[Bug tree-optimization/103221] New: evrp removes |SIGN but does not propagate the ssa name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
Bug ID: 103221
Summary: evrp removes |SIGN but does not propagate the ssa name
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Take:
signed char f(signed char a)
{
signed char v;
v = a;
if (a < 0)
v = a | -128;
return v;
}
CUT
EVRP is able to remove the | -128 part but still left with:
if (a_2(D) < 0)
goto ; [INV]
else
goto ; [INV]
:
v_4 = a_2(D);
:
# v_1 = PHI
return v_1;
But the PHI should be removed and the function should have been at this point
just "return a_2(D);".
Note this is not a regression and even the original VRP had a similar issue
too.
[Bug tree-optimization/103218] (a < 0) << signbit is not always optimized to a & signbitmask at the gimple level
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103218 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 51782 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51782=edit patch in testing Patch in testing.
[Bug libffi/102874] [12 regression] src/x86/win64.S doesn't assemble with Solaris as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102874 --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu --- The proposed fix should be submitted to GCC and put it in libffi/LOCAL_PATCHES after it is checked in.
[Bug tree-optimization/103216] missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103216 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > I am going to implement this. I think I only need the first conversion (and > making sure cond goes away which leads to the second one) which should lead > to the rest (after having fixed PR 103218 which I am doing first which is > needed to get the 4th line). I was right and wrong. I still need to debug match-and-simplify for why ! does not work in one case, I thought it would. Also the last 5 steps did not happen either on the gimple level, I filed PR 103220 for that.
[Bug tree-optimization/103220] New: missed casting issue with |/&?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103220
Bug ID: 103220
Summary: missed casting issue with |/&?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
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:
signed char f(unsigned char a)
{
unsigned char b = a & 127;
signed char c = (signed char) b;
signed char d = (signed char) a;
signed char e = d & -128;
signed char h = c | e;
return h;
}
CUT
GCC can optimize this at the RTL level to just return a but misses out at the
gimple level.
Found this while working on PR 103216.
[Bug tree-optimization/103216] missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103216 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug tree-optimization/103216] missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103216 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2021-11-13 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- b_3 = a_2(D) & 127; c_4 = (signed char) b_3; d_5 = (signed char) a_2(D); if (d_5 < 0) goto ; [INV] else goto ; [INV] : v_7 = c_4 | -128; : # v_1 = PHI (d<0) ? (c | -128) : c -> c | ((d<0) ? -128 : 0) -> c | ((d<0) << 7) -> c | (d & -128) -> (c|d) & c|-128 -> ((signed char)(b | a)) & ((singed char)a|128) -> ((signed char)((a&128) | a)) & ((singed char)a|128) -> ((signed char)a) & ((singed char)a|128) -> (signed char)(a & (a|128))-> (signed char)a Hopefully I did this right. I am going to implement this. I think I only need the first conversion (and making sure cond goes away which leads to the second one) which should lead to the rest (after having fixed PR 103218 which I am doing first which is needed to get the 4th line).
[Bug tree-optimization/103219] [12 Regression] ICE Segmentation fault at -O3 (during GIMPLE pass: unrolljam)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103219 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0
[Bug tree-optimization/103219] New: [12 Regression] ICE Segmentation fault at -O3 (during GIMPLE pass: unrolljam)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103219
Bug ID: 103219
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE Segmentation fault at -O3 (during
GIMPLE pass: unrolljam)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: haoxintu at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Hi all.
I am not sure whether there is a dup but it appears to be a recent regression
issue.
$cat small.c
int a, b, c, e;
int d[10];
int main() {
if (c)
if (f()) {
g();
if (e) {
a = 0;
for (; a != 6; a = a + 2) {
b = 0;
for (; b <= 3; b++)
d[b] &= 1;
}
}
}
return 0;
}
$gcc -w -O3
during GIMPLE pass: unrolljam
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:3:5: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
3 | int main() {
| ^~~~
0xc290af crash_signal
../../gcc/toplev.c:322
0x17bfea7 tree_loop_unroll_and_jam
../../gcc/gimple-loop-jam.c:596
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
$gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/media/haoxin/SeagateData/haoxin-data/dut-research/compilers/gcc/build/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/12.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with:../configure
--prefix=/home/haoxin/haoxin-data/dut-research/compilers/gcc/build/
--enable-bootstrap --enable-checking=release --enable-languages=c,c++
--enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 2022 (experimental) (GCC)
Can also check here: https://godbolt.org/z/r7TKr8MxW
Thanks,
Haoxin
[Bug tree-optimization/103218] (a < 0) << signbit is not always optimized to a & signbitmask at the gimple level
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103218 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- There is code in fold_ternary_loc which does: /* A < 0 ? : 0 is simply (A & ). */ And this works as fold also does (a<0)<
[Bug tree-optimization/103218] (a < 0) << signbit is not always optimized to a & signbitmask at the gimple level
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103218
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-13
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note another testcase:
signed char f(signed char a)
{
if (a < 0)
return 1u<<7;
return 0;
}
PHIOPT does convert it to:
_4 = a_2(D) < 0;
_5 = (signed char) _4;
_6 = _5 << 7;
But then nothing converts it into:
_6 = a_2(D) & 128;
Let me see what I can do.
[Bug tree-optimization/103216] missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103216 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > For x86_64 we might be able to solve this at the RTL level during combine: > (set (reg/v:QI 84 [ ]) > (if_then_else:QI (lt (subreg:QI (reg:SI 86 [ a ]) 0) > (const_int 0 [0])) > (ior:QI (subreg:QI (reg:SI 86 [ a ]) 0) > (const_int -128 [0xff80])) > (reg/v:QI 84 [ ]))) > > That is optimize: > (a < 0) ? a | signbit : b > to > (a < 0) ? a : b That didn't work either because combine could put back into place the lt.
[Bug tree-optimization/103218] (a < 0) << signbit is not always optimized to a & signbitmask at the gimple level
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103218 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=103216 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Note I noticed this while looking on PR 103216.
