[Bug c++/101767] [10/11/12 Regression] Aggregate initialization fails for struct that has both unnamed struct and union fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101767 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug fortran/101760] [11/12 Regression] ICE in make_ssa_name_fn, at tree-ssanames.c:290 since r12-1319-gd4d38135b3137f1d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101760 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.3

[Bug tree-optimization/101754] Missed fold for a/b*b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101754 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug c++/90925] gcc allows calling private overridden operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug tree-optimization/101756] [12 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: non-trivial conversion in 'ssa_name')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101756 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/101750] [12 regression] g++.dg/vect/pr99149.cc fails on aarch64 since r12-2523

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101750 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101750 > > --- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from

[Bug c++/48078] accepts-invalid: taking address of private member function from template function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48078 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||awise.gcc.bug at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/70984] Templated derived class erroneously allows taking address of private base class member functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70984 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c++/48078] accepts-invalid: taking address of private member function from template function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48078 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/53116] protected member access from derived template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53116 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid --- Comment #5 from

[Bug c++/35383] Lookup of template dependent function with overloads fails for namespace-qualified parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35383 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/65969] typename allowed in using declaration of non-types names

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65969 --- Comment #5 from jim x --- The last two cases seem to be not a bug to me. The standard says(cite the c++20 standard) > If a using-declarator uses the keyword typename and specifies a dependent > name ([temp.dep]), the name introduced by the

[Bug c++/72708] error on anonymous union in an unnamed namespace

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72708 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- This code is accepted: namespace { static union { int x; }; } --- For the original testcase, only clang accepts the code; ICC, GCC and MSVC all reject the code with the

[Bug c++/92034] extern template declarations cannot have internal linkage (unnamed namespace)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92034 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Only clang errors out. ICC, GCC and MSVC all accept the code.

[Bug tree-optimization/95384] Poor codegen cause by using base class instead of member for Optional construction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95384 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/95384] Poor codegen cause by using base class instead of member for Optional construction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95384 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |tree-optimization

[Bug c++/84832] Base class member function incorrectly introduced by using-declarator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84832 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Note GCC and ICC accept the code. While clang and MSVC reject the code.

[Bug c++/86249] declaration conflicts with target of using declaration already in scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86249 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Interesting, GCC, ICC and MSVC all accept this.

[Bug c++/85251] Using declaration for base class constructor looses explicit.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85251 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC, ICC, and MSVC all do the same thing and calls A(int).

[Bug c++/80577] Avoid using adj in member function pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80577 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||101603 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/80288] Using directive injects names into a wrong namespace

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80288 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Interesting, ICC, GCC and MSVC all reject this with being ambiguous. Only clang accepts it.

[Bug c++/50921] GCC cannot find dependent conversion-function-id even if there's a using declaration for it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50921 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Known to fail|

[Bug c++/66159] bogus warning for alias-declaration using elaborated-type-specifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66159 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rutsky.vladimir at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/64259] Erroneous "declaration 'struct ...' does not declare anything" when using "typename"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64259 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|NEW

[Bug c++/95597] GCC rejects "typename" in using-declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95597 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- here is another testcase: typedef int T; namespace y{ using typename ::T; }

[Bug c++/94159] parse error on a declaration of a dependent class using a class-key instead of typename

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94159 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/65969] typename allowed in using declaration of non-types names

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65969 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xmh970252187 at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/101771] The keyword "typename" is illegal used in a using-declaration that introduces the non-type declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101771 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/101771] New: The keyword "typename" is illegal used in a using-declaration that introduces the non-type declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101771 Bug ID: 101771 Summary: The keyword "typename" is illegal used in a using-declaration that introduces the non-type declarations Product: gcc Version: 12.0

[Bug tree-optimization/101770] New: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with only locals in GNU diffutils

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101770 Bug ID: 101770 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with only locals in GNU diffutils Product: gcc Version: 11.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/94274] fold phi whose incoming args are defined from binary operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94274 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/96336] Multiple multiplications fail to optimize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96336 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/94884] Failure to recognize that result of or is always superior to operands

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94884 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||101590 --- Comment #5 from Andrew

[Bug c++/101717] [12 Regression] ICE capturing static member within stateless generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101717 --- Comment #5 from Steven Sun --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) Thanks! (In reply to myself from comment #3) > The program seems never think of a situation "a lambda inside a lambda > inside a NSDMI`. We need to amend the

[Bug tree-optimization/94884] Failure to recognize that result of or is always superior to operands

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94884 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/94884] Failure to recognize that result of or is always superior to operands

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94884 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Part of this is: bool f1_part0(unsigned x, unsigned y) { unsigned t1 = x; unsigned t = (x | y); return t >= t1; } Should be optimized to true.

[Bug tree-optimization/94793] Failure to optimize clz idiom

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94793 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 99887 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug tree-optimization/99887] Failure to optimize log2 pattern to clz

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99887 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/96921] Failure to optimize combined boolean not patterns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96921 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > > Hmm, thinking about expanding this further: > > I am going to handle the non-special (bool) case as PR 101610.

