[Bug tree-optimization/98270] [11 Regression] UBSAN: /gcc/tree-vect-slp.c:2396:16: runtime error: load of value 112, which is not a valid value for type 'bool' since r11-5928-gfc7b4248172561a9ee310e2d

2021-01-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98270 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Priority|P3

[Bug tree-optimization/91257] Compile-time and memory-hog hog

2021-01-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91257 --- Comment #15 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Rogério de Souza Moraes from comment #12) > Hi Richard, > > first, thank you for the great work improving the GCC performance. > > The R team which I am working with provided two test cases,

[Bug rtl-optimization/98403] [11 Regression] ICE: in add_def, at rtl-ssa/accesses.cc:837 with -Og -march=goldmont -fPIC -fcse-follow-jumps -fipa-ra -mforce-indirect-call since r11-6188-g0b76990a9d75d9

2021-01-03 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98403 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- For the record, grub2 package is affected by the PR as well.

[Bug other/98437] confusing wording in the description of option -fsanitize=address

2021-01-03 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98437 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/98428] [11 regression] ICE with omp simd loop + optimization since r11-2062-gc4facd483de2d5b6

2021-01-03 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98428 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Summary|[11 regression] ICE

[Bug c++/98332] [10/11 Regression] ICE in unshare_constructor, at cp/constexpr.c:1527 since r6-7607-g52228180f1e50cbb

2021-01-03 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98332 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/98348] GCC 10.2 AVX512 Mask regression from GCC 9

2021-01-03 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348 --- Comment #14 from Hongtao.liu --- *** Bug 96891 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/96891] [AVX512] For vector compare to dest vector, avx512 vector compare could be lowered to avx version

2021-01-03 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96891 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/98461] Suboptimal codegen for negating a movemask

2021-01-03 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98461 --- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #9) > > 128: https://godbolt.org/z/Exo3d9 > > zero_extend should be redudant, add another combine splitter for the bellow? Pass_combine failed to match combine_splitter

[Bug tree-optimization/98464] [11 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in tree_nop_conversion_p, at tree.c:12825 by r11-4637

2021-01-03 Thread linkw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|linkw at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/98507] New: timezone is incorrect on last day of year for "TZ" hours

2021-01-03 Thread urbanjost at comcast dot net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98507 Bug ID: 98507 Summary: timezone is incorrect on last day of year for "TZ" hours Product: gcc Version: 8.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/98461] Suboptimal codegen for negating a movemask

2021-01-03 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98461 --- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu --- > 128: https://godbolt.org/z/Exo3d9 zero_extend should be redudant, add another combine splitter for the bellow? Failed to match this instruction: (set (reg:SI 91 [ _6 ]) (zero_extend:SI (subreg:HI

[Bug tree-optimization/96930] Failure to optimize out arithmetic with bigger size when it can't matter with division transformed into right shift

2021-01-03 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- The optimization is there, but just has different conditions: /* Although it would be tempting to shorten always here, that loses on some targets, since the modulo instruction is

[Bug c++/98499] [11 Regression] Possibly bad std::string initialization in constructors

2021-01-03 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98499 --- Comment #4 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Managed to shrink example even further. Now fails in `037t.fre1`: ```c++ struct string { char * _M_buf; // local store char _M_local_buf[16]; __attribute__((noinline)) string() :

[Bug c++/98499] [11 Regression] Possibly bad std::string initialization in constructors

2021-01-03 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98499 --- Comment #3 from Sergei Trofimovich --- `--param=modref-max-depth=0` makes the bug disappear. Looking at `-fdump-tree-all` the harmful optimization happens at `107.fre3` where: ``` if ([(struct string *) + 48B]._M_local_buf != _17)

[Bug bootstrap/98506] New: ../../gcc/libcody/resolver.cc:178:43: error: 'O_CLOEXEC' was not declared in thi s scope

2021-01-03 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98506 Bug ID: 98506 Summary: ../../gcc/libcody/resolver.cc:178:43: error: 'O_CLOEXEC' was not declared in thi s scope Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/98505] New: Capture groups under quantifier must capture only last match

2021-01-03 Thread asorenji at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98505 Bug ID: 98505 Summary: Capture groups under quantifier must capture only last match Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/96930] Failure to optimize out arithmetic with bigger size when it can't matter with division transformed into right shift

2021-01-03 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Oh, C++, I was trying C. Apparently this optimization is done by the C FE only.