[Bug tree-optimization/103218] New: (a < 0) << signbit is not always optimized to a & signbitmask at the gimple level
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103218
Bug ID: 103218
Summary: (a < 0) << signbit is not always optimized to a &
signbitmask at the gimple level
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
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:
int f(signed char a)
{
signed char t = a < 0;
return (unsigned char)(t << 7);
}
At the gimple level we get:
int f(signed char a)
{
signed char t = a < 0;
return (unsigned char)(t << 7);
}
But combine is able to it:
Trying 9 -> 10:
9: {r89:QI=r91:SI#0 0>>0x7;clobber flags:CC;}
REG_DEAD r91:SI
REG_UNUSED flags:CC
10: {r90:QI=r89:QI<<0x7;clobber flags:CC;}
REG_DEAD r89:QI
REG_UNUSED flags:CC
Successfully matched this instruction:
(parallel [
(set (reg:QI 90)
(and:QI (subreg:QI (reg:SI 91) 0)
(const_int -128 [0xff80])))
(clobber (reg:CC 17 flags))
])
allowing combination of insns 9 and 10
original costs 4 + 4 = 8
replacement cost 4
deferring deletion of insn with uid = 9.
modifying insn i310: {r90:QI=r91:SI#0&0xff80;clobber flags:CC;}
REG_DEAD r91:SI
REG_UNUSED flags:CC
deferring rescan insn with uid = 10.
If we had wrote the testcase like:
int f(signed char a)
{
return (a < 0) << 7;
}
GCC does optimize it to:
(int) NON_LVALUE_EXPR & 128
[Bug libffi/102874] [12 regression] src/x86/win64.S doesn't assemble with Solaris as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102874 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #6) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > > Upstream bug was filed and fix proposed. IMHO we don't need to wait and can > > pull this fix temporarily. > > Is there a pull request to fix it in upstream? I'll help: there -> https://github.com/libffi/libffi/pull/669
[Bug testsuite/103179] [12 regression] Excess errors in gfortran.dg/do_subscript_3.f90 after r12-5126
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103179 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/103189] [12 regression] g++.dg/tree-ssa/pta-delete-1.C etc. FAIL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103189 Bug 103189 depends on bug 103182, which changed state. Bug 103182 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change causes code correctness regression https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103182 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug tree-optimization/103182] [12 Regression] Recent change causes code correctness regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103182 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka --- fixed.
[Bug libstdc++/103166] [12 regression] wrong dependency on getentropy on newlib-based targets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166 --- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- Elaboration: there may be (newlib) targets (build/test setups) where the test-setup can't link and thus erroneously gets a "yes" for these functions. If that happens for you, look into fixing newlib (like, providing a stub that returns -1 and sets errno=ENOSYS, which would work for libstdc++ as it has a fallback option - actually several fallback options). (Or, make newlib stop declaring functions it doesn't completely provide.) That was my plan B, thankfully GCC_TRY_COMPILE_OR_LINK did the right thing for my setup. :)
[Bug tree-optimization/103182] [12 Regression] Recent change causes code correctness regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103182 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2f3d43a35155685b1795b4392e20e1c14a33c38f commit r12-5221-g2f3d43a35155685b1795b4392e20e1c14a33c38f Author: Jan Hubicka Date: Sat Nov 13 01:51:25 2021 +0100 Fix wrong code with modref and some builtins. ipa-modref gets confused by EAF flags of memcpy becuase parameter 1 is escaping but used only directly. In modref we do not track values saved to memory and thus we clear all other flags on each store. This needs to also happen when called function escapes parameter. gcc/ChangeLog: PR tree-optimization/103182 * ipa-modref.c (callee_to_caller_flags): Fix merging of flags. (modref_eaf_analysis::analyze_ssa_name): Fix merging of flags.
[Bug libstdc++/103166] [12 regression] wrong dependency on getentropy on newlib-based targets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- Calling it fixed, as observed for cris-elf applying the same patch at r12-5056-g3439657b0286.
[Bug libstdc++/103166] [12 regression] wrong dependency on getentropy on newlib-based targets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:60f761c7e54f96a287c73a71d0b09ee2b2f8426d commit r12-5220-g60f761c7e54f96a287c73a71d0b09ee2b2f8426d Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson Date: Fri Nov 12 18:04:43 2021 +0100 libstdc++: Use GCC_TRY_COMPILE_OR_LINK for getentropy, arc4random Since r12-5056-g3439657b0286, there has been a regression in test results; an additional 100 FAILs running the g++ and libstdc++ testsuite on cris-elf, a newlib target. The failures are linker errors, not finding a definition for getentropy. It appears newlib has since 2017-12-03 declarations of getentropy and arc4random, and provides an implementation of arc4random using getentropy, but provides no definition of getentropy, not even a stub yielding ENOSYS. This is similar to what it does for many other functions too. While fixing newlib (like adding said stub) would likely help, it still leaves older newlib releases hanging. Thankfully, the libstdc++ configury test can be improved to try linking where possible; using the bespoke GCC_TRY_COMPILE_OR_LINK instead of AC_TRY_COMPILE. BTW, I see a lack of consistency; some tests use AC_TRY_COMPILE and some GCC_TRY_COMPILE_OR_LINK for no apparent reason, but this commit just amends r12-5056-g3439657b0286. libstdc++-v3: PR libstdc++/103166 * acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_CHECK_GETENTROPY, GLIBCXX_CHECK_ARC4RANDOM): Use GCC_TRY_COMPILE_OR_LINK instead of AC_TRY_COMPILE. * configure: Regenerate.
[Bug c/20785] Pragma STDC * (C99 FP) unimplemented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20785 --- Comment #17 from Vincent Lefèvre --- (In reply to Pavel M from comment #16) > Note: The #pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS is unknown and ignored (leading to FP > issues), however, the __STDC_IEC_559__ is defined to 1. Confused. Yes, and IMHO, with __STDC_IEC_559__ defined to 1, this is a much more severe issue. This PR should not be regarded as an enhancement, but as a real bug (this would be an enhancement only if when __STDC_IEC_559__ is defined to 1, there would be a lack of optimization).
[Bug tree-optimization/103216] missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103216 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- For x86_64 we might be able to solve this at the RTL level during combine: (set (reg/v:QI 84 [ ]) (if_then_else:QI (lt (subreg:QI (reg:SI 86 [ a ]) 0) (const_int 0 [0])) (ior:QI (subreg:QI (reg:SI 86 [ a ]) 0) (const_int -128 [0xff80])) (reg/v:QI 84 [ ]))) That is optimize: (a < 0) ? a | signbit : b to (a < 0) ? a : b And I suspect we need after that) (a < 0) ? a : a & ~signbit into: a
[Bug analyzer/99269] False positive -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak/-Wanalyzer-double-free with -fanalyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99269 Dominique Martinet changed: What|Removed |Added CC||npfhrotynz-ptnqh.myvf@noclu ||e.notk.org --- Comment #1 from Dominique Martinet --- gcc 11.2.1 20210728 (fc34) does not produce any warning with this, so would be tempted to say it's been fixed.
