> On Feb 23, 2023, at 7:56 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> But the following:
>>
>> struct flex1 { int length1; char data1[]; };
>> struct flex2 { int length2; char data2[]; };
>> union union_flex { struct flex1 f1; struct flex2 f2;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108545
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
The options need to be set first, so that -std=gnu++20 is used when
checking the c++20 effective target.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* testsuite/std/format/arguments/lwg3810.cc: Move dg-options
before dg-do.
---
On Feb 24, 2023, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> Given the logic of this macro, the text should be
> "!TARGET_CXX_METHOD_MAY_BE_INLINE".
I was thinking just "related to that macro", but yeah, negating it makes
sense.
> OK with that change.
Thanks, here's what I'm checking in.
[PR105224] C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107557
--- Comment #7 from Martin Uecker ---
Created attachment 54529
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54529=edit
new version of patch
Here is another patch that does all the recursion in gimplify_type_sizes.
Unfortunately, there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108834
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.2.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108840
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 54531
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54531=edit
Candidate patch
Candidate patch attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108924
Bug ID: 108924
Summary: memory leak in doloop_warn
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108923
Bug ID: 108923
Summary: memory leak of get_intrinsic_dummy_arg result
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
It did help people to identify what extension used in the binary, so I
would prefer keep that enable by default.
and lld is begin fix those merge issue, so the situation should be improved
soon.
Palmer Dabbelt 於 2023年2月24日 週五 10:29 寫道：
> We generate a handful of attributes by default, but
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 12:15:04PM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > Anyway, I wonder if you get the -Werror=stringop-overflow= errors during
> > > bootstrap that I got with my version or not.
>
> Yes, I get this as well, not sure how to suppress it. I guess there's
> no standard way to get at
The following avoids default-initializing auto_vec storage for
non-POD T since that's not what the allocated storage fallback
will do and it's also not expected for existing cases like
auto_vec, 64> elts;
which exist to optimize the allocation.
It also fixes the array accesses done by vec to
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 02:46:21PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> As preparation to remove m_vecdata in the vl_embed vector this
> changes references to it into calls to address ().
>
> As I was here it also fixes ::contains to avoid repeated bounds
> checking and the same issue in ::lower_bound
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108926
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #0)
> This bug is related to 53357.
Sorry. 63357.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108926
Bug ID: 108926
Summary: No warning for same expression in chain of | or & ?
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
From: Ju-Zhe Zhong
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/rvv/base/scalar_move-1.c: New test.
* gcc.target/riscv/rvv/base/scalar_move-2.c: New test.
* gcc.target/riscv/rvv/base/scalar_move-3.c: New test.
* gcc.target/riscv/rvv/base/scalar_move-4.c: New test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107884
Michael N. Moran changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mike at mnmoran dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108916
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108920
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-02-24
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63357
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #9)
> Please open a new PR mentioning this one.
Done. See 108926.
Tested powerpc64le-linux. Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/ext/aligned_buffer.h (__aligned_buffer): Add
diagnostic pragmas.
---
libstdc++-v3/include/ext/aligned_buffer.h | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108834
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:94c9b1bb79f63d000ebb05efc155c149325e332d
commit r13-6330-g94c9b1bb79f63d000ebb05efc155c149325e332d
Author: Martin Liska
Date:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 08:54, Matthias Kretz via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
>
>
> For simd, the inlining behavior should be similar to builtin types. (No
> operator on buitin types is ever translated into a function call.)
> Therefore, always_inline is the right choice (i.e. inline on -O0 as
> well).
OK
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 08:54, Matthias Kretz via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
>
>
> Whitespace changes only.
Looks like there are a few remaining spaces that could be removed
where you've joined lines, e.g.
+{ return static_cast<_Up*>( __builtin_assume_aligned(__ptr,
_S_alignment<_Tp, _Up>)); }
and
Hi, Joseph and Richard,
Could you please review this patch and let me know whether it???s ready
for committing into GCC13?
