[Bug tree-optimization/43401] Register not cleand correctly by acessing thru pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43401 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0 Status|NEW

[Bug libgcc/101655] canadian compile of libgcc uses native cc as the compiler instead of the target cross compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101655 --- Comment #11 from bootmgr at 163 dot com --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #10) > In a canadian cross, you don't compile the target libraries. They are > already built while building the cross compiler. Isn't this a bug? I

[Bug target/57333] Wrong detection of LZCNT instruction, -mno-lzcnt has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57333 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/101685] [12 Regression] -march=amdfam10 -mno-lzcnt Defines __LZCNT__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101685 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|-march=amdfam10 -mno-lzcnt |[12 Regression]

[Bug target/57333] Wrong detection of LZCNT instruction, -mno-lzcnt has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57333 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|1 |0 Status|NEW

[Bug target/101685] New: -march=amdfam10 -mno-lzcnt Defines __LZCNT__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101685 Bug ID: 101685 Summary: -march=amdfam10 -mno-lzcnt Defines __LZCNT__ Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal

[Bug target/57333] Wrong detection of LZCNT instruction, -mno-lzcnt has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57333 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-linux-gnu Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/101684] Different optimization levels lead to different output results (-Wuninitialized)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101684 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Note find_olap_engine has a similar issue too. int64_t int_value = *(int64_t*)(data); int32_t frac_value = *(int32_t*)((char*)data + sizeof(int64_t)); Should be: int64_t int_value;

[Bug c++/101684] Different optimization levels lead to different output results (-Wuninitialized)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101684 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/101684] New: Different optimization levels lead to different output results (-Wuninitialized)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101684 Bug ID: 101684 Summary: Different optimization levels lead to different output results (-Wuninitialized) Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug debug/101669] error reading variable from debug information when compiling with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101669 Jiu Fu Guo changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|NEW

[Bug debug/101669] error reading variable from debug information when compiling with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101669 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #5) > readelf --debug-dump arg1.exe |grep readelf > readelf: Error: Invalid location list entry type 8 DW_LLE_start_length = 0x08, Didn't make it into binutils

[Bug rtl-optimization/101683] Floating point exception for double->unsigned conversion on avx512 only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101683 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED See Also|

[Bug rtl-optimization/101683] Floating point exception for double->unsigned conversion on avx512 only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101683 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-30

[Bug rtl-optimization/101683] Floating point exception for double->unsigned conversion on avx512 only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101683 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Trapping math is turned on by default I wonder why ifcvt.c is doing the cmov ...

[Bug debug/101669] error reading variable from debug information when compiling with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101669 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmmm, maybe https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27999

[Bug target/101683] New: Floating point exception for double->unsigned conversion on avx512 only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101683 Bug ID: 101683 Summary: Floating point exception for double->unsigned conversion on avx512 only Product: gcc Version: 10.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug debug/101669] error reading variable from debug information when compiling with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101669 --- Comment #5 from Jiu Fu Guo --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > What version of gdb are you using? Tried gdb8.1/8.3/9.2 on ppc64le. In gdb, the msg "error reading variable: dwarf2_find_location_expression:" occurs when

[Bug tree-optimization/45243] Non-volatile variables don't need to be constantly modified at -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45243 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/33535] bitpos_of_field() returns false result base of hard coded multiplication by 8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33535 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/31782] Invalid assembly code on initial dollar signs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31782 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kerrg at ccs dot neu.edu --- Comment

[Bug target/46163] nested function called $ causes assembly error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46163 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/31782] Invalid assembly code on initial dollar signs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31782 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rwxr-xr-x at gmx dot de --- Comment #12

[Bug target/52554] Variable called $1 causes invalid asm to be generated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52554 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug target/31782] Invalid assembly code on initial dollar signs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31782 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-29

[Bug target/72867] SSE/AVX/AVX512: incorrect optimization of VMINPS/VMAXPS at compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72867 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mathias at gaunard dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/57057] Bad optimization on x86 for minps and maxps

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57057 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug target/57690] bextr sometimes used instead of shr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57690 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization --- Comment #2 from

[Bug c/101682] gcc incorrectly rejects C2x attributes after declaration-specifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101682 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Paul Eggert from comment #2) > Clang's warnings are not a problem here, because in clang 12.0.0 (the > current release) __has_c_attribute(nodiscard) is false, so code like this > works: I was

[Bug target/56863] cmpnltpd recognition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56863 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Last

[Bug c/101682] gcc incorrectly rejects C2x attributes after declaration-specifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101682 --- Comment #2 from Paul Eggert --- Clang's warnings are not a problem here, because in clang 12.0.0 (the current release) __has_c_attribute(nodiscard) is false, so code like this works: #ifndef __has_c_attribute # define __has_c_attribute(x)

[Bug c/101682] gcc incorrectly rejects C2x attributes after declaration-specifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101682 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- clang rejects/warnings similar to gcc: :2:8: error: an attribute list cannot appear here extern [[nodiscard]] int f (void); ^ :3:14: error: 'nodiscard' attribute cannot be applied to