[Bug analyzer/103217] New: analyzer false positive on leak warning when using indirect strdup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103217
Bug ID: 103217
Summary: analyzer false positive on leak warning when using
indirect strdup
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: npfhrotynz-ptnqh.myvf at noclue dot notk.org
Target Milestone: ---
Inlining both the reproducer and fanalyzer warning as they are small enough:
--
#include
#include
#include
char *xstrdup(const char *src) {
char *val = strdup(src);
if (!val)
abort();
return val;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
char *one = NULL, *two = NULL;
int rc;
while ((rc = getopt(argc, argv, "a:b:")) != -1) {
switch (rc) {
case 'a':
free(one);
one = xstrdup(optarg);
break;
case 'b':
free(two);
two = xstrdup(optarg);
break;
}
}
free(one);
free(two);
return 0;
}
--
--
$ gcc -fanalyzer -o t t.c
t.c: In function ‘main’:
cc1: warning: leak of ‘val’ [CWE-401] [-Wanalyzer-malloc-leak]
‘main’: events 1-4
|
|t.c:13:5:
| 13 | int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
| | ^~~~
| | |
| | (1) entry to ‘main’
|..
| 17 | while ((rc = getopt(argc, argv, "a:b:")) != -1) {
| |~~~
| | |
| | (2) following
‘true’ branch (when ‘rc != -1’)...
| 18 | switch (rc) {
| | ~~
| | |
| | (3) ...to here
|..
| 25 | two = xstrdup(optarg);
| | ~~~
| | |
| | (4) calling ‘xstrdup’ from ‘main’
|
+--> ‘xstrdup’: events 5-9
|
|6 | char *xstrdup(const char *src) {
| | ^~~
| | |
| | (5) entry to ‘xstrdup’
|7 | char *val = strdup(src);
| | ~~~
| | |
| | (6) allocated here
|8 | if (!val)
| |~
| ||
| |(7) assuming ‘val’ is non-NULL
| |(8) following ‘false’ branch (when ‘val’ is
non-NULL)...
|9 | abort();
| 10 | return val;
| |~~~
| ||
| |(9) ...to here
|
<--+
|
‘main’: event 10
|
| 25 | two = xstrdup(optarg);
| | ^~~
| | |
| | (10) returning to ‘main’ from
‘xstrdup’
|
‘main’: event 11
|
|cc1:
| (11): ‘val’ leaks here; was allocated at (6)
|
--
As far as I see the conditions seem to be:
- there have to be at least two cases and two variables, adding more than two
cases leave the error only on second one; interverting the two makes the error
stay on 2nd. Similarly, using the same variable in both cases makes the error
go away.
- it has to be strdup, replacing strdup with malloc makes the error go away.
- it has to be indirected, calling strdup() directly in main (with the same
check/abort) makes the error go away. explicit "inline" attribute does not
change behaviour.
- it doesn't have to be getopt, but there has to be a function call e.g.
replacing getopt() with a locally defined iteration function keeps the error,
but checking argc/argv directly in the loop makes the error disappear
What's also interesting is the event 11 and "(11): ‘val’ leaks here" that
points to... nothing at all? There's no line number or any code quoted to refer
to. I'm a bit at a loss as to what this could mean, exiting from main? where?
[Bug tree-optimization/103216] New: missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103216
Bug ID: 103216
Summary: missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
signed char f(unsigned char a)
{
unsigned char b;
signed char c, d, v;
b = a & 127;
c = (signed char) b;
d = (signed char) a;
v = c;
if (d < 0)
v = c | -128;
return v;
}
This should just be optimized to return (signed char)a;
Reduced from the testcase provided by
https://twitter.com/__phantomderp/status/1459247957904080901 .
[Bug tree-optimization/88443] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overflow warnings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443 Bug 88443 depends on bug 103176, which changed state. Bug 103176 Summary: -foptimize-strlen causes stringop-overflow warning https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103176 What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
[Bug tree-optimization/103176] -foptimize-strlen causes stringop-overflow warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103176
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Thanks for the test case. The warning is based on the IL below. In basic
block 16 the result of operator new is assigned to _134, and in basic block 19
the code stores zero at an negative offset from _134. So the warning is doing
its job here: the invalid statement exists in the emitted program, it just may
be unreachable and GCC can't prove that.
[local count: 19040066]:
_82 = len_49 - lastpos.2_4;
length_83 = (int) _82;
o ={v} {CLOBBER};
_134 = operator new (1); >>> _134
goto ; [100.00%]
...
[local count: 19040066]:
MEM[(char *)_134] = 0;
_85 = length_83 + 1;
_86 = (unsigned int) _85;
if (_86 == 0)
goto ; [80.71%]
else
goto ; [19.29%]
[local count: 25513689]:
MEM[(char *)_134 + -1B] = 0; <<< -Wstringop-overflow
goto ; [100.00%]
The cause of the warning is in the subString() function where it can't prove
that the length argument won't become negative:
string subString(unsigned begin, int length) const
{
// if start after string
// or no proper substring length
if ((length <= 0) || (begin>=size()))
return string{ "" };
// clamp length to maximal value
if ((length+begin) > size())
length = size()-begin; <<< length not proven to
become -1
string o;
o.reserve(length+1);
for (int i=0; i
[Bug middle-end/103193] gcc for x86_64: wrong code generation: ucomiss instead of comiss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103193
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Fri, 12 Nov 2021, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs wrote:
> /* Simplify comparison of something with itself. For IEEE
>floating-point, we can only do some of these simplifications. */
> (for cmp (eq ge le)
> (simplify
> (cmp @0 @0)
> (if (! FLOAT_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0))
>|| ! HONOR_NANS (@0))
>{ constant_boolean_node (true, type); }
>(if (cmp != EQ_EXPR)
> (eq @0 @0)
>
> does this. The folding to == happens unconditionally. As I understand you
> the condition that applies to the constant folding should apply to the
> folding to EQ as well, which means we effectively need to remove the
> canonicalization to EQ (since when it would be valid we can fold to constant
> true)?
It's invalid with -ftrapping-math because it loses an exception. With
-fno-trapping-math, but NaNs supported, you can convert to EQ but can't
fold to constant true.
