[Bug c++/115469] [14/15 Regression] ICE :tree check expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in poplevel_named_label_1, at cpdecl.cc579

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115469

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|ICE :tree check expected|[14/15 Regression] ICE
   |class 'type', have  |:tree check expected class
   |'exceptional' (error_mark)  |'type', have 'exceptional'
   |in poplevel_named_label_1,  |(error_mark) in
   |at cpdecl.cc579 |poplevel_named_label_1, at
   ||cpdecl.cc579
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-13
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=37722
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
  Known to fail||15.0

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Confirmed. Looks to be new in GCC 14; looking like r14-6765-g4d9e0f3f211c8c (PR
37722) caused it.
Reduced testcase:
```
void fn1() { b = &  goto *0;}
```

[Bug tree-optimization/111873] [12/13/14/15 Regression] runtime Segmentation fault with '-O3 -fno-code-hoisting -fno-early-inlining -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-pre'

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111873

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch

--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 115467 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug ipa/115467] wrong code at -O1 with "-fno-tree-fre" on x86_64-linux-gnu

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115467

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Dup.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 111873 ***

[Bug ipa/115467] wrong code at -O1 with "-fno-tree-fre" on x86_64-linux-gnu

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115467

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Component|tree-optimization   |ipa

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
I think this is a dup.

[Bug target/115466] rs6000 vec_ld built-in works on BE but not LE

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115466

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-12
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
>  int ia[8] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8};
>  float fa[8] = {10.0, 20.0, 30.0, 40.0, 50.0, 60.0, 70.0, 80.0};

The way vec_ld works is is (a+b)&~0xf is the address which is being loaded. 

Both ia and fa are not specified as being aligned to the 16byte boundary so it
could be loading from before hand.

What happens if you do:
  int ia[8] __attribute__((aligned(16))) = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8};
  float fa[8] __attribute__((aligned(16))) = {10.0, 20.0, 30.0, 40.0, 50.0,
60.0, 70.0, 80.0};

Instead?

[Bug c++/115445] [15 Regression] [modules] ICE when repeating an export of function declared in GMF

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115445

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed by r15-1224-g074c1fc797435979c00b24aff2a4f895b8273bcf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2024-June/404138.html

[Bug c++/103524] [meta-bug] modules issue

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 115445, which changed state.

Bug 115445 Summary: [15 Regression] [modules] ICE when repeating an export of 
function declared in GMF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115445

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

[Bug testsuite/115460] gcc test results deviations

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115460

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Note you want to look into the gcc.log file to understand why things are
turning into UNRESOLVED. the gcc.sum file is only a summary of what is going
on.

Also depending on the board you are using or how you are running the testsuite,
it could be that the ssh connection has been broken due to the machine
crashing. So you really should look into the gcc.log file to understand the
exact failure here.

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 114061, which changed state.

Bug 114061 Summary: GCC fails vectorization when using __builtin_prefetch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114061

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

[Bug tree-optimization/114061] GCC fails vectorization when using __builtin_prefetch

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114061

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed I think.

[Bug bootstrap/115465] [15 Regression] aarch64-early-ra.cc:3449:23: error: ‘class pretty_printer’ has no member named ‘buffer’

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115465

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
  pretty_printer rtl_slim_pp;
  rtl_slim_pp.buffer->stream = dump_file;
  print_insn (_slim_pp, insn, 1);
  pp_flush (_slim_pp);
  fprintf (dump_file, "\n");


There seems to be a better way of implement this than the above too.

Maybe change dump_insn_slim to take an bool argument that defaults to true and
then if it was false use print_insn instead of print_insn_with_notes.

[Bug bootstrap/115465] [15 Regression] aarch64-early-ra.cc:3449:23: error: ‘class pretty_printer’ has no member named ‘buffer’

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115465

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
   Keywords||build
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0

[Bug target/113858] `ldr s0/h0/b0` should be used to zero extend into the full register

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113858

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-12
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |pinskia at gcc dot 
gnu.org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
I have someone working on this.

[Bug target/115176] rbit pattern should use bitreverse rtl now

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115176

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed.

[Bug sanitizer/115461] lsan doesn't work on s390x

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115461

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Does it work with upstream (LLVM)?

[Bug tree-optimization/115449] `(truncate)a` and `(nop_convert)~(truncate)a` are bitwise inversion of each other

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115449

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed.

