[Bug bootstrap/87741] Don't build readline/libreadline.a in GDB, when --with-system-readline is supplied

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87741 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;f=configure.ac;h=69961a84c9b3744a10248fb6cbccc3c688a1e0a5 It would be useful if both configures were synced up again

[Bug bootstrap/87741] Don't build readline/libreadline.a in GDB, when --with-system-readline is supplied

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87741 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-08-26 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug bootstrap/42756] Build fails if gold is used as linker and some libraries reside is /usr/local/lib

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42756 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org ---

[Bug bootstrap/86534] Linking gcc with gold fails, when libisl is under /usr/local/lib

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86534 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug bootstrap/80200] decNumber.c : error : #include_next is a GCC extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80200 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/80476] GCC 7 can't be compiled with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80476 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- This worked for me on the trunk. I did not try any earlier version though.

Weird struct behavior on ESA S390

I was using 31-bit (with the -m31 flag) S390 cross-compiling with GCC 11. When something weird happened: https://github.com/udos-project/flatboot/blob/60046ae0d6cee23348359b7f94a312332a1357b2/stage2/stivale.c#L383 Here we can see the declaration of a struct, however when i declare the same

[Bug target/55143] vms-c.o:(.toc+0x0): undefined reference to `c_default_pointer_mode' (building cc1plus)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55143 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jay.krell at cornell dot edu ---

[Bug bootstrap/58765] c_default_pointer_mode need to be in c-family for vms-c.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58765 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/55143] vms-c.o:(.toc+0x0): undefined reference to `c_default_pointer_mode' (building cc1plus)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55143 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0

[Bug tree-optimization/79637] documentation for --param max-fsm-thread-length is confusing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79637 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|missing documentation for |documentation for --param

[Bug bootstrap/67062] -no-pie check breaks cross compilation of GCC [OS X -> Windows]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67062 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug driver/88708] help-dummy.o file left behind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88708 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug driver/31774] inconsitency between gcc and g++ when linking with --as-needed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31774 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/57768] Assumption of a case-insensitive filesystem on Darwin is incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57768 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I was going to say GCC should depend on std::filesystem::path but that was not added until C++17 and I think it still does not handle the case insenative correctly, see

[Bug middle-end/57768] Assumption of a case-insensitive filesystem on Darwin is incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57768 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug driver/58468] Macro gets undefined when source directory is same as macro name.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58468 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|preprocessor|driver --- Comment #1 from Andrew

[Bug target/101865] _ARCH_PWR8 is not defined when using -mcpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865 --- Comment #9 from HaoChen Gui --- (In reply to Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho from comment #7) > (In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #6) > > Does _ARCH_PWR8 impact anything during the compiling? > > I can answer this question from an

[Bug lto/51765] [9/10 Regression] Testsuite ICEs with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51765 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #8) > ... which I forgot to attach :) > FAIL: gcc.dg/nested-func-12.c (internal compiler error) > FAIL: gcc.dg/nested-func-9.c (internal compiler error) This is PR

[Bug lto/41756] LTO: -flto -O1 linking files compiled with -fno-exceptions with ones compiled with exceptions yields error "BB 14 can not throw but has an EH edge"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41756 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #14 from Nicholas Piggin --- (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #10) > Well, the problem is that we still generate suboptimal code on GCC 11. I > don't know whether we want to address that or not. > > I suppose we aren't going

[Bug bootstrap/63547] --disable-lto with configure creates and installs lto-wrapper

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63547 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|lto |bootstrap Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/102071] New: crash when combining -faligned-new=N with array cookie

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102071 Bug ID: 102071 Summary: crash when combining -faligned-new=N with array cookie Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug bootstrap/62260] Build inside source tree doesn't work with lto-plugin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62260 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---

[Bug lto/54206] build in source dir breaks lto plugin detection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54206 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/46503] collect2's search for nm makes LTO support fragile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46503 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- nm and strip are found the same way by collect2 and unlike ld is not hard coded. ldd too but that is only for hppa-hpux (32bit). config/pa/som.h:#define LDD_SUFFIX "chatr"

[Bug lto/46503] collect2's search for nm makes LTO support fragile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46503 Bug 46503 depends on bug 46502, which changed state. Bug 46502 Summary: collect2 LTO marker detection is fragile wrt. to nm output format https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46502 What|Removed |Added

[Bug lto/46502] collect2 LTO marker detection is fragile wrt. to nm output format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46502 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/52399] -Wclobbered should be a common option rather than a C family specific option

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52399 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|lto |middle-end Summary|With

[Bug rtl-optimization/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #13 from David Edelsohn --- I don't object to backporting Hao Chen's patch. It has baked sufficiently on trunk that it seems relatively stable.