[Bug c++/103212] requires expression with lambda inside causes a parse error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103212
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-12
Summary|requires expression with|requires expression with
|lambda fails|lambda inside causes a
||parse error
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Simplified testcase:
static_assert(requires { [](int){}(0); });
Note even though MSVC parses this code correctly, it still says the
static_assert is valid which is obviously wrong :).
[Bug tree-optimization/103209] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-4324-g008e7397dad971c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103209 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/103209] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-4324-g008e7397dad971c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103209 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4d2d5565a0953eaa829d10006baf007cf33bab89 commit r12-5217-g4d2d5565a0953eaa829d10006baf007cf33bab89 Author: Jan Hubicka Date: Fri Nov 12 23:55:50 2021 +0100 Fix wrong code with pure functions I introduced bug into find_func_aliases_for_call in handling pure functions. Instead of reading global memory pure functions are believed to write global memory. This results in misoptimization of the testcase at -O1. The change to pta-callused.c updates the template for new behaviour of the constraint generation. We copy nonlocal memory to calluse which is correct but also not strictly necessary because later we take care to add nonlocal_p flag manually. gcc/ChangeLog: PR tree-optimization/103209 * tree-ssa-structalias.c (find_func_aliases_for_call): Fix use of handle_rhs_call gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR tree-optimization/103209 * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pta-callused.c: Update template. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr103209.c: New test.
[Bug fortran/83646] (PDT) Use statement with PDTs excludes the specific instances.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83646 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldot at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Bernhard Reutner-Fischer --- Seems to compile with 10.3.0 and 11.2.0 $ gfortran-10 -c /tmp/pr83646.f90 -o /tmp/pr.o -W -Wall -Wextra -fdump-tree-original && gfortran-10 --version | head -n1 /tmp/pr.f90:10:20: 10 |subroutine sub( a ) |1 Warning: Unused dummy argument ‘a’ at (1) [-Wunused-dummy-argument] GNU Fortran (Debian 10.3.0-11) 10.3.0
[Bug ada/103070] ICE in gimple_call_static_chain_flags, at gimple.c:1669
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103070 Bug 103070 depends on bug 103058, which changed state. Bug 103058 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_static_chain_flags, at gimple.c:1669 when building 527.cam4_r https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103058 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug tree-optimization/102943] [12 Regression] Jump threader compile-time hog with 521.wrf_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943 Bug 102943 depends on bug 103058, which changed state. Bug 103058 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_static_chain_flags, at gimple.c:1669 when building 527.cam4_r https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103058 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 103058, which changed state. Bug 103058 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_static_chain_flags, at gimple.c:1669 when building 527.cam4_r https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103058 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug fortran/103058] [12 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_static_chain_flags, at gimple.c:1669 when building 527.cam4_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103058 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/103182] [12 Regression] Recent change causes code correctness regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103182
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
What happens here is that we optimize the loop to memcpy and memcpy EAF flags
coming from fnspec are quite interesting. The copied argument is marked as
escaping but used only directly. This is correct but not what modref expects
since it generally punts on tracking anything stored in memory, so it needs to
give up on all other flags which it doesn't.
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-modref.c b/gcc/ipa-modref.c
index e999c2c5d1e..c705a67daf7 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa-modref.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-modref.c
@@ -1888,19 +1888,18 @@ callee_to_caller_flags (int call_flags, bool
ignore_stores,
that is not the same as caller returning it. */
call_flags |= EAF_NOT_RETURNED_DIRECTLY
| EAF_NOT_RETURNED_INDIRECTLY;
- /* TODO: We miss return value propagation.
- Be conservative and if value escapes to memory
- also mark it as escaping. */
if (!ignore_stores && !(call_flags & EAF_UNUSED))
{
+ /* If value escapes we are no longer able to track what happens
+with it because we can read it from the escaped location
+anytime. */
if (!(call_flags & EAF_NO_DIRECT_ESCAPE))
- lattice.merge (~(EAF_NOT_RETURNED_DIRECTLY
-| EAF_NOT_RETURNED_INDIRECTLY
-| EAF_NO_DIRECT_READ
-| EAF_UNUSED));
- if (!(call_flags & EAF_NO_INDIRECT_ESCAPE))
+ lattice.merge (0);
+ else if (!(call_flags & EAF_NO_INDIRECT_ESCAPE))
lattice.merge (~(EAF_NOT_RETURNED_INDIRECTLY
| EAF_NO_DIRECT_READ
+| EAF_NO_INDIRECT_READ
+| EAF_NO_INDIRECT_CLOBBER
| EAF_UNUSED));
}
else
[Bug tree-optimization/103215] [12 regression] gcc generates unexpected warnings on libx11-1.7.2: error: array subscript -2 is outside array bounds of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103215 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-11-12 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed, though I don't see anywhere in the IR [(void *)_and_type + -2B]; I do see: type_9 = [(void *)type_3 + -2B]; But type_3 cannot be _and_type there because of a check before hand. This is definitely VRP/CCP related with maybe jump threading involved.
[Bug c/20785] Pragma STDC * (C99 FP) unimplemented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20785 --- Comment #16 from Pavel M --- Note: The #pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS is unknown and ignored (leading to FP issues), however, the __STDC_IEC_559__ is defined to 1. Confused.
[Bug tree-optimization/103207] [12 Regression] ICE in verify_range, at value-range.cc:385 since r12-4766-g113dab2b9d511f3a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207 --- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez --- That is, is the overflowed 0 allowed in the switch's case?
[Bug fortran/102368] Failure to compile program using the C_SIZEOF function in ISO_C_BINDING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102368 --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Note: Steve Lionel of Intel thinks the code in comment#0 is invalid. But nvfortran, flang and crayftn all accept it without complaining. @Bill: any more detailed thoughts how to resolve this?
[Bug tree-optimization/103215] [12 regression] gcc generates unexpected warnings on libx11-1.7.2: error: array subscript -2 is outside array bounds of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103215 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- >Does double post-increment `if (type-- == name_and_type || type-- == >name_and_type)` have defined behaviour? Yes as the || acts as a sequence point. My bet is there is a (bad) transformation going on that converts v-- == array to v == array-1, v-- and that is causing the warnings to show up. > I think error message is at least incorrectly worded. the warning is correct iif array-2 was used and that seems to be the problem here is that is not used directly but the compiler decides to create it (incorrectly).