[Bug target/115370] [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr77881.c FAIL

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115370

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-12
 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Confirmed.

[Bug target/115463] 526.blender_r regressed 5% on Zen2 with -Ofast -flto -march=native since r15-1058-gc989e59fc99d99

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115463

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on||115370

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Most likely similar to PR 115370. Yes enabling ccmp for x86_64's APX
unfortunately enables it for all of x86_64 due to the way ccmp was originally
designed (thinking it was enabled for the whole target or not).


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115370
[Bug 115370] [15 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr77881.c FAIL

[Bug testsuite/115460] gcc test results deviations

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115460

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-12
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Without the full .log of the testsuite runs, it is hard to debug what is going
wrong. And I personally have not seen this. The only time I have (recently)
seen a timeout compiling has been when the compiler is miscompiled.

[Bug middle-end/115459] [14/15 regression] Alpha/Linux ICE: in gen_rtx_SUBREG, at emit-rtl.cc:1032 around g-debpoo.adb:1896:8, as from r14-1187-gd6b756447cd5

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115459

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Alpha really should move to LRA too.

[Bug middle-end/115459] [14/15 regression] Alpha/Linux ICE: in gen_rtx_SUBREG, at emit-rtl.cc:1032 around g-debpoo.adb:1896:8, as from r14-1187-gd6b756447cd5

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115459

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|15.0|14.2

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> The change doesn't seem to be on the GCC 14 branch.

r14-1187-gd6b756447cd58b is the commit id where the change was done for
rejecting `unaligned subregs when strict alignment`.

[Bug target/115457] AArch64 should define __ARM_FEATURE_BF16

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115457

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-12
 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Hmm, patch for the arm target was posted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642184.html

I wonder why aarch64 was not done.

[Bug tree-optimization/115455] ICE: verify_flow_info failed during GIMPLE pass: cfg with non-local goto from an inner most nested function to an outer nested function

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115455

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Dup.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 40317 ***

[Bug middle-end/40317] verify_flow_info ICE with nested functions and non-local goto/labels

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40317

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 115455 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug bootstrap/115453] [15 regression] Noise from new dlopen, pthread configure checks since r15-1177-g75299e4fe50aa8

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Also it is not just old glibc but most non-"modern" libc out there (e.g.
Solaris I think). So maybe don't reference glibc in the comments in
configure.ac either. Just say some libc.

[Bug bootstrap/115453] [15 regression] Noise from new dlopen, pthread configure checks since r15-1177-g75299e4fe50aa8

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> Also, a typo: it has ac_cv_search_pthread_crate (not create).

Someone had rust crate on their mind when they did the patch :).

[Bug bootstrap/115453] [15 regression] Noise from new dlopen, pthread configure checks since r15-1177-g75299e4fe50aa8

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-12
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Note when this gets fixed, Make sure that this gets synced over toto
gdb-binutils repo too since toplevel configure is shared.

[Bug bootstrap/115453] [15 regression] Noise from new dlopen, pthread configure checks since r15-1177-g75299e4fe50aa8

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|[15 regression] Noise from  |[15 regression] Noise from
   |new dlopen, pthread |new dlopen, pthread
   |configure checks|configure checks since
   ||r15-1177-g75299e4fe50aa8
 CC||cohenarthur at gcc dot gnu.org
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0

[Bug d/115295] [15 regression] Various gdc testsuite regressions

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115295

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #4)
> Created attachment 58410 [details]
> candidate patch
> 
> This patch reverts dg-additional-sources to the earlier behavior, in which
> sources are added regardless of the test, introducing an explicit flag to
> activate the link-only mode.  This should bring the D testsuite back to a
> functioning state (I'd appreciate if someone who has a D compiler could give
> it a spin; I'm new to it), and the additional of the flag to the pr95401.cc
> test should address the original problem.

So I fixed the other `dg-additional-sources` issues in the vect testsuite by
adding `dg-do run` to them (PR 113899, r14-8978-g948dbc5ee45f9f). I suspect we
should just do the same for g++.dg/vect/pr95401.cc . I had missed the c++
testsuite's vect testcases when I was looking for dg-additional-sources when I
fixed that one.

