[Bug rtl-optimization/97459] __uint128_t remainder for division by 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #49438|divisiontable.dat |divisiontable.txt filename|| --- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig --- Comment on attachment 49438 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49438 Numbers a, b so that 2^b ≡ 1 mod a up to b=64, larger b taken if several solutions exist Seems the bugzilla system decided this was an MPEG file. Well, it is not, hopefully renaming it as txt will help.
[Bug ipa/97575] [11 Regression] ICE in try_make_edge_direct_simple_call, at ipa-prop.c:3671 or in propagate_controlled_uses, at ipa-prop.c:4073
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97575 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[11 Regression] ICE in |[11 Regression] ICE in |try_make_edge_direct_simple |try_make_edge_direct_simple |_call, at ipa-prop.c:3671 |_call, at ipa-prop.c:3671 ||or in ||propagate_controlled_uses, ||at ipa-prop.c:4073 --- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha --- Something that looks like a related issue, hence reported here instead of filing a new PR. % gcc-11.0.0 -Os -fopenacc -c gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr51012-1.c during IPA pass: inline gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr51012-1.c:17:1: internal compiler error: in propagate_controlled_uses, at ipa-prop.c:4073 17 | } | ^ 0x677dc7 propagate_controlled_uses /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-prop.c:4073 0x677dc7 ipa_propagate_indirect_call_infos(cgraph_edge*, vec*) /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-prop.c:4135 0xb9bd5c inline_call(cgraph_edge*, bool, vec*, int*, bool, bool*) /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline-transform.c:502 0x17d5bb2 inline_small_functions /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline.c:2242 0x17d5bb2 ipa_inline /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline.c:2723 0x17d5bb2 execute /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline.c:3122
[Bug ipa/97575] New: [11 Regression] ICE in try_make_edge_direct_simple_call, at ipa-prop.c:3671
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97575
Bug ID: 97575
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in
try_make_edge_direct_simple_call, at ipa-prop.c:3671
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: asolokha at gmx dot com
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
g++-11.0.0-alpha20201025 snapshot (g:308e40331f9d2820f8286769b5fc764671187364)
ICEs when compiling the following testcase w/ -Os -fopenacc:
template
struct db;
template
struct db
{
typedef WM
};
template
struct zg
{
typename db::k3
operator* ();
};
int
fq (int);
template
void
ri (TT k2, HA t0)
{
*k2 = t0 (0);
}
void
ai (zg pb)
{
ri (pb, fq);
}
% g++-11.0.0 -Os -fopenacc -c w6shyynz.cc
during IPA pass: inline
w6shyynz.cc:31:1: internal compiler error: in try_make_edge_direct_simple_call,
at ipa-prop.c:3671
31 | }
| ^
0x73eaf7 try_make_edge_direct_simple_call
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-prop.c:3671
0x73eaf7 update_indirect_edges_after_inlining
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-prop.c:3880
0x73eaf7 propagate_info_to_inlined_callees
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-prop.c:3974
0xe32fe3 ipa_propagate_indirect_call_infos(cgraph_edge*, vec*)
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-prop.c:4136
0xe0ae2c inline_call(cgraph_edge*, bool, vec*,
int*, bool, bool*)
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline-transform.c:502
0x1a3d272 inline_small_functions
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline.c:2242
0x1a3d272 ipa_inline
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline.c:2723
0x1a3d272 execute
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201025/work/gcc-11-20201025/gcc/ipa-inline.c:3122
[Bug bootstrap/97124] ICE when bootstrapping GCC on x86_64-w64-mingw32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97124 --- Comment #6 from Liu Hao --- Today I got the same ICE when building mingw-w64. I am not clear why this error only happened with GCC previously.
[Bug analyzer/97568] -fanalyzer assumes that an extern const pointer is NULL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97568 --- Comment #1 from Vincent Lefèvre --- The bug has been introduced by commit af66094d037793773eb8a49597866457f2f6a104.