[Bug target/47186] -O2 moves invariant address load INTO loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47186 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization --- Comment #1 from

[Bug c/101682] New: gcc incorrectly rejects C2x attributes after declaration-specifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101682 Bug ID: 101682 Summary: gcc incorrectly rejects C2x attributes after declaration-specifiers Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/47133] code size opportunity for boolean expression evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47133 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- 5.4+ produces: ldr r3, [r1] cmp r3, #9 ittte eq ldreq r0, [r1, #4] clzeq r0, r0 lsreq r0, r0, #5 movne r0, #0 bx lr

[Bug rtl-optimization/47698] CMOV accessing volatile memory with read side effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47698 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||regehr at cs dot utah.edu --- Comment

[Bug target/35764] improper load from volatile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35764 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0 Known to work|

[Bug c++/82081] Tail call optimisation of noexcept function leads to exception allowed through

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82081 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rogero at howzatt dot co.uk --- Comment

[Bug ipa/64181] 'noexcept' on a lambda sometimes appears to get optimised away at -O2 (or above).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64181 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug ipa/64181] 'noexcept' on a lambda sometimes appears to get optimised away at -O2 (or above).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64181 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||8.4.0 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug ipa/64181] 'noexcept' on a lambda sometimes appears to get optimised away at -O2 (or above).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64181 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||9.1.0 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug ipa/64181] 'noexcept' on a lambda sometimes appears to get optimised away at -O2 (or above).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64181 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > Seems to be fixed in GCC 10+. It looks like GCC is handling volatile more > correctly now. Note I could only get the original testcase to show the issue not

[Bug ipa/64181] 'noexcept' on a lambda sometimes appears to get optimised away at -O2 (or above).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64181 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.0 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug ipa/64641] ICE in get_polymorphic_call_info with C-cast to (polymorphic) object-reference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64641 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.8.5 Known to fail|

[Bug middle-end/101679] triplicate warning offset outside bounds of constant string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101679 --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor --- For the code in comment #1, the first warning is issued from the front end, the second one from the Gimplifier, and the last one just before expansion. The first one still has the right location. The

[Bug middle-end/101679] triplicate warning offset outside bounds of constant string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101679 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|duplicate warning offset|triplicate warning offset

[Bug c++/67033] [c++11] template argument invalid for integral constant expression beginning with address-of expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67033 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/101681] New: PMF comparison to nullptr is not considered a constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101681 Bug ID: 101681 Summary: PMF comparison to nullptr is not considered a constexpr Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rejects-valid

[Bug c++/101603] [meta-bug] pointer to member functions issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101603 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/89781] Misleading error messages when initializing a static data member in-class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89781 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-29

[Bug c++/86970] Rejected constexpr expression involving lambdas and inheritance, "use of this in a constant expression"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86970 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||9.4.0 Known to work|

[Bug c++/101680] [9/10 Regression] spurious error: use of ‘this’ in a constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101680 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|spurious error: use of |[9/10 Regression] spurious

[Bug middle-end/168] Spurious signed/unsigned comparison warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6) > fixed on the mainline (20030614) by: > > I do not think this should fixed for 3.3 since this an adittional

[Bug c++/101680] New: spurious error: use of ‘this’ in a constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101680 Bug ID: 101680 Summary: spurious error: use of ‘this’ in a constant expression Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug testsuite/101517] Some testcases were lost when tree-ssa was merged

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101517 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 51221 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51221=edit Patch which adds them back This is the patch which I am testing.

[Bug target/100340] Bootstrap fails with Clang 12.0.5 (XCode 12.5)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100340 --- Comment #12 from Jürgen Reuter --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #11) > > 1. Update to XCode 12.5.1 (which apparently exists, but I don't know if it > > has the fixes?) > > not yet checked - but if someone has time I'd like to

[Bug fortran/101101] ICE in gfc_build_array_type, at fortran/trans-types.c:1391

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101101 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-29 Ever

[Bug ipa/101382] function declarations with identical asm label aliasing a target function does not compile with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101382 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Parzefall --- I am wondering whether LTO is wrong or the default handling when not using LTO is wrong. As I understand it, the assembly that is generated in this case is correct. The documentation of GNU as even

[Bug target/65568] ptrmem8.C:9:9: internal compiler error: in build_ptrmemfunc, at cp/typeck.c:7940

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65568 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vladimir.kokovic at gmail dot com ---

[Bug testsuite/97825] internal compiler error: in build_ptrmemfunc, at cp/typeck.c:9199

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97825 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target|

[Bug target/65568] ptrmem8.C:9:9: internal compiler error: in build_ptrmemfunc, at cp/typeck.c:7940

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65568 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW

[Bug target/65572] ptrmem5.C:7:26: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:8629

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65572 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vladimir.kokovic at gmail dot com ---

[Bug testsuite/97824] internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14531

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97824 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/65573] 13908.C:20:33: internal compiler error: in cp_build_addr_expr_1, at cp/typeck.c:5527