[Bug tree-optimization/115450] [15 Regression] cpu2017 502.gcc runtime miscompute on aarch64 with SVE since r15-1006-gd93353e6423eca

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
 Target||aarch64-linux-gnu
   Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|cpu2017 502.gcc runtime |[15 Regression] cpu2017
   |miscompute  |502.gcc runtime miscompute
   ||on aarch64 with SVE since
   ||r15-1006-gd93353e6423eca
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
 Blocks||26163


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
[Bug 26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

[Bug tree-optimization/115450] cpu2017 502.gcc runtime miscompute

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
>[r15-1006-gd93353e6423eca] Do single-lane SLP discovery for reductions


Interesting because PR 115256 bisect it to an earlier patch.

[Bug tree-optimization/115449] `(truncate)a` and `(nop_convert)~(truncate)a` are bitwise inversion of each other

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115449

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Created attachment 58409
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58409=edit
Patch which I am testing

Just attaching it for now.

[Bug target/115176] rbit pattern should use bitreverse rtl now

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115176

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
   ||il/gcc-patches/2024-June/65
   ||4271.html
   Keywords||patch

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Patch submitted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/654271.html

[Bug tree-optimization/115449] `(truncate)a` and `(nop_convert)~(truncate)a` are bitwise inversion of each other

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115449

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |pinskia at gcc dot 
gnu.org
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
Summary|`(truncate)a` and   |`(truncate)a` and
   |`(nop_convert)~(truncate)a` |`(nop_convert)~(truncate)a`
   ||are bitwise inversion of
   ||each other

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Mine.

[Bug tree-optimization/115449] New: `(truncate)a` and `(nop_convert)~(truncate)a`

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115449

Bug ID: 115449
   Summary: `(truncate)a` and `(nop_convert)~(truncate)a`
   Product: gcc
   Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P3
 Component: tree-optimization
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

Take:
```
void setBit(unsigned char , int b) {
   unsigned char c = 0x1UL << b;
   a &= ~c;
a |= c;
}

void setBit(signed char , int b) {
   signed char c = 0x1UL << b;
   a &= ~c;
a |= c;
}
```

We should be able to optimize both setBit on the gimple level to:
```
  _1 = 1 << b_4(D);
  c_5 = ([un]signed char) _1;
  _2 = *a_7(D);
  _3 = _2 | c_5;
  *a_7(D) = _3;
```
Removing the ~ that is there.


So we already have this pattern (deals with some type changes though) in
gimple:
 /* (~x | y) & x -> x & y */
 /* (~x & y) | x -> x | y */
 (simplify
  (bitop:c (rbitop:c @2 @1) @0)
  (with { bool wascmp; }
   (if (bitwise_inverted_equal_p (@0, @2, wascmp)
&& (!wascmp || element_precision (type) == 1))
(bitop @0 @1

The problem is bitwise_inverted_equal_p does not see that:
  c.0_4 = (signed char) _1;
  _5 = ~c.0_4;
  _16 = (charD.11) _5;

and
  c_11 = (charD.11) _1;

are bitwise inversions of each other.

[Bug tree-optimization/115447] GCC fails to tail call unless variable wrapped in a block

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115447

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Note if you don't do the assignment (to extend the lifetime of the temp), GCC
does tail calls bar unlike clang/LLVM.

[Bug tree-optimization/115447] GCC fails to tail call unless variable wrapped in a block

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115447

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |INVALID
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
> Putting the variable inside this block does not change the semantics of the 
> function

YES it does, the side effect of the dtor happens after bar in the original case
and before bar in the second case. They could have side effects on global
memory that is outside of what the front-end knows.

[Bug tree-optimization/115447] GCC fails to tail call unless variable wrapped in a block

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115447

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Created attachment 58408
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58408=edit
testcase from godbolt

[Bug c++/115446] [15 Regression] Segfault when exporting operator new

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115446

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
s/unsigned long/decltype(sizeof(0))/

to make the testcase more portable since not all targets use `unsigned long` as
size_t.

[Bug c++/115446] [15 Regression] Segfault when exporting operator new

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115446

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |15.0

[Bug target/114905] aarch64 locally_streaming function ICE in dwarf2cfi due to mismatched CFA instructions in prologue/epilogue

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114905

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Confirmed.

Note it looks like the location of the attributes is not correct according to
the ACLE though.
```
#include 
__arm_locally_streaming
void
no_gprs_saved_very_streaming (__SVBool_t x)
__arm_streaming_compatible
{
  asm ("");
}
```

is the corrected testcase and yes we still ICE.