[Bug tree-optimization/103215] [12 regression] gcc generates unexpected warnings on libx11-1.7.2: error: array subscript -2 is outside array bounds of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103215 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |tree-optimization Keywords||diagnostic CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |12.0
[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 67901, which changed state. Bug 67901 Summary: [concepts] overloading bug when considered more specialized vs more constrained https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67901 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/67901] [concepts] overloading bug when considered more specialized vs more constrained
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67901 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3) > Fixed on master with r11-1571-g57b4daf8dc4ed7b6. Which was also committed on the GCC 10 branch with r10-8343-gc3d4dbc68be14842 . So fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/103195] [12 Regression] tfft2 text grows by 70% with -Ofast since r12-5113-gd70ef65692fced7a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103195 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mjambor at suse dot cz --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka --- OK, quite surprisingly the code size growth is due to ipa-cp. Due to early modref, we get two aggregate jump functions: value: 0x0, mask: 0xffe0 VR [1, -1] param 3: UNKNOWN + Aggregate passed by reference: + offset: 0, type: integer(kind=4), CONST: 33554432 value: 0x0, mask: 0xfffc VR [1, -1] param 4: CONST: -> -1 @@ -747,6 +744,8 @@ value: 0x0, mask: 0xffe0 VR [1, -1] param 3: UNKNOWN + Aggregate passed by reference: + offset: 0, type: integer(kind=4), CONST: 33554432 value: 0x0, mask: 0xfffc VR [1, -1] param 4: CONST: -> 1 and later we decide to clone: + Estimating body: rfft/1 + Known to be false: op3[ref offset: 0] <= 0, op3[ref offset: 0] == 1, op3[ref offset: 0] == 2, op3[ref offset: 0] changed + size:602 time:9868.835632 nonspec time:9884.134781 loops with known iterations:0.470881 known strides:0.00 + - estimates for value 33554432 for param #3 npts[ref offset: 0]: time_benefit: 109.299, size: 602 so the cost metric says that cloning will speed up the function by 0.1% however good clonning oportunity seems happy: + - considering value 33554432 for param #3 npts, offset: 0 (caller_count: 2) + good_cloning_opportunity_p (time: 109.299, size: 602, freq_sum: 16.1818) -> evaluation: 2937.97, threshold: 500 and we clone + Creating a specialized node of rfft/1. +adding an extra known scalar value for param #0 x +adding an extra known scalar value for param #1 trg +adding an extra known scalar value for param #2 ibi +replacing param #0 x with const +replacing param #1 trg with const +replacing param #2 ibi with const
[Bug c++/100055] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE on invalid requires expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100055 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lts-rudolph at gmx dot de --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 96111 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug c++/96111] checking type of attribute with concepts results in compilation error or ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96111 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Dup of bug 100055. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 100055 ***
[Bug c++/98939] [C++23] Implement P1787R6 "Declarations and where to find them"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98939
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I'm having trouble with "Default template arguments are now complete-class
contexts":
class C {
template struct _List;
template struct S; // #1
template
struct S<_Sz, _List<_Uint, _UInts...>>; // #2
static constexpr bool value = false;
};
#2 wants to lookup_template_class S, but S can contain a DEFERRED_PARSE, so
that's not going to work. Perhaps we have to delay finish_template_type until
the end of class somehow...
[Bug tree-optimization/103209] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-4324-g008e7397dad971c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103209 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- Wow, what a bug :P
[Bug tree-optimization/103209] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-4324-g008e7397dad971c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103209 --- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka --- This is bug I introduced to tree-ssa-structalias where I reversed order of flags which deterine global memory read and writes. So pure functions are handled as functions writting global memory but not reading it. I am very surprised it took so long to show as wrong code. diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c index 153ddf57a61..34fd47fdf47 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c +++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c @@ -4996,7 +4996,7 @@ find_func_aliases_for_call (struct function *fn, gcall *t) reachable from their arguments, but they are not an escape point for reachable memory of their arguments. */ else if (flags & (ECF_PURE|ECF_LOOPING_CONST_OR_PURE)) - handle_rhs_call (t, , implicit_pure_eaf_flags, true, false); + handle_rhs_call (t, , implicit_pure_eaf_flags, false, true); /* If the call is to a replaceable operator delete and results from a delete expression as opposed to a direct call to such operator, then the effects for PTA (in particular
[Bug libstdc++/103166] [12 regression] wrong dependency on getentropy on newlib-based targets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma ||il/gcc-patches/2021-Novembe ||r/584316.html Assignee|redi at gcc dot gnu.org|hp at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- Yoink!
[Bug c/103215] [12 regression] gcc generates unexpected warnings on libx11-1.7.2: error: array subscript -2 is outside array bounds of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103215 --- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Created attachment 51781 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51781=edit orig.bug.c Attaching orig.bug.c in case I corrupted original too much.
[Bug middle-end/97048] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overread warnings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97048 Bug 97048 depends on bug 98465, which changed state. Bug 98465 Summary: Bogus -Wstringop-overread with -std=gnu++20 -O2 and std::string::insert https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98465 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug middle-end/98465] Bogus -Wstringop-overread with -std=gnu++20 -O2 and std::string::insert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98465 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail|11.0| Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #33 from Martin Sebor --- With the workaround in r11-7146 the warning should no longer be issued for std::string::insert. Thanks to r12-2087 suppression by #pragma GCC diagnostic works reliably even with inlining in GCC 12, so the warning can also be suppressed using it. I'm not working on any other improvements related to the underlying problem but I think this report can be resolved as fixed in GCC 11 and 12.