[Bug c++/97569] Declaring a struct in a field declaration of another struct. gcc and clang difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97569
--- Comment #2 from Anders Granlund ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> (In reply to Anders Granlund from comment #0)
> > The interesting thing is that if we replace struct S with struct S {}
> > both compilers agree on rejecting the program.
>
> I don't see any struct S in the example program.
struct B it should be.
[Bug c++/97574] New: Allow for nul output with Windows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97574 Bug ID: 97574 Summary: Allow for nul output with Windows Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: svnpenn at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Allow for nul output with Windows A project I am trying to compile has this command: cc -xc++ -o/dev/null -lc++ -shared However I am using PowerShell, which has no notion of `/dev/null`: PS C:\> cc -xc++ -o/dev/null -lc++ -shared C:/msys2/mingw64/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/10.2.0/../../../../ x86_64-w64-mingw32/bin/ld.exe: cannot open output file /dev/null.exe: No such file or directory I tried using `-o$null`, but it just creates a file `$null.exe`. I also tried this: PS C:\> cc -xc++ -o $null -lc++ -shared cc.exe: fatal error: no input files It appears the issue is specific to GCC. If I get Clang [1], the same command works with `nul` [2]: cc -xc++ -onul -lc++ -shared but if I try the same thing with GCC, I get this: C:/msys2/mingw64/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/10.2.0/../../../../ x86_64-w64-mingw32/bin/ld.exe: nul.exe: final close failed: file truncated Alternatively, if anyone knows a better way to check the availability of a library, I would be interested in that. [1] https://github.com/mstorsjo/llvm-mingw [2] https://support.microsoft.com/help/110930
[Bug c++/97531] Improve type/non-type declaration diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97531
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2020-10-25
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Extended test:
// PR c++/97531
struct A { };
void A(int);
void
fn0 ()
{
A a;
static A *a2;
}
int B;
struct B { };
void
fn1 ()
{
B b;
static B *b2;
}
enum E { };
void E();
void
fn2 ()
{
E e;
static E *e2;
}
class C { };
void C(int);
void
fn3 ()
{
C c;
static C *c2;
}
union U { };
void U(int);
void
fn4 ()
{
U u;
static U *u2;
}
[Bug libstdc++/96817] __cxa_guard_acquire unsafe against dynamically loaded pthread
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96817 --- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely --- I don't really care about test failures for non-standard configurations like that.
[Bug c++/97563] undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator >::reserve()'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97563 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
[Bug c++/97572] [c++ 20] Constraining is broken
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97572 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- I think GCC is correct to reject this. any(t) is not a valid constraint.
[Bug c++/97569] Declaring a struct in a field declaration of another struct. gcc and clang difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97569
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Anders Granlund from comment #0)
> The interesting thing is that if we replace struct S with struct S {}
> both compilers agree on rejecting the program.
I don't see any struct S in the example program.
[Bug c++/97573] Implement C++20 [depr.arith.conv.enum]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97573 --- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek --- Likewise, [depr.array.comp] should be implemented too.
[Bug c++/97573] Implement C++20 [depr.arith.conv.enum]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97573 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2020-10-25 Keywords||diagnostic Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/97573] New: Implement C++20 [depr.arith.conv.enum]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97573
Bug ID: 97573
Summary: Implement C++20 [depr.arith.conv.enum]
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
P1120R0 added various deprecations, see [depr.arith.conv.enum]:
enum E1 { e };
enum E2 { f };
bool b = e <= 3.7; // deprecated
int k = f - e; // deprecated
but we don't warn for this, not even with -Wdeprecated -Wenum-compare
-Wfloat-conversion -Wfloat-equal -Wpedantic -Wall -Wextra etc.
In C++20, this should warn by default.
-Wenum-conversion is currently only valid for C, but that should change, so
that we can warn on the code above in C++17 too.
[Bug c++/95132] Concept checked after auto return type deduction
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95132
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #2)
> (In reply to Francesco Biscani from comment #0)
> > This is problematic because it means that another concept that would check
> > whether or not bar() can be called with a specific argument type would fail
> > with a hard compile time error, instead of marking the concept as not
> > satisfied.