[Bug sanitizer/115205] ICE when using -fsanitize=hwaddress

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115205

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/652975.html

[Bug jit/115442] gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc fails to build against musl: attempt to use poisoned "calloc"

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
   Target Milestone|--- |14.2

--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed.

[Bug target/115439] [15 Regression] ICEs after r15-638 on master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #6)
> Are you going to post a patch?

I was going to let the arm folks take care of it since I have no way to test
it.

[Bug jit/115442] gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc fails to build against musl: attempt to use poisoned "calloc"

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Ismael Luceno from comment #2)
> Created attachment 58406 [details]
> Avoid  poisoning on musl

That is not the correct fix. see comment #1 for the correct one.

[Bug jit/115442] gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc fails to build against musl: attempt to use poisoned "calloc"

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org|pinskia at gcc dot 
gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
I have an obvious fix at least for the trunk.

diff --git a/gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc b/gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc
index 68a2e860c1f..70830e34965 100644
--- a/gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc
+++ b/gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.  If not see
 .  */

 #include "config.h"
+#define INCLUDE_SSTREAM
 #include "system.h"
 #include "coretypes.h"
 #include "tm.h"
@@ -29,7 +30,6 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.  If not see
 #include "jit-builtins.h"
 #include "jit-recording.h"
 #include "jit-playback.h"
-#include 

 namespace gcc {
 namespace jit {

[Bug target/115439] [15 Regression] ICEs after r15-638 on master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> I think something like this:
> ```
> [apinski@xeond2 arm]$ git diff mve.md
> diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/mve.md b/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
> index 9fe51298cdc..8af4797e935 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
> +++ b/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
> @@ -6897,6 +6897,12 @@ (define_expand "vcond_mask_"
>   (match_operand:MVE_VLD_ST 2 "s_register_operand")))]
>"TARGET_HAVE_MVE"
>  {
> +  if (!register_operand (operands[3], mode))
> +operands[3] = force_reg (operands[3]);
> +  if (!register_operand (operands[1], mode))
> +operands[1] = force_reg (operands[1]);
> +  if (!register_operand (operands[2], mode))
> +operands[1] = force_reg (operands[2]);

copy and pasto:`operands[1] = force_reg (operands[1]);` is the correct line for
above.

>switch (GET_MODE_CLASS (mode))
>  {
>case MODE_VECTOR_INT:
> 
> ```
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Pinski  

[Bug target/115439] [15 Regression] ICEs after r15-638 on master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski  ---
I think something like this:
```
[apinski@xeond2 arm]$ git diff mve.md
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/mve.md b/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
index 9fe51298cdc..8af4797e935 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
@@ -6897,6 +6897,12 @@ (define_expand "vcond_mask_"
  (match_operand:MVE_VLD_ST 2 "s_register_operand")))]
   "TARGET_HAVE_MVE"
 {
+  if (!register_operand (operands[3], mode))
+operands[3] = force_reg (operands[3]);
+  if (!register_operand (operands[1], mode))
+operands[1] = force_reg (operands[1]);
+  if (!register_operand (operands[2], mode))
+operands[1] = force_reg (operands[2]);
   switch (GET_MODE_CLASS (mode))
 {
   case MODE_VECTOR_INT:

```
Signed-off-by: Andrew Pinski  

[Bug middle-end/115428] 3 * unused in today's build

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115428

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
I can't figure out why GCC didn't warn about summary_cast_reg though ...

[Bug middle-end/115428] 3 * unused in today's build

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115428

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=44598,
   ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=52105

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The reason why has_pointer_operand_p is not warned about is because it is a
> `static inline` function which GCC will never warn about. Looks like clang
> only warns about them if they are in a main source.

See PR 52105 for that.

> 
> The reason why relation_to_code is not warned about is a similar reasons but
> this time for `static const` variables.

This one see PR 44598.

[Bug c/115428] 3 * unused in today's build

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115428

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
The reason why has_pointer_operand_p is not warned about is because it is a
`static inline` function which GCC will never warn about. Looks like clang only
warns about them if they are in a main source.

The reason why relation_to_code is not warned about is a similar reasons but
this time for `static const` variables.

[Bug c++/115431] ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl common’ structure, have ‘error_mark’ in decl_template_parm_check, at cp/cp-tree.h:5131

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115431

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on||115331

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Might be a dup of bug 115331.