[Bug c/103215] New: [12 regression] gcc generates unexpected warnings on libx11-1.7.2: error: array subscript -2 is outside array bounds of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103215
Bug ID: 103215
Summary: [12 regression] gcc generates unexpected warnings on
libx11-1.7.2: error: array subscript -2 is outside
array bounds of
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Upstream core:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/libx11/-/blob/6d1dc1f6169ebf0ba71785d461bd98129c65c862/src/RdBitF.c#L156
Self-contained example:
// $ cat bug.c
#include
int extract(char*);
int XReadBitmapFileData (void) {
char name_and_type[255];
for (;;) {
extract (name_and_type);
char * type = strrchr (name_and_type, '_');
if (type) type++; else type = name_and_type;
if (strcmp ("hot", type) == 0) {
if (type-- == name_and_type || type-- == name_and_type) continue;
if (strcmp ("ax_hot", type) == 0) return 1;
}
}
return -1;
}
Good:
$ gcc-11.2.0 -Wall -Werror=array-bounds -fno-strict-aliasing -O2 -c bug.c
-o bug.o
Bad:
$ gcc-12.0.0 -Wall -Werror=array-bounds -fno-strict-aliasing -O2 -c bug.c
-o bug.o
bug.c: In function 'XReadBitmapFileData':
bug.c:10:48: error: array subscript -2 is outside array bounds of
'char[9223372036854775807]' [-Werror=array-bounds]
10 | if (type-- == name_and_type || type-- == name_and_type)
continue;
|^~
bug.c:4:14: note: at offset [0, 253] into object 'name_and_type' of size 255
4 | char name_and_type[255];
| ^
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
Does double post-increment `if (type-- == name_and_type || type-- ==
name_and_type)` have defined behaviour?
I think error message is at least incorrectly worded. I don't think there is an
out-of-bounds access.
$ LANG=C ./result-2/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/nix/store/w588w2rqb5zrs6d09q3rmqpf7m9259y1-gcc-12.0.0/bin/gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/nix/store/w588w2rqb5zrs6d09q3rmqpf7m9259y1-gcc-12.0.0/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/12.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with:
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20211107 (experimental) (GCC)
[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17 since r12-3876-g4a960d548b7d7d94
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #12 from Aldy Hernandez --- fixed
[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17 since r12-3876-g4a960d548b7d7d94
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:264f061997c0a5349cdce6d73f0dc167ac7fc8f4 commit r12-5216-g264f061997c0a5349cdce6d73f0dc167ac7fc8f4 Author: Aldy Hernandez Date: Fri Nov 12 16:08:01 2021 +0100 path solver: Solve PHI imports first for ranges. PHIs must be resolved first while solving ranges in a block, regardless of where they appear in the import bitmap. We went through a similar exercise for the relational code, but missed these. Tested on x86-64 & ppc64le Linux. gcc/ChangeLog: PR tree-optimization/103202 * gimple-range-path.cc (path_range_query::compute_ranges_in_block): Solve PHI imports first.
[Bug c++/103213] Lambda type name overlap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103213 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-11-12 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1
[Bug tree-optimization/98512] [11/12 Regression] “#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored” ineffective in conjunction with alias attribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98512 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||12.0 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to fail|11.0|11.2.0 --- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor --- Fixed in GCC 12. The patch is not suitable for backporting to release branches.
[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 98871, which changed state. Bug 98871 Summary: Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug middle-end/98871] Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Known to work||12.0 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- Fixed in GCC 12. The patch will not be backported to current releases.
[Bug fortran/102043] Wrong array types used for negative stride accesses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102043 --- Comment #12 from Mikael Morin --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #11) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) > > > Is there any case where the frontend would make 'data' point into the > > middle of the array and iteration over the array would end up accessing > > elements on "both sides"? Can somebody write a short testcase where that > > would happen? > > I've tried, but I have been unable to find such a test case, and > I do not think this can (or should) happen. I would say it can happen as things stand, when one dimension is accessed going backward and another going forward. program main implicit none integer, dimension :: a(4, 4) a = 0 call s(a(4:1:-1,:)) if (any(a /= 10)) stop 1 contains subroutine s(b) implicit none integer, dimension(:,:) :: b b = 10 end subroutine s end program main
[Bug libstdc++/103166] [12 regression] wrong dependency on getentropy on newlib-based targets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- There's no other patch as far as I know, so that would be great, thanks.
[Bug c++/100583] [modules] ICE when importing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100583 --- Comment #4 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña --- As pointed out in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103118#c3: > What works is including them in a non-module unit translation unit. > > ```C++ > #if defined(__GNUC__) and not defined(__clang__) > # include // Workaround GCC bug 103118. > # include// Workaround GCC bug 100583. > #endif > import waarudo.geometries; > import waarudo.numbers; > import waarudo.quantities; > #include > ```
[Bug c++/103118] [modules] ICE tree check in get_merge_kind at cp/module.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103118 --- Comment #3 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña --- What works is including them in a non-module unit translation unit. ```C++ #if defined(__GNUC__) and not defined(__clang__) # include // Workaround GCC bug 103118. # include// Workaround GCC bug 100583. #endif import waarudo.geometries; import waarudo.numbers; import waarudo.quantities; #include ```
[Bug c++/103186] [11/12 Regression] ICE with fold-expression and lambdas as default since r11-7965-g23be03a0f243a084
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103186 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org, ||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|[11/12 Regression] ICE with |[11/12 Regression] ICE with |fold-expression and lambdas |fold-expression and lambdas |as default |as default since ||r11-7965-g23be03a0f243a084 --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --- Started with r11-7965-g23be03a0f243a084.
[Bug c++/67901] [concepts] overloading bug when considered more specialized vs more constrained
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67901 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Fixed on master with r11-1571-g57b4daf8dc4ed7b6.
[Bug c++/96111] checking type of attribute with concepts results in compilation error or ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96111 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- The ICE was fixed with r12-389-gc9b6890d0b6aa030.
[Bug c++/101149] Coroutine compiler error with ternary operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101149 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | Resolution|--- |FIXED CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Fixed with r12-3529-g70ee703c479081ac.
[Bug c++/103118] [modules] ICE tree check in get_merge_kind at cp/module.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103118 --- Comment #2 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña --- Or not. I forgot to uncomment uses of the chrono library.
[Bug fortran/102043] Wrong array types used for negative stride accesses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102043 --- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) > Is there any case where the frontend would make 'data' point into the > middle of the array and iteration over the array would end up accessing > elements on "both sides"? Can somebody write a short testcase where that > would happen? I've tried, but I have been unable to find such a test case, and I do not think this can (or should) happen.
[Bug fortran/102368] Failure to compile program using the C_SIZEOF function in ISO_C_BINDING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102368 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Corrected the logic and submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-November/057007.html
[Bug libstdc++/103166] [12 regression] wrong dependency on getentropy on newlib-based targets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- I have a patch using GCC_TRY_COMPILE_OR_LINK instead of AC_TRY_COMPILE for those function, since I foolishly went about to fix this before looking in bugzilla. :) Will post once it's successfully past the first point of failure, sparing others the churn of finding autoconf-2.69 and automake-2.15.1. Unless a patch is already posted?
