6 from Janez Zemva --- I have since changed the repo. You can still demonstrate the bug by uncommenting the line: //[, , ]() noexcept -> bool // uncomment for bug

[Bug debug/106263] BTF_KIND_FUNC type does not encode linkage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106263 --- Comment #2 from James Hilliard --- Should this be backported to the gcc 12 branch?

[Bug fortran/106684] inconsistent array initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106684 --- Comment #7 from Jorn Bruggeman --- None from me; thanks for the explanation!