[Bug tree-optimization/91213] Missed optimization: (sub X Y) -> (xor X Y) when Y <= X and isPowerOf2(X + 1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91213 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 101610 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug tree-optimization/101610] CST - (x ^ (CST-1)) can be optimized to x + 1 if x < CST and CST is a power of 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101610 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/91213] Missed optimization: (sub X Y) -> (xor X Y) when Y <= X and isPowerOf2(X + 1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91213 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/89263] Simplify bool expression to OR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89263 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/96685] Failure to optimize not+sub to add+not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96685 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug tree-optimization/94356] Missed optimisation: useless multiplication generated for pointer comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94356 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #5 from Andrew

[Bug middle-end/19987] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987 Bug 19987 depends on bug 96897, which changed state. Bug 96897 Summary: Failure to optimize sub+not involving constant to add https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] Failure to optimize sub+not involving constant to add

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] Failure to optimize sub+not involving constant to add

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 Bug 96897 depends on bug 37516, which changed state. Bug 37516 Summary: ~(-2 - a) is not being optimized into a + 1 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37516 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/96685] Failure to optimize not+sub to add+not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96685 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/37516] ~(-2 - a) is not being optimized into a + 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37516 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c/101766] Microblaze gcc misses symver but __has_attribute(symver) returns true

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101766 --- Comment #3 from Giulio Benetti --- I've done this: https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/pull/620/commits/3aba09a5c56e017746c5c1652dbc845f4db7374a and works fine. It doesn't seem to have pitfalls.

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] Failure to optimize sub+not involving constant to add

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||37516 Assignee|prathamesh3492

[Bug tree-optimization/96897] Failure to optimize sub+not involving constant to add

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96897 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug c++/101717] [12 Regression] ICE capturing static member within stateless generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101717 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Steven Sun from comment #3) > By the way, does anyone know other magics like g:hash? r works for the old Subversion revisions "PR" and "bug " (maybe one more) puts a link to the

[Bug tree-optimization/99997] Missed optimisation with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/101717] [12 Regression] ICE capturing static member within stateless generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101717 Steven Sun changed: What|Removed |Added CC||StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com ---

[Bug tree-optimization/95527] Failure to optimize __builtin_ffs == 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95527 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/101769] New: loop->finite_p is not always true for some loops even with -ffinite-loops being used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101769 Bug ID: 101769 Summary: loop->finite_p is not always true for some loops even with -ffinite-loops being used Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/100810] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-397-gda9e6e63d1ae22e530ec7baf59f6ed028bf05776

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100810 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6) > GCC does warn about an unitialized variable i even in "i && d" > For: > if (!b) > i & > > b is even set to 1. Note setting b to be 0 still get the

[Bug middle-end/100810] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-397-gda9e6e63d1ae22e530ec7baf59f6ed028bf05776

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100810 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC does warn about an unitialized variable i even in "i && d" For: if (!b) i & b is even set to 1. Note setting b to be 0 still get the wrong code.

[Bug gcov-profile/71672] inlining indirect calls does not work with autofdo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71672 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Eugene Rozenfeld : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:285aa6895d479bed8e72ad363290846645b6faa0 commit r12-2711-g285aa6895d479bed8e72ad363290846645b6faa0 Author: Eugene Rozenfeld

[Bug gcov-profile/71672] inlining indirect calls does not work with autofdo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71672 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Eugene Rozenfeld : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9265b378531391498ec1727f67a45da72a6c07e9 commit r12-2710-g9265b378531391498ec1727f67a45da72a6c07e9 Author: Eugene Rozenfeld

[Bug gcov-profile/71672] inlining indirect calls does not work with autofdo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71672 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Eugene Rozenfeld : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ed093c7c3f755bc1cd80e5186abeb2f5c50ee0c commit r12-2709-g0ed093c7c3f755bc1cd80e5186abeb2f5c50ee0c Author: Eugene Rozenfeld

[Bug gcov-profile/71672] inlining indirect calls does not work with autofdo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71672 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Eugene Rozenfeld : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9ad3d5339faaaed6e15a7b27d90fbc66eb72f37 commit r12-2708-gf9ad3d5339faaaed6e15a7b27d90fbc66eb72f37 Author: Eugene Rozenfeld

[Bug middle-end/100810] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-397-gda9e6e63d1ae22e530ec7baf59f6ed028bf05776

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100810 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- # i_16 = PHI _22 = (unsigned int) i_16; _48 = -_22; _49 = _39 - _22; h_lsm.23_29 = (int) _49; Somehow or another h gets its value from i which causes the incorrect code. ccp is not at

[Bug tree-optimization/82188] Missed optimization opportunity for constant folding

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82188 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #3 from Andrew

[Bug c/101766] Microblaze gcc misses symver but __has_attribute(symver) returns true

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101766 --- Comment #2 from Giulio Benetti --- Ah ok, so the workaround is to check with a little build test, right?