[Bug c++/103118] [modules] ICE tree check in get_merge_kind at cp/module.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103118 --- Comment #1 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña --- To work around this - Do not include ``. - Explicitly import a module that exports its definitions when you need to use the chrono library. I use the headers above to compile a header unit, which I export from a module to work around the lack of a standard modules. Apparently, `` is indirectly included, as using the chrono library works.
[Bug ipa/103211] [12 Regression] 416.gamess crashes after r12-5177-g494bdadf28d0fb35
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103211
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
There is wrong change in my patch (I mixed up this_looping variable for
looping)
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-pure-const.c b/gcc/ipa-pure-const.c
index b831844afa6..5056850c0a8 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa-pure-const.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-pure-const.c
@@ -1611,9 +1611,6 @@ propagate_pure_const (void)
enum pure_const_state_e edge_state = IPA_CONST;
bool edge_looping = false;
- if (e->recursive_p ())
- looping = true;
-
if (e->recursive_p ())
looping = true;
@@ -1800,11 +1797,11 @@ propagate_pure_const (void)
switch (this_state)
{
case IPA_CONST:
- remove_p |= ipa_make_function_const (node, looping, false);
+ remove_p |= ipa_make_function_const (node, this_looping,
false);
break;
case IPA_PURE:
- remove_p |= ipa_make_function_pure (node, looping, false);
+ remove_p |= ipa_make_function_pure (node, this_looping, false);
break;
default:
[Bug ipa/103211] [12 Regression] 416.gamess crashes after r12-5177-g494bdadf28d0fb35
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103211 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- Yes: grep 'found to' * | grep master unport.fppized.f.025t.nothrow:Function found to be nothrow: master.0.setfm unport.fppized.f.084i.pure-const:Function found to be pure: master.0.setfm/8 unport.fppized.f.210t.local-pure-const2:Function found to be pure: master.0.setfm/8
[Bug c++/84930] Brace-closed initialization of cstring (i.e."abcdefghi") to coresponding aggregate types fails in certain situation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84930 --- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek --- Comment 3 was fixed in r11-7102.
[Bug ipa/103211] [12 Regression] 416.gamess crashes after r12-5177-g494bdadf28d0fb35
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103211
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103211
>
> --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
> Optimized dump differs for couple of functions in the same way:
>
> diff -u good bad
> --- good2021-11-12 17:42:36.995947103 +0100
> +++ bad 2021-11-12 17:41:56.728194961 +0100
> @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@
>
> ;; Function abrt (abrt_, funcdef_no=10, decl_uid=4338, cgraph_uid=11,
> symbol_order=10) (executed once)
>
> -Removing basic block 5
> __attribute__((fn spec (". ")))
> void abrt ()
> {
> @@ -350,7 +349,6 @@
> void setfm (integer(kind=4) * ipar)
> {
> [local count: 1073741824]:
> - master.0.setfm (0, ipar_2(D)); [tail call]
>return;
>
> }
>
> maybe the fnspec for master.0.setfm is bad?
>
> __attribute__((fn spec (". R w ")))
> void master.0.setfm (integer(kind=8) __entry, integer(kind=4) * ipar)
> {
It looks more like pure/const discovery. You should be able to use
-fdump-ipa-all -fdump-tree-all and grep "function found to be"
either pure or const.
What is body of master.0.setfm. Does it look like it does nothing?
"R" in fnspec means that arg 0 is only read directly and not derefernced.
"w" means that it arg 1 is not escaping.
Honza
Re: [Bug ipa/103211] [12 Regression] 416.gamess crashes after r12-5177-g494bdadf28d0fb35
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103211
>
> --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
> Optimized dump differs for couple of functions in the same way:
>
> diff -u good bad
> --- good2021-11-12 17:42:36.995947103 +0100
> +++ bad 2021-11-12 17:41:56.728194961 +0100
> @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@
>
> ;; Function abrt (abrt_, funcdef_no=10, decl_uid=4338, cgraph_uid=11,
> symbol_order=10) (executed once)
>
> -Removing basic block 5
> __attribute__((fn spec (". ")))
> void abrt ()
> {
> @@ -350,7 +349,6 @@
> void setfm (integer(kind=4) * ipar)
> {
> [local count: 1073741824]:
> - master.0.setfm (0, ipar_2(D)); [tail call]
>return;
>
> }
>
> maybe the fnspec for master.0.setfm is bad?
>
> __attribute__((fn spec (". R w ")))
> void master.0.setfm (integer(kind=8) __entry, integer(kind=4) * ipar)
> {
It looks more like pure/const discovery. You should be able to use
-fdump-ipa-all -fdump-tree-all and grep "function found to be"
either pure or const.
What is body of master.0.setfm. Does it look like it does nothing?
"R" in fnspec means that arg 0 is only read directly and not derefernced.
"w" means that it arg 1 is not escaping.
Honza
[Bug ipa/103211] [12 Regression] 416.gamess crashes after r12-5177-g494bdadf28d0fb35
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103211
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Optimized dump differs for couple of functions in the same way:
diff -u good bad
--- good2021-11-12 17:42:36.995947103 +0100
+++ bad 2021-11-12 17:41:56.728194961 +0100
@@ -38,7 +38,6 @@
;; Function abrt (abrt_, funcdef_no=10, decl_uid=4338, cgraph_uid=11,
symbol_order=10) (executed once)
-Removing basic block 5
__attribute__((fn spec (". ")))
void abrt ()
{
@@ -350,7 +349,6 @@
void setfm (integer(kind=4) * ipar)
{
[local count: 1073741824]:
- master.0.setfm (0, ipar_2(D)); [tail call]
return;
}
maybe the fnspec for master.0.setfm is bad?
__attribute__((fn spec (". R w ")))
void master.0.setfm (integer(kind=8) __entry, integer(kind=4) * ipar)
{
[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17 since r12-3876-g4a960d548b7d7d94
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 --- Comment #10 from Sergei Trofimovich --- (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #9) > Created attachment 51780 [details] > patch in testing The patch fixed real ed-1.17 test suite as well. Thank you!