The fix to Bug PR101832 is an important patch for kernel security
purpose. it's better to be put into GCC13.
=
These are the 4th version of
On Linux/x86_64,
3da77f217c8b2089ecba3eb201e727c3fcdcd19d is the first bad commit
commit 3da77f217c8b2089ecba3eb201e727c3fcdcd19d
Author: Andrew Stubbs
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:07:22 2022 +0100
vect: inbranch SIMD clones
caused
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-16.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
Ok to commit?
I suggest that when committed I'll also set the bugzilla
entry in SUSPENDED mode, as opposed to RESOLVED. I mean,
the issue isn't really solved; that'd be a patch improving
pointer tracking across ivopts.
-- >8 --
For cris-elf before this patch, ever since it was added,
this test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108927
Bug ID: 108927
Summary: error: too few arguments to function 'long unsigned
int __riscv_vsetvlmax_e8mf8(void)'
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108924
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106977
--- Comment #27 from Iain Sandoe ---
great!
we make more progress now - at least past libphobos configure:
we now fail building druntime/core/atomic.d and I am not quite sure how to
interpret the backtrace (from b internal_error).
(lldb) bt
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure.
"GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
* The
GCC extension accepts the case when a struct with a C99 flexible array member
is embedded into another struct or union (possibly recursively).
__builtin_object_size should treat such struct as flexible size.
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/101832
* c-decl.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108921
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106977
--- Comment #28 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #27)
> great!
>
> we make more progress now - at least past libphobos configure:
>
> we now fail building druntime/core/atomic.d and I am not quite sure how to
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108923
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mikael at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108927
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
You are using a month old sources, can you try with a much newer trunk sources?
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 08:55, Matthias Kretz via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
OK for trunk (and maybe backport later if you want to).
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Kretz
>
> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>
> PR libstdc++/108856
> * include/experimental/bits/simd_builtin.h
>
Ok to commit?
-- >8 --
I see overlong lines in the output when a test fails, for
example for a bug exposed for cris-elf and pru-elf in
gcc.dg/analyzer/allocation-size-multiline-3.c:
Running /x/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/analyzer.exp ...
FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/allocation-size-multiline-3.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106977
--- Comment #29 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #27)
> great!
>
> we make more progress now - at least past libphobos configure:
>
> we now fail building druntime/core/atomic.d and I am not quite sure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108030
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e37b04328ae68f91efe1fb2c5de9122be34bc74a
commit r13-6334-ge37b04328ae68f91efe1fb2c5de9122be34bc74a
Author: Matthias Kretz
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108856
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6ce55180d494b616e2e3e68ffedfe9007e42ca06
commit r13-6333-g6ce55180d494b616e2e3e68ffedfe9007e42ca06
Author: Matthias Kretz
Date:
On Fri, 2023-02-24 at 18:54 +0100, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> Ok to commit?
Looks good to me [1]
Thanks
Dave
[1] though FWIW although I wrote this code, my DejaGnu skills are weak
and I'm not a testsuite maintainer :-/
>
> -- >8 --
> I see overlong lines in the output when a test fails, for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108929
Bug ID: 108929
Summary: bfin-openbsd: Issues calling `as` when trying to build
Module-2 components
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108929
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108924
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68800
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
Ok to commit?
-- >8 --
Those multi-line-patterns are literal. Sometimes a regexp
needs to be matched. This is a start: just three elements
are supported: "(" ")" and the compound ")?" (and on second
thought, it can be argued that "(...)" alone is not useful).
Note that Tcl "string map" is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108923
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Morin ---
Here is a small reproducer by the way:
program p
implicit none
call s(0)
contains
subroutine s(i)
integer :: i
end subroutine s
end program p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106977
--- Comment #30 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to ibuclaw from comment #29)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #27)
> > great!