[Bug fortran/98498] Interp request: defined operators and unlimited polymorphic

2021-01-03 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98498 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug go/98504] [11 Regression] bootstrap broken in libgo on ia64-linux-gnu

2021-01-03 Thread schwab--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98504 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- Does it also fail without LTO?

[Bug go/98504] [11 Regression] bootstrap broken in libgo on ia64-linux-gnu

2021-01-03 Thread doko at debian dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98504 --- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose --- make[6]: *** [Makefile:2962: runtime.lo] Error 1 make[6]: Leaving directory '/<>/build/ia64-linux-gnu/libgo' make[5]: *** [Makefile:2292: all-recursive] Error 1 make[5]: Leaving directory

[Bug go/98504] New: [11 Regression] bootstrap broken in libgo on ia64-linux-gnu

2021-01-03 Thread doko at debian dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98504 Bug ID: 98504 Summary: [11 Regression] bootstrap broken in libgo on ia64-linux-gnu Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/96930] Failure to optimize out arithmetic with bigger size when it can't matter with division transformed into right shift

2021-01-03 Thread gabravier at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930 --- Comment #6 from Gabriel Ravier --- For this exact code : unsigned f(unsigned a, unsigned b) { return a / (unsigned long long)(1U << b); } compiled with a trunk-based GCC built yesterday for x86-64-linux-gnu configured with:

[Bug c++/98499] [11 Regression] Possibly bad std::string initialization in constructors

2021-01-03 Thread slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98499 Sergei Trofimovich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jh at suse dot cz --- Comment #2

[Bug tree-optimization/96930] Failure to optimize out arithmetic with bigger size when it can't matter with division transformed into right shift

2021-01-03 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- I can't reproduce that. I get: movl%edi, %eax movl%esi, %ecx shrl%cl, %eax ret for that function, and LLVM emits the same code with the first two insns swapped.

[Bug tree-optimization/96930] Failure to optimize out arithmetic with bigger size when it can't matter with division transformed into right shift

2021-01-03 Thread gabravier at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930 --- Comment #4 from Gabriel Ravier --- > The testcase seems to be optimized into return a >> b; and already e.g. GCC > 4.4 does that. > So it is unclear why this has been reported and what difference you found. What I observed is that it is

[Bug c++/97438] [accepts-invalid] coroutines accepts prmomise type with both return_value() and return_void()

2021-01-03 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97438 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4bca11333c274ab5d06677ed952afa097c7d3c78 commit r10-9197-g4bca11333c274ab5d06677ed952afa097c7d3c78 Author: Iain Sandoe

[Bug target/97865] libtool needs to be updated for Darwin20.

2021-01-03 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97865 --- Comment #30 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c85bc938ccf75ea45c00e430f715544ff396e5b5 commit r10-9196-gc85bc938ccf75ea45c00e430f715544ff396e5b5 Author: Iain Sandoe

[Bug middle-end/98502] Optimised memcpy breaks __scalar_storage_order__

2021-01-03 Thread noring at nocrew dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98502 --- Comment #2 from Fredrik Noring --- Thanks, Andrew. I felt certain it's a GCC bug. :) Will the patch be backported to GCC 9.x and 10.x? It'll take a while before 11 is commonly available, I think.

[Bug middle-end/98502] Optimised memcpy breaks __scalar_storage_order__

2021-01-03 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98502 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Component|c