[Bug ipa/103211] [12 Regression] 416.gamess crashes after r12-5177-g494bdadf28d0fb35
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103211 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- The following file is miscompiled with: gfortran -c -o unport.fppized.o -O2 -march=skylake -g -std=legacy -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations unport.fppized.f
[Bug web/103214] Incorrect function signatures for __builtin_ia32_pblendd* instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103214 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- These builtins should never be used directly, they aren't a supported interface, which are the intrinsics like _mm_blend_epi32 etc. The builtins are just underlying implementation of those intrinsics, and can be added, removed or changed any time. So, IMNSHO instead of changing the prototypes in the documentation we should remove all that documentation from there and clarify what we've been telling for years, that the __builtin_ia32_* builtins must never be used directly.
[Bug web/103214] New: Incorrect function signatures for __builtin_ia32_pblendd* instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103214 Bug ID: 103214 Summary: Incorrect function signatures for __builtin_ia32_pblendd* instructions Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: web Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gnugcc at bdwjn dot 33mail.com Target Milestone: --- The documentation on https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/x86-Built-in-Functions.html lists the following two AVX2 functions: > v4si __builtin_ia32_pblendd128 (v4si,v4si) > v8si __builtin_ia32_pblendd256 (v8si,v8si) These instructions take two vectors and an integer mask, so this should be: > v4si __builtin_ia32_pblendd128 (v4si,v4si,int) > v8si __builtin_ia32_pblendd256 (v8si,v8si,int)
[Bug middle-end/102997] [12 Regression] 45% 454.calculix regression with LTO+PGO -march=native -Ofast on Zen since r12-4526-gd8edfadfc7a9795b65177a50ce44fd348858e844
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102997 --- Comment #31 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz --- > It likely was the loop header copying missing on cold loops then. Yep. It is good we worked that out.
[Bug target/99657] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 with SVE code without -march=+sve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99657 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 103206 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug target/103206] ICE in insn_default_length, at config/aarch64/aarch64.md:1183
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103206 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > I think we have a duplicate of this - the testcase is invalid unless you > enable SVE. Yes PR 99657. My patch which I submitted already fixes this ICE. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 99657 ***
[Bug tree-optimization/103175] [12 Regression] internal compiler error: in handle_call_arg, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:4139
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103175 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/103175] [12 Regression] internal compiler error: in handle_call_arg, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:4139
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103175 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4526ec20f17a6182f754da9460d9d944dd123cc0 commit r12-5201-g4526ec20f17a6182f754da9460d9d944dd123cc0 Author: Jan Hubicka Date: Fri Nov 12 16:34:03 2021 +0100 Fix ICE in tree-ssa-structalias.c PR tree-optimization/103175 * ipa-modref.c (modref_lattice::merge): Add sanity check. (callee_to_caller_flags): Make flags adjustment sane. (modref_eaf_analysis::analyze_ssa_name): Likewise.
[Bug target/93082] macOS Authorization.h needs fixinclude
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93082 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=90835, ||https://bugs.llvm.org/show_ ||bug.cgi?id=44406 CC||bkorb at gnu dot org, ||iains at gcc dot gnu.org, ||mikestump at comcast dot net --- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager --- This is hitting me in my fork of Apple's version of gdb; cc-ing Darwin and fixincludes maintainers
[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17 since r12-3876-g4a960d548b7d7d94
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 --- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez --- Created attachment 51780 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51780=edit patch in testing
[Bug tree-optimization/103202] [12 regression] gcc miscompiles ed-1.17 since r12-3876-g4a960d548b7d7d94
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103202 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez --- The problem here is this thread: [5] Registering jump thread: (13, 11) incoming edge; (11, 10) nocopy; BB11 has this: === BB 11 Imports: n_42 Exports: n_42 Relational : (n_45 < n_42) [local count: 118111614]: # np_43 = PHI # n_42 = PHI # m_31 = PHI <0(13), m_16(4)> n_45 = n_42 + -1; if (n_42 != 0) goto ; [89.00%] else goto ; [11.00%] Because of the ordering of the import bitmap, we solve m_31 first to 0. Then, when we solve n_42, we think we can use the m_31 in the cache, but the ordering is wrong. PHIs must always be done first. We went through a similar exercise to get relationals right and somehow missed this.
[Bug c++/84930] Brace-closed initialization of cstring (i.e."abcdefghi") to coresponding aggregate types fails in certain situation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84930 Will Wray changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wjwray at gmail dot com --- Comment #8 from Will Wray --- This can be marked RESOLVED, fixed in gcc11, same as the referenced duplicates.
[Bug target/103201] [12 Regression] trunk 20211111 ftbfs for amdgcn – libgomp/teams.c:49:6: error: 'struct gomp_thread' has no member named 'num_teams'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103201
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f49c7a4fb23d82c89c97acec88770b300c903d9a
commit r12-5200-gf49c7a4fb23d82c89c97acec88770b300c903d9a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Fri Nov 12 16:11:02 2021 +0100
libgomp: Unbreak gcn offload build
My recent libgomp change apparently broke libgomp build for gcn offloading.
The problem is that gcn, unlike nvptx, doesn't override teams.c source file
and the patch I've committed assumed all the non-LIBGOMP_USE_PTHREADS
targets
do not use it. My understanding is that gcn included omp_get_num_teams
and omp_get_team_num definitions in both icv-device.o and teams.o,
with the definitions only in the former working correctly.
This patch brings gcn into sync with how nvptx does it, that teams.c
is overridden, provides a dummy GOMP_teams_reg and
omp_get_{num_teams,team_num}
definitions and icv-device.c doesn't provide those.
2021-11-12 Jakub Jelinek
PR target/103201
* config/gcn/icv-device.c (omp_get_num_teams, omp_get_team_num):
Move
to ...
* config/gcn/teams.c: ... here. New file.
[Bug target/103201] [12 Regression] trunk 20211111 ftbfs for amdgcn – libgomp/teams.c:49:6: error: 'struct gomp_thread' has no member named 'num_teams'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103201 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Stubbs --- I did some preliminary testing on your patch: the libgomp.c/target-teams-1.c testcase runs fine on amdgcn. I presume that that covers most of the existing features of those runtime calls?
[Bug other/89863] [meta-bug] Issues in gcc that other static analyzers (cppcheck, clang-static-analyzer, PVS-studio) find that gcc misses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863 Bug 89863 depends on bug 89259, which changed state. Bug 89259 Summary: liboffloadmic/runtime/offload_omp_host.cpp:692: pointless test ? https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89259 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
[Bug other/89259] liboffloadmic/runtime/offload_omp_host.cpp:692: pointless test ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89259 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- H.J. We'd like to deprecate MIC offload in GCC 12. We will remove all traces of MIC offload in GCC 13.