[Bug target/94630] General bug for changes needed to switch the powerpc64le-linux long double default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94630 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Michael Meissner : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c5d76a655b9abdacaa992ab1167b33d35c3ffe9 commit r12-3151-g4c5d76a655b9abdacaa992ab1167b33d35c3ffe9 Author: Michael Meissner

[Bug lto/49249] LTO streaming of builtins corrupts BLOCK lists

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49249 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/43850] ice: tree code �template_type_parm� is not supported in gimple streams

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43850 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||scovich at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug lto/45968] ICE: tree code 'template_type_parm' is not supported in gimple streams with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45968 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/45959] [4.6 Regression] ICE: tree code 'template_type_parm' is not supported in gimple streams with -flto/-fwhopr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45959 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0

[Bug c/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool --- We can backport Hao Chen's patch, it has proven to cause no problems at all. We don't normally backport patches that aren't bugfixes, but we could do it for important enough things (we did it for most

[Bug c/102070] New: missing warning initializing aggregate member with itself

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102070 Bug ID: 102070 Summary: missing warning initializing aggregate member with itself Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/102048] __gnu_cxx::rope.erase(size_t __p) implementation seems to be wrong

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102048 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan

[Bug c++/97931] missing -Wuninitialized initializing an aggregate member with itself

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97931 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |c++ Last reconfirmed|

[Bug lto/43542] LTO segfault with object referencing __gnu_lto_v1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43542 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz

[Bug c++/66590] switch statement: incorrect warning "reaches end of non-void function"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66590 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/102064] Wrong assignable check in uninitialized_fill and uninitialized_fill_n

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102064 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ead408529d7a69873a7c14dd12fa043cd5862253 commit r12-3147-gead408529d7a69873a7c14dd12fa043cd5862253 Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug libstdc++/102048] __gnu_cxx::rope.erase(size_t __p) implementation seems to be wrong

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102048 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2cd229dec8d6716938de5052479d059d306969da commit r12-3146-g2cd229dec8d6716938de5052479d059d306969da Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug c++/66590] switch statement: incorrect warning "reaches end of non-void function"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66590 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:971df602e0a798fe9c805c3105f4ac80d638a12b commit r12-3145-g971df602e0a798fe9c805c3105f4ac80d638a12b Author: Andrew Pinski Date:

[Bug fortran/99125] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: gimplification failed (gimplify.c:15068)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99125 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.2.1, 12.0

[Bug analyzer/101980] [12 regressions] many test case failures after r12-3002

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101980 --- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- (In reply to Ankur Saini from comment #7) > Should be fixed after the above commit. Confirmed (at 43a5d46feabd). Thanks for the prompt fix.

[Bug lto/66228] Compiling simple program with -flto -O1 causes mad behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66228 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.4 Status|NEW

[Bug lto/66228] Compiling simple program with -flto -O1 causes mad behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66228 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > I think this is an effective duplicate of PR61886. With GCC 5 I get > > rguenther@murzim:/tmp> gcc-5 t.i -O -flto Right you need to either use -std=gnu90 or

[Bug c++/12672] Evals template defaults args that it should not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/102019] [12 Regression] UBSAN error: hwint.h:293:61: runtime error: shift exponent 64 is too large for 64-bit type 'long unsigned int' since r12-2975-g32c3a75390623a0470df52af13f78baddd562981

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102019 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ab84eda5548119908c4e24c6ad953dd7c00a5b7 commit r12-3143-g1ab84eda5548119908c4e24c6ad953dd7c00a5b7 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/24021] VRP does not work with floating points

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24021 Andrew Macleod changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at redhat dot com,

