https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks, Tim. I'd forgotten about that issue and was about to reinvent the
resolution.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70053
luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #26 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
Had a test on spec2017 xz_r by changing the specified loop manually, on
ppc64le.
original loop (this loops occur three times in code):
while (++len != len_limit)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95251
Bug ID: 95251
Summary: x86 code size expansion inserting field into a union
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
--- Comment #8 from TC ---
(really from Tim)
This is https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3420
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Lyberta from comment #0)
> #include
> #include
>
> struct Foo
> {
> Foo(const std::filesystem::path& p);
> };
>
> static_assert(std::copyable);
The problem is that copyable considers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93295
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7797f5ec58078523a452e5cf239596e13d77d885
commit r11-535-g7797f5ec58078523a452e5cf239596e13d77d885
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95250
Bug ID: 95250
Summary: [D] ICE instead of error when trying to use bad
template type inside template
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95213
Seth Robertson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95246
Gabriel Ravier changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95198
--- Comment #3 from Witold Baryluk ---
> The main example to demonstrate the current behaviour is correct would be the
> following:
```
extern(C)
private final int f() {
return 5;
}
auto pubf()() {
return f();
}
```
I see, I guess you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95246
--- Comment #2 from Gabriel Ravier ---
Looks like I misread it, LLVM compares `dil` and `sil` with that
transformation, not `edi` and `esi` as it does without it. I should stop making
bug reports at 1 am... I suppose I should mark thtis as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95249
--- Comment #2 from Rich Felker ---
Indeed, using an extra zero pad byte could bump the stack frame size by 4 or 8
or 16 bytes, or could leave it unchanged, depending on alignment prior to
adding the byte and the alignment requirements of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95249
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I doubt you could skip one byte as the protector location has to be aligned.
So the trade off is adding at least 4 or 8 bytes (depending on which ABI is
used) or 8bits less of the randomness.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #18 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 48575
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48575=edit
Patch in testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #17 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The problem is with commutative operands, these somehow confuse postreload
pass.
I'll commit partial revert that basically puts back:
(define_insn_and_split "*2"
- [(set (match_operand:VF 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93083
--- Comment #2 from Hana Dusíková ---
Same error is also triggered by template partial specialization:
```
template struct literal {
constexpr literal(const char ()[N]) noexcept { }
constexpr literal(const literal &) noexcept {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95249
Bug ID: 95249
Summary: Stack protector runtime has to waste one byte on null
terminator
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95005
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95213
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95246
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
On which version of LLVM did you see that? For me, gcc produces
movzbl %dil, %edi
movsbl %sil, %esi
cmpl%esi, %edi
setg%al
while clang skips the first 2 lines (but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39170
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||in-gcc at baka dot org
--- Comment #22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95248
Bug ID: 95248
Summary: GCC produces incorrect code with -O3 for loops
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95247
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95247
Bug ID: 95247
Summary: Backport the DRIVER_SELF_SPECS implementation of
-mdejagnu-cpu= to GCC 9
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95245
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95246
Bug ID: 95246
Summary: Failure to optimize comparison between differently
signed chars
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95245
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
[algorithms.requirements] paragraph 10 says:
[Note: Unless otherwise specified, algorithms that take function objects as
arguments are permitted to copy those function objects freely. Programmers for
whom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #18 from Rafael Avila de Espindola ---
(In reply to Avi Kivity from comment #17)
> Is that the test were a lambda coroutine is called from future::then()? In
> that case it's a real use-after-free.
It was reduced from that to just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #17 from Avi Kivity ---
Is that the test were a lambda coroutine is called from future::then()? In that
case it's a real use-after-free.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #16 from Rafael Avila de Espindola ---
> @Rafael: Can you please append output with:
> export UBSAN_OPTIONS="print_stacktrace=1"
I also added halt_on_error=1:abort_on_error=1:
It is
../tests/unit/coroutines_test.cc:11:5: runtime
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95005
--- Comment #7 from Michael Kuhn ---
Took me a while, sorry. I have just sent the patch to the list.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95245
Bug ID: 95245
Summary: std::sort copies custom comparator
Product: gcc
Version: 7.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95244
Bug ID: 95244
Summary: GCC 10 no longer builds on RHEL5 [trivial patch]
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223
--- Comment #10 from Bill Seurer ---
It works for me, too, now. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223
--- Comment #9 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #8)
> Thanks for the reports. This should now hopefully be fixed with r11-522.
r11-526 PASS for me.
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95243
Bug ID: 95243
Summary: libgomp documentation should specify GCC Runtime
Library Exception license as applicable
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95242
Bug ID: 95242
Summary: [10 Regression] spurious "warning: zero as null
pointer constant [-Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant]" on
comparisons with -std=c++2a
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95241
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94553
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
The structured binding part is now fixed, but the variable template part isn't
yet, so not closing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94553
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2a8565fa1182ed326721a50c700f9f5275355d40
commit r11-529-g2a8565fa1182ed326721a50c700f9f5275355d40
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95241
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95241
Bug ID: 95241
Summary: internal compiler error: tree check: expected
integer_cst, have range_expr in to_wide, at
tree.h:5900
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95229
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3872a519c8fa65318efa1b481d331ef91b3ff044
commit r11-528-g3872a519c8fa65318efa1b481d331ef91b3ff044
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2cf6f31527c6d8dd2cc96f4efe8ff70d60d5fb44
commit r11-527-g2cf6f31527c6d8dd2cc96f4efe8ff70d60d5fb44
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95240
Bug ID: 95240
Summary: calloc() false positives
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95239
Bug ID: 95239
Summary: Unable to ignore -Wattribute-warning in macro
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94335
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.1.0, 11.0
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585
Bug 20585 depends on bug 39695, which changed state.