>
> Would you have a concrete testcase for this behavior?
Ah, here's one:
$ cat testcase.C
template struct A {
static auto f() requires false { return T::fail; }
};
template
constexpr int v = requires { A::f(); };
static_assert(!v);
$ g++ -std=c++20 testcase.C
testcase.C: In instantiation of ‘static auto A::f() requires false [with T
= int]’:
testcase.C: required from ‘constexpr const int v’
testcase.C: required from here
testcase.C: error: ‘fail’ is not a member of ‘int’
2 | static auto f() requires false { return T::fail; }
| ^~~~
We wrongly issue a hard error for the reason you pointed out.
[Bug c++/97572] New: [c++ 20] Constraining is broken
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97572
Bug ID: 97572
Summary: [c++ 20] Constraining is broken
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dimitri.gorokhovik at free dot fr
Target Milestone: ---
The code:
constexpr bool any (bool) { return true; };
template concept Any = requires (T t) { requires any (t); };
constexpr static int f (Any auto) { return 42; };
constexpr auto q = f (false);
when compiled as:
g++ -std=c++20 -o bug-9.o -c bug-9.cpp
produces:
bug-9.cpp: In substitution of ‘template requires Any
constexpr int f(auto:1) [with auto:1 = bool]’:
bug-9.cpp:5:28: required from here
bug-9.cpp:3:63: error: ‘t’ is not a constant expression
3 | template concept Any = requires (T t) { requires any (t);
};
| ~^~~
bug-9.cpp:5:28: error: no matching function for call to ‘f(bool)’
5 | constexpr auto q = f (false);
|^
bug-9.cpp:4:22: note: candidate: ‘template requires Any
constexpr int f(auto:1)’
4 | constexpr static int f (Any auto) { return 42; };
| ^
bug-9.cpp:4:22: note: substitution of deduced template arguments resulted in
errors seen above
GCC version:
g++ (GCC) 11.0.0 20201025 (experimental)
[Bug fortran/97571] New: long parsing phase for simple array constructor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97571 Bug ID: 97571 Summary: long parsing phase for simple array constructor Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- gcc version 11.0.0 20201025 (experimental) [master revision d7ddd287c:9f8172cd7:47d13acbda9a5d8eb57ff169ba74857cd54108e4] (GCC) x86_64-unknown-linux $ cat init.f90 subroutine bpr_init implicit none integer :: i real :: tacos2( 0:35250) tacos2 = acos( (/ (i, i=64000,99250) /) / 10.0) end subroutine bpr_init $ gfortran -O1 -Wall -Wextra -c init.f90 -ftime-report init.f90:4:24: 4 | real :: tacos2( 0:35250) |1 Warning: Array 'tacos2' at (1) is larger than limit set by '-fmax-stack-var-size=', moved from stack to static storage. This makes the procedure unsafe when called recursively, or concurrently from multiple threads. Consider using '-frecursive', or increase the '-fmax-stack-var-size=' limit, or change the code to use an ALLOCATABLE array. [-Wsurprising] Time variable usr sys wall GGC phase parsing :1923.03 (100%) 0.21 (100%)1923.67 (100%) 7500k ( 97%) phase opt and generate : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.02 ( 0%) 69k ( 1%) callgraph functions expansion : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%) 48k ( 1%) parser (global):1923.02 (100%) 0.21 (100%)1923.67 (100%) 7500k ( 97%) tree gimplify : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%) 1752 ( 0%) tree STMT verifier : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%) 0 ( 0%) varconst : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0 ( 0%) initialize rtl : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 12k ( 0%) TOTAL :1923.04 0.21 1923.69 7756k Extra diagnostic checks enabled; compiler may run slowly. Configure with --enable-checking=release to disable checks. Configuring with checking=release or different -O levels have no impact on time taken, previous gfortran 10.2 did not exhibit such long parsing times.