[Bug debug/57828] linker error: undefined reference to '.LLSTxxx'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57828 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/102024] [12 Regression] zero width bitfields and ABIs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102024 --- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt --- Never mind my last comment. Segher pointed out that structure layout is done early enough that this isn't a problem. I verified this using g++ from GCC 11 and GCC 12 to show that we get correct offsets

[Bug debug/53023] file_table_last_lookup is used, but never set

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53023 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Keywords|

[Bug debug/88389] -flto -g -gsplit-dwarf is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88389 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug debug/78871] Anonymous namespace and -flto -gsplit-dwarf: ICE in lhd_decl_printable_name, at langhooks.c:215

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78871 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug debug/47361] ICE: in build_abbrev_table, at dwarf2out.c:10477 with -g -feliminate-dwarf2-dups

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47361 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug debug/46102] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in dwarf2out_finish (dwarf2out.c:8490) with -feliminate-dwarf2-dups when using precompiled headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46102 Bug 46102 depends on bug 53118, which changed state. Bug 53118 Summary: [9/10/11/12 regression] -feliminate-dwarf2-dups is broken for C++ https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53118 What|Removed |Added

[Bug debug/47361] ICE: in build_abbrev_table, at dwarf2out.c:10477 with -g -feliminate-dwarf2-dups

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47361 Bug 47361 depends on bug 53118, which changed state. Bug 53118 Summary: [9/10/11/12 regression] -feliminate-dwarf2-dups is broken for C++ https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53118 What|Removed |Added

[Bug debug/53118] [9/10/11/12 regression] -feliminate-dwarf2-dups is broken for C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53118 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|NEW

[Bug target/102069] New: [12 regression] New test case gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_3.c in r12-3136 fails on power 7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102069 Bug ID: 102069 Summary: [12 regression] New test case gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_3.c in r12-3136 fails on power 7 Product: gcc Version: 9.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/102024] [12 Regression] zero width bitfields and ABIs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102024 --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- Actually, on further review, I guess we have additional concerns. Unnamed bitfields also have the effect of updating alignment of the subsequent field of a structure. "The types of unnamed bit fields have

[Bug bootstrap/88623] gcc build uses CXX_FOR_BUILD but files have .c extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88623 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||build --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/102024] [12 Regression] zero width bitfields and ABIs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102024 --- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt --- Sorry to be late jumping in. Previously zero bitfields were spuriously removed, now they're being left in place and matching C. That's very good. As Jakub shows, the biggest problem is with homogeneous

[Bug middle-end/101996] libatomic: RISC-V 64: Infinite recursion in __atomic_compare_exchange_1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101996 --- Comment #6 from Jim Wilson --- Looking at Alpine Linux discussions, I see that it has a --enable-autolink-libatomic configure option which links in libatomic by default. This could break the libatomic autoconf tests that check to see if

[Bug c/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #11 from David Edelsohn --- We could backport Haochen's patch to AT.

[Bug c/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt --- Well, the problem is that we still generate suboptimal code on GCC 11. I don't know whether we want to address that or not. I suppose we aren't going to backport Haochen's lovely patch for sign

[Bug c++/102065] [C++20] Substitution failure of function instantiates its argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102065 --- Comment #2 from Egor Seredin --- Thank you! I agree that it is a duplicate. Also, there is 3rd workaround without guards (may be with implicit guards): move last function argument to last template argument:

[Bug c/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool --- Thanks for the detective work! So the variable expansion code could be improved to handle sign extensions better (or maybe zero extensions as well?) In either case that won't help rs6000 much anymore

[Bug libstdc++/100285] experimental/net/socket/socket_base.cc fails on arm-eabi (r12-137)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100285 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- Sorry I am still seeing errors on trunk and gcc-11: FAIL: experimental/net/socket/socket_base.cc (test for excess errors) Excess errors:

[Bug c++/91235] Array size expression is implicitly casted to unsigned long type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91235 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 Michael Matz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug target/102068] [AIX] field alignment ignores packed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102068 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/102068] New: [AIX] field alignment ignores packed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102068 Bug ID: 102068 Summary: [AIX] field alignment ignores packed Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- Hm, note the ccxjqZU1 file contains: libwave_common.a@0x4307c libwave_common.a@0x180314c What does the syntax mean? I can reproduce it locally with: $ /dev/shm/objdir2/gcc/lto1 -quiet -fwpa