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115331
[Bug 115331] [13/14/15 Regression] ICE-on-invalid passing a typoed lambda to a
list-initializer

[Bug target/115439] [15 Regression] ICEs after r15-638 on master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/654086.html

[Bug target/115439] [15 Regression] ICEs after r15-638 on master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target||arm-eabi
  Component|c++ |target
Summary|[Regression] ICEs after |[15 Regression] ICEs after
   |7ca35f2e43 on   |r15-638 on
   |master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi  |master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi
   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0

[Bug c/95715] __atomic_fetch_add accepts nonsense arguments

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95715

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||patrick at rivosinc dot com

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 115441 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c/115441] Pointer/integer mismatch in __atomic_fetch-* not covered by -Wint-conversion

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115441

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Actually yes it is a dup of bug 95715, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95715#c1 .

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 95715 ***

[Bug c/115441] Pointer/integer mismatch in __atomic_fetch-* not covered by -Wint-conversion

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115441

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=95715

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
I think this is a dup of bug 95715.

[Bug driver/115440] unrecognized command-line option '--c++17'; did you mean '--stdc++17'?

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115440

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Confirmed.

[Bug tree-optimization/115143] [11 Regression] tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in useless_type_conversion_p, at gimple-expr.cc:85

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115143

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|[11/12 Regression] tree |[11 Regression] tree check:
   |check: expected class   |expected class 'type', have
   |'type', have 'exceptional'  |'exceptional' (error_mark)
   |(error_mark) in |in
   |useless_type_conversion_p,  |useless_type_conversion_p,
   |at gimple-expr.cc:85|at gimple-expr.cc:85
  Known to work||12.3.1

--- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #16)
> Fixed on the GCC 13 branch too. Backporting further requires removing the
> hunk that handles diamond bbs as that was not in 12 or 11. I will handle
> that tomorrow.

Fixed on the GCC 12 branch too now. Will handle 11 tomorrow.

[Bug target/113042] popcount of 8bits and 128bits can be improved for !TARGET_CSSC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113042

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski  ---
New patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/654115.html

[Bug target/113870] Add V2HF support

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113870
Bug 113870 depends on bug 113869, which changed state.

Bug 113869 Summary: V4HF->V4SF pattern seems to be missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113869

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

[Bug target/113869] V4HF->V4SF pattern seems to be missing

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113869

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed. Note V4SF->V4HF was added with
r15-1182-ge7cd8ea1fa3e48404954bb7c06e9bcd603f132dd.

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2024-June/404047.html

[Bug target/113880] V2SF->V2DF conversion pattern seems to be missing

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113880

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed. Note V2DF->V2SF was added with
r15-1182-ge7cd8ea1fa3e48404954bb7c06e9bcd603f132dd.

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2024-June/404047.html

[Bug tree-optimization/115438] [15 Regression] 503.bwaves_r regressed 5-11% on different x86_64 machines at -Ofast -march=native since r15-1006-gd93353e6423eca

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115438

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||missed-optimization
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
 Blocks||53947
Version|14.0|15.0
 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|503.bwaves_r regressed  |[15 Regression]
   |5-11% on different x86_64   |503.bwaves_r regressed
   |machines at -Ofast  |5-11% on different x86_64
   |-march=native since |machines at -Ofast
   |r15-1006-gd93353e6423eca|-march=native since
   ||r15-1006-gd93353e6423eca


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
[Bug 53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

[Bug c++/115430] Cannot take address of template function

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115430

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to fail||3.4.6

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Note GCC 4.4.7 and before gave the following error message:
:5: error: argument of type 'void' does not match 'int (*)(int)'

[Bug c/115096] -fstrict-aliasing miscompilation or missing warning

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115096

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||Explorer09 at gmail dot com

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 115437 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug other/115437] Wrong optimized code - GCC didn't detect a variable is modified

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115437

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 115096 ***

[Bug other/115437] Wrong optimized code - GCC didn't detect a variable is modified

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115437

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |INVALID

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
There is an alias violation here.
Use -fno-strict-aliasing or as you shown use the correct pointer type
originally.

That is stores to `uint8_t *` and loads from `char *` are considered different
aliasing sets and GCC optimizes based on that.