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65573 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vladimir.kokovic at gmail dot com ---

[Bug testsuite/97826] internal compiler error: in cp_build_addr_expr_1, at cp/typeck.c:6453

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97826 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libfortran/98076] Increase speed of integer I/O

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|11.3|--- --- Comment #3 from

[Bug fortran/98411] [10/11/12 Regression] Pointless: Array larger than ‘-fmax-stack-var-size=’, moved from stack to static storage for main program variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98411 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11] Pointless: Array|[10/11/12 Regression]

[Bug rtl-optimization/14319] incorrect optimization of union of structs with common initial sequences

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14319 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ghazi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug testsuite/43495] gcc.c-torture/execute/20000603-1.c fails with -fpic/-fPIC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43495 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work|| Status|NEW

[Bug testsuite/45068] g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/nested-2.C failed on Linux/ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45068 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/37628] gcc.c-torture/execute/pr35456.c is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37628 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-29 Severity|normal

[Bug testsuite/16230] Spurious test failures with --disable-static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16230 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0 Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/101517] Some testcases were lost when tree-ssa was merged

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101517 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/100651] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Weird memory corruption with multiple triggers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100651 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Weird memory corruption |[9/10/11/12 Regression]

[Bug tree-optimization/101641] Bogus redundant store removal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101641 --- Comment #5 from Martin Uecker --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > What we know from the union read is that the dynamic type is either the > union type (so the read can pun) or the dynamic type is the union member > type

[Bug middle-end/101679] New: duplicate warning offset outside bounds of constant string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101679 Bug ID: 101679 Summary: duplicate warning offset outside bounds of constant string Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/24293] Undefined behaviour not diagnosed with -fsyntax-only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24293 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hristo at venev dot name --- Comment #8

[Bug c/63878] Variables of incomplete type can be defined with -fno-fat-lto-objects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63878 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c/24293] Undefined behaviour not diagnosed with -fsyntax-only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24293 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug fortran/100651] Weird memory corruption with multiple triggers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100651 --- Comment #5 from Matt Thompson --- Iain, The Linux system would be SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12 SP3. The macOS system is macOS 11.5.1. On the Linux machine, I can confirm the error with (I only have some versions of GCC available): *

[Bug c/60139] Imprecise column number for -pedantic on non-computable initializer element

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60139 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||edwin+bugs at etorok dot eu --- Comment

[Bug c/37187] please provide a way to treat -pedantic as warning when using -Werror

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37187 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0 Status|NEW

[Bug c/97882] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Segmentation Fault on improper redeclaration of function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97882 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gs...@t-online.de --- Comment #9 from

[Bug target/89932] ICE in must_pass_in_stack_var_size_or_pad, at calls.c:5824

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89932 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Actually this one has been fixed while PR 67694 has not. THis is a dup of bug 97882. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 97882 ***

[Bug objc/67694] ICE on returning undefined enum in must_pass_in_stack_var_size_or_pad

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67694 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2017-08-09 00:00:00 |2021-7-29 See Also|

[Bug c/97882] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Segmentation Fault on improper redeclaration of function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97882 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dpotapov at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c/92428] Crash on conflicting types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92428 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/101171] [10 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (error_mark) in c_expr_sizeof_expr, at c/c-typeck.c:3006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101171 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||changochen1 at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c/93574] internal compiler error: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (error_mark) in c_expr_sizeof_expr, at c/c-typeck.c:2925

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93574 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/101171] [10 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (error_mark) in c_expr_sizeof_expr, at c/c-typeck.c:3006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101171 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||doko at debian dot org --- Comment #9

[Bug c/97892] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE in tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (error_mark) in c_expr_sizeof_expr, at c/c-typeck.c:2946

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97892 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/71538] Missing removal of null pointer check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71538 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Ever confirmed|0

[Bug testsuite/101678] New: [12 regression] many fortran errors afterr r12-2553

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101678 Bug ID: 101678 Summary: [12 regression] many fortran errors afterr r12-2553 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/101627] List-directed read with trailing characters after quotes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101627 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/101669] error reading variable from debug information when compiling with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101669 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- What version of gdb are you using?

[Bug middle-end/101671] pr83510 fails with -Os because threader confuses -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101671 --- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez --- Yeah, that would be great. Thanks! On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 6:05 PM msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101671 > > Martin Sebor changed: > >What

[Bug middle-end/101674] gcc.dg/uninit-pred-9_b.c fails after jump threading rewrite

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101674 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2f6bdd51cfe15403085b69c133065ebda4af9bb9 commit r12-2600-g2f6bdd51cfe15403085b69c133065ebda4af9bb9 Author: Martin Sebor Date:

[Bug c++/101670] Internal compiler error with concepts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101670 Joe Loser changed: What|Removed |Added CC||joeloser93 at gmail dot com --- Comment #1

[Bug fortran/100651] Weird memory corruption with multiple triggers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100651 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-linux-gnu, |

[Bug middle-end/101671] pr83510 fails with -Os because threader confuses -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101671 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Last

  1   2   >