Bug 39695 Summary: [F03] ProcPtr function results: wrong name in error message
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15e518600a9ef82b55d2ec75d8d41d767132f475
commit r8-10261-g15e518600a9ef82b55d2ec75d8d41d767132f475
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> > > The "i" constraint shouldn't be used for flag_pic since symbolic constant
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #15 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> So perhaps pre-reload splitter of that into the UNSPEC form?
Vector insns should be able to use pre-reload splitter, but scalar instructions
depend on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> > The "i" constraint shouldn't be used for flag_pic since symbolic constant
> > leads to writable text in 32-bit mode and invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7c9bfd404691e5dac7e32830ae6d9726ccf59683
commit r9-8608-g7c9bfd404691e5dac7e32830ae6d9726ccf59683
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|uros at gcc dot gnu.org|
--- Comment #14 from Uroš Bizjak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8358ac9bbc57d6986c9bd5dd17c0331a60114f45
commit r10-8160-g8358ac9bbc57d6986c9bd5dd17c0331a60114f45
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #12 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> Note a 'use' is not something that needs to be preserved, so
>
> (define_insn_and_split "*2"
> [(set (match_operand:VF 0 "register_operand" "=x,v")
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> The "i" constraint shouldn't be used for flag_pic since symbolic constant
> leads to writable text in 32-bit mode and invalid in 64-bit mode.
Just a typo. "i" should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95229
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> That fixes the testcase. But simplify_subreg is used in a lot more places
> so leaving to Uros to match up with expectations.
Oh, yes... We don't have hard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eb069ae8819c3a84d7f78becc5501e21ee3a9554
commit r11-524-geb069ae8819c3a84d7f78becc5501e21ee3a9554
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:610ae2dbbf98a291782cb05c0fb31e056193e5e2
commit r11-522-g610ae2dbbf98a291782cb05c0fb31e056193e5e2
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
The "i" constraint shouldn't be used for flag_pic since symbolic constant
leads to writable text in 32-bit mode and invalid in 64-bit mode.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Note a 'use' is not something that needs to be preserved, so
(define_insn_and_split "*2"
[(set (match_operand:VF 0 "register_operand" "=x,v")
(absneg:VF
(match_operand:VF 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95238
Bug ID: 95238
Summary: [11 Regression] Invalid *pushsi2_rex64
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94335
kal.conley at dectris dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kal.conley at dectris dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 May 2020, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
>
> Uroš Bizjak changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237
Bug ID: 95237
Summary: LOCAL_DECL_ALIGNMENT shrinks alignment, FAIL
gcc.target/i386/pr69454-2.c
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
There's partially reduced test-case:
$ cat fma.i
double res_test0101[] = {
-3,1, 17,51,109, 197, 321, 487, 701, 969, 1297,
1691, 2157, 2701, 3329, 4047, 4861, 5777,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95229
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Built by
>
> #5 0x020c4504 in gen_rtx_fmt_ee_stat (code=VEC_SELECT,
> mode=E_V2SImode, arg0=0x0, arg1=0x76ad92e0) at ./genrtl.h:49
> #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95229
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Built by
#5 0x020c4504 in gen_rtx_fmt_ee_stat (code=VEC_SELECT,
mode=E_V2SImode, arg0=0x0, arg1=0x76ad92e0) at ./genrtl.h:49
#6 0x0211e242 in gen_sse4_1_zero_extendv2siv2di2 (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
I think I found the issue.
Before the patch, we had:
(insn 375 373 2574 7 (parallel [
(set (reg:V4DF 21 xmm1 [orig:1681 vect__45.441 ] [1681])
(neg:V4DF (mem/c:V4DF (plus:DI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95229
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-* i?86-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2f26af32b5b031fce761aa090de9476a53e6e5a
commit r11-519-gb2f26af32b5b031fce761aa090de9476a53e6e5a
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85304
Trupti Pardeshi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trupti_pardeshi@persistent.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95231
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:130bb4c79295487c5fc203103d80e3b754640eb4
commit r11-518-g130bb4c79295487c5fc203103d80e3b754640eb4
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95231
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95171
Bug 95171 depends on bug 95231, which changed state.
Bug 95231 Summary: [11 Regression] error: the first argument of a
‘vec_cond_expr’ must be of a boolean vector type of the since
r11-451-gfe168751c5c1c517
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #14)
> The original problem:
>
> test.cc:3749:5: runtime error: member call on misaligned address
> 0x41b58ab3 for type 'struct awaiter', which requires 8 byte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Sure, doing that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91695
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1e46a443f25d26816536c0c480211714b123a1d5
commit r11-516-g1e46a443f25d26816536c0c480211714b123a1d5
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue May 19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> Started with r11-455-g94f687bd9ae37ece.
It is not obvious from the referred patch what is going wrong here.
Unfortunately, I have no FMA capable machine, can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
The original problem:
test.cc:3749:5: runtime error: member call on misaligned address 0x41b58ab3
for type 'struct awaiter', which requires 8 byte alignment
0x41b58ab3: note: pointer points here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95208
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #13 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 48572
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48572=edit
fix for most of the UBSAN fails
Most of the UBSAN fails are from a single cause; I reused the built DTOR tree
on both
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95236
Bug ID: 95236
Summary: OMP 'GOMP_MAP_STRUCT': a structure is more than the
sum of all its fields?
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95214
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95234
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95235
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-* i?86-*-*
--- Comment #1
1 - 100 of 139 matches
Mail list logo