[Bug c++/115430] Cannot take address of template function

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115430

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
  Known to fail||4.5.3
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Reduced (and modified to be C++98):
```
template
int Func(T);
typedef int (*funcptrtype)(int);
funcptrtype fp1 = ;
funcptrtype fp2 = (0, );
```

[Bug c++/47940] warn about calls to a pure virtual indirectly from a constructor/destructor

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47940

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
 Blocks||87403
   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=1925,
   ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=6006
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
Summary|warn about calls to a pure  |warn about calls to a pure
   |virtual from a  |virtual indirectly from a
   |constructor/destructor  |constructor/destructor

--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski  ---
.


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87403
[Bug 87403] [Meta-bug] Issues that suggest a new warning

[Bug ipa/115435] Issue warning for indirect call to pure virtual function in ctor or dtor

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115435

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=6006

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Dup. will update that bug.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 47940 ***

[Bug middle-end/87403] [Meta-bug] Issues that suggest a new warning

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87403
Bug 87403 depends on bug 115435, which changed state.

Bug 115435 Summary: Issue warning for indirect call to pure virtual function in 
ctor or dtor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115435

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c++/47940] warn about calls to a pure virtual from a constructor/destructor

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47940

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 115435 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c++/6006] problem with pure virtual functions and destructord

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6006

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|FIXED   |INVALID

[Bug ipa/115435] Issue warning for indirect call to pure virtual function in ctor or dtor

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115435

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
  Component|c++ |ipa
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
.

[Bug tree-optimization/115423] Inlined strcmp optimizes poorly

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115423

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |enhancement
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Confirmed.

[Bug c/115424] 'auto' type inference not working when struct declared in rhs, even when the final type is not anonymous

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115424

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Hmm from the commit message (r13-3620-ge3c898e12d0ace):
```
* The standard feature disallows the declaration from declaring
  anything that's not an ordinary identifier (thus, the initializer
  cannot declare a tag or the members of a structure or union), while
  making it undefined behavior for it to declare more than one
  ordinary identifier.  (For the latter, while I keep the existing
  error from __auto_type in the case of more than one declarator, I
  don't restrict other ordinary identifiers from being declared in
  inner scopes such as GNU statement expressions.  I do however
  disallow defining the members of an enumeration inside the
  initializer (if the enum definition has no tag, that doesn't
  actually violate a constraint), to avoid an enum type becoming
  accessible beyond where it would have been without auto.
  (Preventing new types from escaping the initializer - thus, ensuring
  that anything written with auto corresponds to something that could
  have been written without auto, modulo multiple evaluation of VLA
  size expressions when not using auto - is a key motivation for some
  restrictions on what can be declared in the initializer.)

The rule on shadowing and restrictions on other declarations in the
initializer are actually general rules for what C2x calls
underspecified declarations, a description that covers constexpr as
well as auto (in particular, this disallows a constexpr initializer
from referencing the variable being initialized).  Thus, some of the
code added for those restrictions will also be of use in implementing
C2x constexpr.

```

So this might be expected.

[Bug c++/115425] ICE: tree check: expected type_pack_expansion or expr_pack_expansion, have error_mark in tsubst_pack_expansion, at cp/pt.cc:13778

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115425

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
> 15 regressions

It might not be because this is a checking enabled ICE.

[Bug tree-optimization/115426] ICE: in execute_todo, at passes.cc:2138

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115426

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Reduced testcase that ICEs on all targets:
```
 _Complex float fcs() {
  _Complex float r;
  __asm__(""  : "=X" (__imag__ r)  );
  return r;
 } 
```

Looks like this has been ICEing for a while with checking enabled.

[Bug libstdc++/115421] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421

--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Liviu Ionescu from comment #12)
> Isn't it possible to fix libstdc++ in order to run static multi-threaded
> apps on older systems too?

Well it depends. glibc changed how libpthread works in 2.34 and above. So
someone with the specific versions that you are testing with need to debug it
to see what is going wrong. It might need `-Wl,--whole-archive -lpthread
-Wl,--no-whole-archive` as mentioned in PR 58909 or some other changes.

[Bug libstdc++/115421] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Are you sure that arch does not patch glibc to make it broken?

