https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93348
Bug ID: 93348
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at
gimplify.c:14378
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93347
Bug ID: 93347
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed (error:
calls_comdat_local is set outside of a comdat group)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93346
--- Comment #1 from Andi Kleen ---
typedef unsigned u;
u bzhi(u src, u inx) { return src & ((1 << inx) - 1); }
with -O2 -march=skylake generates
movl%esi, %r8d
movl$1, %esi
shlx%r8d, %esi, %esi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93346
Bug ID: 93346
Summary: gcc not generate BZHI
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #4 from Jim Wilson ---
I tried some cross testing with rtl checking enabled, and found another rtl
check bug with the -msave-restore support in config/riscv/riscv-sr.c where it
uses XINT to read from a CONST_INT which is wrong, as it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70129
Maxim Cournoyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maxim.cournoyer at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93304
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kito Cheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e0a5b313c1a3edfb33a28b8d8fea92e01490ebb3
commit r10-6101-ge0a5b313c1a3edfb33a28b8d8fea92e01490ebb3
Author: Kito Cheng
Date: Fri Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93345
Bug ID: 93345
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in nothrow_spec_p, at
cp/except.c:1247
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93316
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #3 from Jim Wilson ---
Jakub's patch looks OK, and works for the testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93291
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #4)
> Not sure if the patch was done but the failure changed a bit over the
> weekend.
>
> New failures (update from 3684bbb022cd75da55e1457673f269980aa12cdf to
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93344
Bug ID: 93344
Summary: interchange does not work when using the address
rather than direct array
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93297
--- Comment #5 from fdlbxtqi ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> (In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> > > Thanks for the report. Can you please send us the command line used for
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93343
Bug ID: 93343
Summary: coroutine ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93335
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91753
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > lower-subreg should have be able to help here. I wonder why it did not ...
>
> I'm not sure how it can help. When you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93342
Bug ID: 93342
Summary: wrong AVX mask generation with
-funsafe-math-optimizations
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90722
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93224
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> So a negative zero is reached ;)
No it isn't, the value is non-zero:
a.load() - 208.0l:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93221
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93341
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93341
Bug ID: 93341
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in aarch64_do_track_speculation,
at config/aarch64/aarch64-speculation.cc:221
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92599
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
I am testing the following fix. it was indeed a call_stmt hash getting
out of sync. I will need to refactor the code next stage1 as it got
quite ugly (it was not pretty before the mutli-target speculation was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93291
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93124
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93314
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93340
Bug ID: 93340
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in check_constant_initializer,
at fortran/trans-decl.c:5450
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93332
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
You can use --param logical-op-non-short-circuit=0 or --param
logical-op-non-short-circuit=1 in the mean time to force particular decisions
about branch costs (or -mbranch-cost= on certain targets).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93332
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93339
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93339
Bug ID: 93339
Summary: [9/10 Regression] ICE in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at
gimplify.c:2830
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93338
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93338
Bug ID: 93338
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in make_ssa_name_fn, at
tree-ssanames.c:282
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93337
Bug ID: 93337
Summary: [9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_dt_upper_string, at
fortran/module.c:441
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93014
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
Wall -Wextra -O3 test.c && ./a.out
0
--
gcc x86-64 version: gcc (GCC) 10.0.1 20200120 (experimental)
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93014
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92792
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81886
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
Related: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2020-01/msg01183.html (full thread)
Namely, AMD GCN has different ISA – and depending which are available in the
binary, the hardware could be chosen; having the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92071
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92071
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> The ICE started with r10-2840-g70cdb21e579191fe9f0f1d45e328908e59c0179e
> but we generated silently wrong-code before that, I believe since
> r7-5812-ga271e415611a80f1e86e625fd61360e193d04474
> ldr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > Yet another possibility is to create these in libsupc++ in assembly, but
> > that would need to be macroized.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The safer variant:
--- gcc/cp/cp-tree.h.jj 2020-01-20 10:04:52.335091019 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/cp-tree.h2020-01-20 17:09:15.350260384 +0100
@@ -206,6 +206,10 @@ enum cp_tree_index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93309
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Yet another possibility is to create these in libsupc++ in assembly, but
> that would need to be macroized.
I was assuming we'd do that. It would be ugly, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93336
Bug ID: 93336
Summary: BIND(C) and CHARACTER arguments
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic, wrong-code
Severity: normal
el: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.1 20200120 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93334
Bug ID: 93334
Summary: -O3 generates useless code checking for overlapping
memset ?
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
--- Comment #4 from Arseny Solokha ---
And also on Compiler Explorer[1], which means it's not (solely) my
misconfiguration.
[1] https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/A8b--q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-unknown-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80028
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
3b-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-riscv64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.1 20200120 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92536
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks. Like PR 92542, this one was also fixed by r278786 aka g:1a291106384cabc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93275
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93172
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Why should it be limited that way? simplify_rtx does not / should not care
about peculiarities of a certain architecture or microarchitecture.
A transform like this would be a good idea I think, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92829
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Mail Quota: (99% Full)
The size limit of 4096 MB for mailbox gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
has been exceeded. Incoming mail is currently being rejected. To upgrade for
more Megabytes [MB].
Upgrade Email Quota
Note: This upgrade is required immediately after receiving this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93332
Bug ID: 93332
Summary: target-dependent inaccurate range info for some
expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93242
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93172
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This isn't a regression, so I don't think we can handle it for GCC 10.
Anyway, with the simpler ~k instead of _knot_mask16(k) we don't optimize that
in combine either:
(set (reg:V16SF 88)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93242
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:45d06a4045bebc3dbaaf0b1c676f4e22b7c6aca1
commit r10-6095-g45d06a4045bebc3dbaaf0b1c676f4e22b7c6aca1
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91753
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> If we had a way to generate XImode directly from 4 V16QI, and only generate
> one move statement, then the register allocator would act better.
That or split
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93331
Bug ID: 93331
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in build2, at tree.c:4792
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92829
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:414231ba78973dfcb11648a0a5287b989e0148bb
commit r10-6094-g414231ba78973dfcb11648a0a5287b989e0148bb
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93160
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93224
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93251
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93275
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Reduced test-case:
$ cat pr93275.ii
template struct A { static constexpr int value = __v; };
template struct B;
template struct B { typedef _Tp type; };
template
using enable_if_t = typename B<_Cond,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93256
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93194
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5d8a40617df40680cf7de6109925e4f1f1b9ae2
commit r10-6093-ga5d8a40617df40680cf7de6109925e4f1f1b9ae2
Author: Fangrui Song
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93259
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80005
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93261
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93275
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80005
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ad1a3914ae8d67c94b0d2428e3f9672e7db491a1
commit r10-6092-gad1a3914ae8d67c94b0d2428e3f9672e7db491a1
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93288
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93276
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92836
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:42066149461d7e6951d61c341954b0ed77c08d34
commit r9-8148-g42066149461d7e6951d61c341954b0ed77c08d34
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93159
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93296
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93293
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93304
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e82ba180d6641a1e2bad1ac327234fc1cda658ef
commit r10-6091-ge82ba180d6641a1e2bad1ac327234fc1cda658ef
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93305
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93309
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93315
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93317
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93316
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