[Bug c++/97563] undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator >::reserve()'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97563 Damian changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Damian --- hello, with a fresh rebuild of gcc 11 it works. Best regards Damian
[Bug libstdc++/97570] New: avr-gcc: error: 'void* memalign' redeclared as different kind of entity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97570 Bug ID: 97570 Summary: avr-gcc: error: 'void* memalign' redeclared as different kind of entity Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: matwey.kornilov at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Hi, While I am trying to build avr-gcc from master with Freestanding C++ standard library on x86_64 host system, I see the following compile error: ../../../../libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc:56:18: error: 'void* memalign' redeclared as different kind of entity 56 | void *memalign(size_t alignment, size_t size); | ^~ ../../../../libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc:39:18: note: previous declaration 'void* memalign(std::size_t, std::size_t)' 39 | extern "C" void *memalign(std::size_t boundary, std::size_t size); | ^~~~ ../../../../libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc:56:18: error: 'size_t' was not declared in this scope; did you mean 'std::size_t'? 56 | void *memalign(size_t alignment, size_t size); | ^~ | std::size_t In file included from ../../../../libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc:26: /usr/src/gcc/avr-obj/avr/libstdc++-v3/include/avr/bits/c++config.h:280:33: note: 'std::size_t' declared here 280 | typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t; | ^~ ../../../../libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc:56:36: error: 'size_t' was not declared in this scope; did you mean 'std::size_t'? 56 | void *memalign(size_t alignment, size_t size); |^~ |std::size_t In file included from ../../../../libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc:26: /usr/src/gcc/avr-obj/avr/libstdc++-v3/include/avr/bits/c++config.h:280:33: note: 'std::size_t' declared here 280 | typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t; | ^~ I use binutils 2.35 and gcc 47d13acbda9a5d8eb57ff169ba74857cd54108e4 Steps to reproduce: 1. Build and install gcc without libstdc++: # ../configure --prefix=/usr --target=avr --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-nls --disable-libssp --with-dwarf2 # make # make install 2. Build and install avr-libc 2.0 # ../configure --prefix=/usr --build=`../config.guess` --host=avr # make # make install 3. Rebuild gcc with Freestanding libstdc++ # ../configure --prefix=/usr --target=avr --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-nls --disable-libssp --with-dwarf2 --with-newlib --disable-__cxa_atexit --disable-threads --disable-shared --enable-static --disable-sjlj-exceptions --enable-libstdcxx --enable-lto --disable-hosted-libstdcxx # make See the error. The following simple patch fixes the issue: --- a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ extern "C" # elif _GLIBCXX_HAVE_POSIX_MEMALIGN void *posix_memalign(void **, size_t alignment, size_t size); # elif _GLIBCXX_HAVE_MEMALIGN - void *memalign(size_t alignment, size_t size); + void *memalign(std::size_t alignment, std::size_t size); # endif } #endif Then gcc and libstdc++ are compiled and installed successfully without any further errors. But I doubt that this is correct way to handle this issue.
[Bug c++/97569] New: Declaring a struct in a field declaration of another struct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97569
Bug ID: 97569
Summary: Declaring a struct in a field declaration of another
struct.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: anders.granlund.0 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following c++ program:
int main()
{
struct A
{
struct B *b;
};
using U = B;
}
Compile it with "-std=c++20 -pedantic-errors".
The gcc compiler accepts it.
Clang however rejects it with the following error
message: "unknown type name 'B': using U = B;".
The interesting thing is that if we replace struct S with struct S {} both
compilers agree on rejecting the program.
I'm not sure if this is a bug in gcc or clang, but I think this is a gcc bug.