> >
> > we make more progress now - at least past libphobos configure:
> >
> > we now fail building
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108924
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:45f406c4f62e516b58dcda20b5a7aa43ff0aa0f3
commit r13-6336-g45f406c4f62e516b58dcda20b5a7aa43ff0aa0f3
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108929
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
On Friday, 24 February 2023 18:14:53 CET Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Looks like there are a few remaining spaces that could be removed
> where you've joined lines, e.g.
Fixed and pushed.
> OK for trunk anyway (and the branches if you want).
I'll likely backport after I backported all other patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108030
Matthias Kretz (Vir) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #13 from
I'll install this as obvious provided that the prerequisite
multiline.exp patch is approved.
-- >8 --
For 32-bit newlib targets (such as cris-elf and pru-elf),
that int32_t is "long int". See other regexps in the
testsuite matching "aka (long )?int" (with single-quotes
where needed) where the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108928
Bug ID: 108928
Summary: epiphany-elf: unrecognizable insn (internal compiler
error: in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2791) triggered
during Modula-2 build
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108846
--- Comment #12 from Giuseppe D'Angelo ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> (In reply to Giuseppe D'Angelo from comment #5)
> > https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/include/bits/
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86802
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|wilson at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108923
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #1)
> Should be easy to fix anyway.
Not that easy after all.
The following (obvious) fix regresses heavily.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/expr.cc
Dear all,
as reported by Richard - although without a testcase - we leak
gmp memory in do_subscript(). The attached patch was derived
by inspection of the code pointed at by valgrind and regtested
on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Committed as obvious as
commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108920
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 05:09:30 PST (-0800), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
It did help people to identify what extension used in the binary, so I
would prefer keep that enable by default.
IMO it actually hurts more than helps, as it's not really encoding what
extensions are in the binary (or
Hello,
I have just pushed a for PR108923 (a memory leak).
It fixes the small reproducer that I pasted in bugzilla, and I have run
it through the fortran regression testsuite.
More details in the patch.From 545a7d5da5fcc338e29c5241b574ac99d03f4454 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mikael Morin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108923
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
Hi Rimvydas,
Am 24.02.23 um 06:16 schrieb Rimvydas Jasinskas via Gcc-patches:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 10:53 PM Harald Anlauf wrote:
the patch is mostly fine, but there is a minor style issue:
+ if (sym->attr.ext_attr & (1 << EXT_ATTR_WEAK))
+ gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108871
--- Comment #7 from Jonny Grant ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > > *** Bug 108893 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108893
--- Comment #5 from Jonny Grant ---
Here is an example, no warnings during compilation.
https://godbolt.org/z/h8E7r3Wf8
#include
// Try get a build warning for nullptr dereference
__attribute__ ((access (read_only, 1, 2))) void f(char * s,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108893
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
access attribute says if it is access, then it will be that. It does not say it
MUST be accessed. That is what nonnull is for.
>I didn't want to use __attribute__((nonnull)) because the optimizer may use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108923
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mikael Morin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:24c9edfa73632276d7698c103f35833f29804d98
commit r13-6337-g24c9edfa73632276d7698c103f35833f29804d98
Author: Mikael Morin
Date:
Hi Tobias,
Am 24.02.23 um 12:31 schrieb Tobias Burnus:
(B) The attached patch:
With 'intent(out)' there is no reason to do the conversions. While for
nullified
pointers the bounds-conversion loop is skipped, it may still be executed
for undefined
pointers. (Which is usually harmless.) In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108930
Bug ID: 108930
Summary: Internal compiler error with -fopenmp
(tsubst_omp_for_iterator)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108930
--- Comment #1 from michael_greenburg at byu dot edu ---
Created attachment 54534
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54534=edit
The *.out file from `-freport-bug`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108930
--- Comment #2 from michael_greenburg at byu dot edu ---
Created attachment 54535
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54535=edit
The *.ii file from `-save-temps`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108893
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |INVALID
--- Comment #6 from Andrew
101 - 173 of 173 matches
Mail list logo