[Bug c++/95016] [DR 2082] Referring to parameters in unevaluated operands of default arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95016 --- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek --- Will be fixed by https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-August/576627.html

[Bug tree-optimization/81206] missed tail recursion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81206 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-08-03

[Bug middle-end/100810] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu since r12-397-gda9e6e63d1ae22e530ec7baf59f6ed028bf05776

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100810 --- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle --- I believe this bug occurs during the .195t.ccp4 pass that was introduced by the commit identified above, where tree-ssa-propagate.c's substitute_and_fold_engine appears not to correctly handle the situation

[Bug tree-optimization/81206] missed tail recursion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81206 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- int a; int b() { int c, d; if (a) d = b(); return 1 + c + d; }

[Bug tree-optimization/101768] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with non local variables in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101768 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- [AFTER NORMALIZATION -- [DEF]: (.NOT.) ct.0_1 == 1 [AFTER NORMALIZATION -- [DEF]: offset_width_13 = PHI is guarded by : (.NOT.) arg_10 != 0 (.AND.) arg_16 != 0 (.AND.) ct.0_1 == 1 (.OR.) (.NOT.)

[Bug tree-optimization/101768] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with non local variables in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101768 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/101768] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with 'switch' instead of 'if'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101768 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- switch has nothing to do it.

[Bug tree-optimization/101768] New: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with 'switch' instead of 'if'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101768 Bug ID: 101768 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with 'switch' instead of 'if' Product: gcc Version: 11.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/101767] [10/11/12 Regression] Aggregate initialization fails for struct that has both unnamed struct and union fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101767 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[11/12 Regression] |[10/11/12 Regression]

[Bug c++/101767] [11/12 Regression] Aggregate initialization fails for struct that has both unnamed struct and union fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101767 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.3

[Bug c++/101747] Two-argument version of attribute malloc does not perform overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101747 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/101767] New: Aggregate initialization fails for struct that has both unnamed struct and union fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101767 Bug ID: 101767 Summary: Aggregate initialization fails for struct that has both unnamed struct and union fields Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/101766] Microblaze gcc misses symver but __has_attribute(symver) returns true

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101766 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- __has_attribute is broken for many attributes. If GCC supports them in a generic way but does not really support them, __has_attribute still returns true.

[Bug libbacktrace/101753] ld: Unrecognized argument: --build-id

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101753 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Target|hppa*-hp-hpux* |hppa64-hp-hpux*

[Bug tree-optimization/101741] [12 Regression] ICE in fold_stmt, at gimple-range-fold.cc:541 since r12-2517-g1ce0b26e6e1e6c34

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101741 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/101766] New: Microblaze gcc misses symver but __has_attribute(symver) returns true

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101766 Bug ID: 101766 Summary: Microblaze gcc misses symver but __has_attribute(symver) returns true Product: gcc Version: 10.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/81127] Complex division misses BB vectorisation opportunity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81127 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- SLP does work for: void f(complex double *x, complex double *y, double *tt) { complex double t = *x/ *y; tt[0] = __real__ t; tt[1] = __imag__ t; }

[Bug testsuite/101688] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails on 32-bit archs with new jump threader

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101688 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/101688] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails on 32-bit archs with new jump threader

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101688 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aabf07cd5dc314135adde89830a86be157d7596b commit r12-2707-gaabf07cd5dc314135adde89830a86be157d7596b Author: Martin Sebor Date:

[Bug testsuite/101688] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails on 32-bit archs with new jump threader

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101688 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/101765] New: ICE when using a VLA inside of a coroutine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101765 Bug ID: 101765 Summary: ICE when using a VLA inside of a coroutine Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/101688] g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C fails on 32-bit archs with new jump threader

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101688 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/79028] Un-optimal/ incorrect forward propagation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79028 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2017-01-09 00:00:00 |2021-8-3 --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug tree-optimization/101758] Inconsistent optimizations with UBSan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101758 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/71343] missed optimization (can't "prove" shift and multiplication equivalence)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71343 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/77705] Optimize away some static constructors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77705 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/71034] abs(f) u>= 0. is always true

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71034 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/101763] Comments in tree-vrp.c are way out of date

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101763 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- The change happened in r11-439.

[Bug fortran/101760] [11/12 Regression] ICE in make_ssa_name_fn, at tree-ssanames.c:290 since r12-1319-gd4d38135b3137f1d

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101760 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug tree-optimization/59564] False positive array -Warray-bounds check with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59564 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/101764] New: ICE for constexpr if within fold expression within lambda expression within a template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101764 Bug ID: 101764 Summary: ICE for constexpr if within fold expression within lambda expression within a template Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/101763] Comments in tree-vrp.c are way out of date

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101763 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Note I found this while trying to figure out what fixed PR 59564.

[Bug tree-optimization/101756] [12 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: non-trivial conversion in 'ssa_name')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101756 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

  1   2   3   >