[Bug libstdc++/102048] __gnu_cxx::rope.erase(size_t __p) implementation seems to be wrong

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102048 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > That function was not part of the SGI rope so I think we should just remove > it: > https://www.boost.org/sgi/stl/Rope.html Correction: it's present in the

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Matt Godbolt from comment #4) > Interestingly, if we extract (with nm x) the files in the library, and glob > them in instead of naming the library file, everything works. We're having >

[Bug c/102060] -Wprio-ctor-dtor underlines the wrong part of the source line due to missing location for attributes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102060 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|-Wprio-ctor-dtor underlines |-Wprio-ctor-dtor underlines

[Bug c/102060] -Wprio-ctor-dtor underlines the wrong part of the source line

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102060 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug ipa/102061] .constprop gets exposed in warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102061 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 --- Comment #5 from Matt Godbolt --- > And can you please test a more recent compiler (gcc-10 or gcc-11)? Unfortunately not easily; we have a whole ecosystem of libraries we link in (not attached here). If we get any more time we'll try and

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 --- Comment #4 from Matt Godbolt --- Interestingly, if we extract (with nm x) the files in the library, and glob them in instead of naming the library file, everything works. We're having difficulty constructing a reduced case, as we need a

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Matt Godbolt from comment #2) > Hi Martin! > > Thanks for the quick reply. We don't have an easy way to do this in our > current setup: those files are built and published as a library by a >

[Bug ipa/102059] Incorrect always_inline diagnostic in LTO mode with #pragma GCC target("cpu=power10")

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug other/93067] diagnostics are not aware of -finput-charset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93067 Lewis Hyatt changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 --- Comment #2 from Matt Godbolt --- Hi Martin! Thanks for the quick reply. We don't have an easy way to do this in our current setup: those files are built and published as a library by a different system. We'll give it a go though.

[Bug libstdc++/102048] __gnu_cxx::rope.erase(size_t __p) implementation seems to be wrong

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102048 --- Comment #5 from Zonghan Yang --- I do agree this function should be deleted if SGI rope doesn't contain it. Also, it's the easiest way to fix the problem.

[Bug target/102066] aarch64: Suboptimal addressing modes for SVE LD1W, ST1W

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102066 --- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #1) > > I guess the predicates and constraints in @aarch64_pred_mov in > > aarch64-sve.md should allow for the scaled address modes > They

[Bug c++/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/102066] aarch64: Suboptimal addressing modes for SVE LD1W, ST1W

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102066 --- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- > I guess the predicates and constraints in @aarch64_pred_mov in > aarch64-sve.md should allow for the scaled address modes They already allow them. I'm guessing this is an ivopts problem,

[Bug c++/102067] New: SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 Bug ID: 102067 Summary: SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols Product: gcc Version: 9.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/102066] New: aarch64: Suboptimal addressing modes for SVE LD1W, ST1W

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102066 Bug ID: 102066 Summary: aarch64: Suboptimal addressing modes for SVE LD1W, ST1W Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization

[Bug c++/99599] [11/12 Regression] Concepts requirement falsely reporting cyclic dependency, breaks tag_invoke pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99599 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seredinyegor at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/102065] [C++20] Substitution failure of function instantiates its argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102065 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE CC|

[Bug target/101865] _ARCH_PWR8 is not defined when using -mcpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865 --- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #6) > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5) > > (In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #4) > > > I wonder if it's a Power8 architecture when those 6

[Bug c++/102063] Default arguments should not be a SFINAE context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102063 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Also Jason's https://wg21.link/cwg2296

[Bug c/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool --- Btw, -ftree-loop-vectorize -fvect-cost-model=cheap makes this 8 vectors per iteration (and very-cheap doesn't vectorise it). Maybe overkill, esp. when you look at the tail code, but that 8 vector core

[Bug c++/102063] Default arguments should not be a SFINAE context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102063 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Interesting, thanks!

[Bug c/102062] powerpc suboptimal unrolling simple array sum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062 --- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Nicholas Piggin from comment #0) > I may be unaware of a constraint of C standard here, but maintaining the two > base addresses seems pointless, This is an ordering problem. The

  1   2   >