[Bug analyzer/97568] New: -fanalyzer assumes that an extern const pointer is NULL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97568
Bug ID: 97568
Summary: -fanalyzer assumes that an extern const pointer is
NULL
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
Target Milestone: ---
On the following program tst.c:
extern int *const s;
int main (void)
{
return s[0];
}
I get under Debian/unstable:
zira:~> gcc-snapshot -fanalyzer -c tst.c
tst.c: In function 'main':
tst.c:4:11: warning: dereference of NULL '0' [CWE-690]
[-Wanalyzer-null-dereference]
4 | return s[0];
| ~^~~
'main': event 1
|
|
This occurs with:
gcc (Debian 20201023-1) 11.0.0 20201023 (experimental) [master revision
d08d481912b:b3da6ca6235:9e3b9ddb996f18d541a3e03611d46c3a6c0c0b5f]
There was no such issue with:
gcc (Debian 20201002-1) 11.0.0 20201002 (experimental) [master revision
05d39f0de9e:767e018251e:1d3e12c469e5f5627c2e271232e1a3d8a88783be]
[Bug tree-optimization/97567] [11 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97567 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-10-25 Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Priority|P3 |P1 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org, ||amacleod at redhat dot com, ||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|wrong code at -Os and above |[11 Regression] wrong code |on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |at -Os and above on ||x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Started with r11-3685-gfcae5121154d1c3382b056bcc2c563cedac28e74
[Bug fortran/97530] Segmentation fault compiling coarray program with option -fcoarray=shared (not with -fcoarray={lib,single})
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97530 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig --- Fixed by https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9dca1f29608df4bda70b33be735373ac18b8714b Thanks a lot for the bug report! I think we need a way to run the whole testsuite with -fcoarray=shared to spot any other issues like this.
[Bug fortran/88076] Shared Memory implementation for Coarrays
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88076
Bug 88076 depends on bug 97530, which changed state.
Bug 97530 Summary: Segmentation fault compiling coarray program with option
-fcoarray=shared (not with -fcoarray={lib,single})
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97530
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug libstdc++/96817] __cxa_guard_acquire unsafe against dynamically loaded pthread
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96817 Rimvydas (RJ) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com --- Comment #18 from Rimvydas (RJ) --- When libstdc++ is configured with --disable-linux-futex for use in valgrind, the g:e6923541fae5081b646f240d54de2a32e17a0382 on x86_64-linux gives WARNING: 18_support/96817.cc execution test program timed out. FAIL: 18_support/96817.cc execution test Also, disabling linux-futex fails libstdc++-abi/abi_check for symbols? std::__atomic_futex_unsigned_base::_M_futex_wait_until() std::__atomic_futex_unsigned_base::_M_futex_notify_all()
[Bug libgomp/88707] Random failures of libgomp.c++/task-reduction-(8|10|11|13).C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88707 Rimvydas (RJ) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 from Rimvydas (RJ) --- Reproducible on x86_64-linux when configured with --disable-linux-futex WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-reduction-10.C execution test WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-reduction-11.C execution test WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-reduction-13.C execution test WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: libgomp.c++/task-reduction-8.C execution test Disabling use of futexes is needed to avoid lots of false positives in valgrind for obvious reasons.
[Bug tree-optimization/97567] New: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97567
Bug ID: 97567
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
Target Milestone: ---
[550] % gcctk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcctk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/local/suz-local/software/local/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --disable-bootstrap
--prefix=/local/suz-local/software/local/gcc-trunk --enable-languages=c,c++
--disable-werror --enable-multilib --with-system-zlib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20201025 (experimental) [master revision
1aeb7d7d67d:7a48d67add1:d7ddd287ca76e87f431f43687de6d8cc48e52543] (GCC)
[551] %
[551] % gcctk -O1 small.c; ./a.out
[552] %
[552] % gcctk -Os small.c
[553] % ./a.out
Illegal instruction
[554] %
[554] % cat small.c
int a, b, c, d;
void k() {
unsigned f = 1;
long g = 4073709551615;
for (; a; a++)
for (;;) {
d = 0;
L1:
break;
}
if (f)
for (; a; a++)
;
g || f;
int i = 0 - f || g;
long j = g - f;
if (j || f) {
if (g < 4073709551615)
for (;;)
;
int e = ~f, h = b / ~e;
if (c)
goto L2;
g = f = h;
}
g || d;
L2:
if (c)
goto L1;
}
int main() { k(); return 0; }