[Bug libstdc++/115421] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421

--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski  ---
apinski@xeond:~/src/upstream-gcc-match$ /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
GNU C Library (Ubuntu GLIBC 2.35-0ubuntu3.8) stable release version 2.35.
Copyright (C) 2022 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Compiled by GNU CC version 11.4.0.
libc ABIs: UNIQUE IFUNC ABSOLUTE
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
.
apinski@xeond:~/src/upstream-gcc-match$ ~/upstream-gcc-match/bin/g++ -static -g
-lpthread t.cc
apinski@xeond:~/src/upstream-gcc-match$ ./a.out
Usage: sleepy-thread N
apinski@xeond:~/src/upstream-gcc-match$ ./a.out  4
abcd

[Bug libstdc++/115421] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> This works fine with glibc 2.34 and above.

I should say with glibc 2.34 and above and GCC 13+.
Other combinations are know to fail since you need to link in the whole
libpthread as there are weak symbols used to detect if the program was single
threaded or not.

[Bug libstdc++/115421] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-10
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
This works fine with glibc 2.34 and above.

[Bug libstdc++/115421] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
What version of glibc do you have?

[Bug libstdc++/115421] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 115422 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug libstdc++/115422] Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when linking as -static on Linux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115422

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 115421 ***

[Bug libstdc++/115420] Default constructor of unordered_map deleted

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115420

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |INVALID

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
You need to do:
#include 


This is documented already at https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-13/porting_to.html too.

[Bug target/115418] Extra movapd emitted for MAX implementation

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115418

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|[14 regression] Extra   |Extra movapd emitted for
   |movapd emitted for MAX  |MAX implementation
   |implementation  |

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Note the issue is ix86_expand_sse_fp_minmax only handles LT/UNGE but it should
handle GT/UNLT with both parts swapped (comparison and true/false).

Note this was just by accident that GCC 14 does not work.

[Bug target/115418] [14 regression] Extra movapd emitted for MAX implementation

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115418

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||missed-optimization
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Target||x86_64-linux-gnu
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-10

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
The difference between GCC 14 and 15 is:

GCC 14:
  _1 = a_4(D) < _5;
  _7 = _1 ? _5 : a_4(D);

GCC 15:
  _8 = _4 > a_5(D);
  _7 = _8 ? _4 : a_5(D);


GCC 15's IR gets recognized for UNSPEC_IEEE_MAX while GCC 14's is not.

If anything the target should recognize both cases ... Since both are
canonical.

[Bug c++/115417] Destructor is noexcept even though the class has a throwing destructor subobject in an anonymous union

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115417

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Dup of bug 115222.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 115222 ***

[Bug c++/115417] Destructor is noexcept even though the class has a throwing destructor subobject in an anonymous union

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115417

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
 Resolution|DUPLICATE   |---
 Status|RESOLVED|NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-10
   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=115222

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Actually let's reopen this for a second since of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222#c4 .

[Bug c++/115417] Destructor is noexcept even though the class has a throwing destructor subobject in an anonymous union

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115417

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Note it is not just anonymous unions, it is all unions.

[Bug c++/115222] gcc ignores noexcept on fields' deconstructors in an union

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||janschultke at googlemail dot 
com

--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski  ---
*** Bug 115417 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/115411] ICE : in expand_call, at calls.cc:3668

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115411

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-10

[Bug middle-end/115411] ICE : in expand_call, at calls.cc:3668

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115411

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=84964,
   ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=100536
 Target||x86_64

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Confirmed.

[Bug testsuite/115415] New test case gcc.dg/torture/pr115388.c in r15-1163-g818e760528d436 hangs

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115415

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |15.0
   Keywords||testsuite-fail
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Fixed.

[Bug testsuite/115415] New test case gcc.dg/torture/pr115388.c in r15-1163-g818e760528d436 hangs

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115415

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Component|other   |testsuite
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed||2024-06-10

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Mine. It is a testcase issue. A simple s/char/signed char/ should fix it.

[Bug middle-end/115388] [15 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-571-g1e0ae1f52741f7

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115388

--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #7)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> > Fixed.  Unfortunately this didn't fix PR115256 if I checked correctly.  Keep
> > searching!
> 
> The testcase hangs on AArch64, so this commit didn't fix it...

I suspect the issue is char being unsigned on a few targets. I will fix it in a
few hours.

[Bug tree-optimization/115404] [15 Regression] possibly wrong code on glibc-2.39 since r15-1113-gde05e44b2ad963

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115404

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #4)
> I can hit ICE with the following testcase:

Then it is most likely a dup of bug 115387 .