https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102215
Bug ID: 102215
Summary: [GCN offloading] Missing '__atomic_compare_exchange_1'
etc.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
I tried bootstrapping the current tip of gcc-11 branch with -O2 -march=native
on my
model name : AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Eight-Core Processor
but I can't reproduce the ICE on the provided boost test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102214
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86303
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
GCC 7+ accepts it for C++17 and C++20 but rejects it for C++11 and C++14.
Maybe there was a rule change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102214
Bug ID: 102214
Summary: ICE when compiling local class with -fno-weak
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90390
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96127
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Krebbel ---
The testcase does not appear to fail on current GCC 10 branch. So I would just
close it as fixed in GCC 11.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||97706
--- Comment #10 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #10 from Greg Turner ---
If you find yourself not readily reproducing, let me know
I suspect a pregenerated gentoo prefix might be a nice "drag-and-drop" way to
get someone up and running with a fully working reproduction. Of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63604
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kot.tom97 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85848
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63604
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66893
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63604
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iluvtrollhd at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83615
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83615
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 98554 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98554
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83615
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xmh970252187 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102212
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83615
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Even more reduced testcase:
typedef int t;
struct S {
explicit operator t() {
return 0;
}
};
int main() {
S val;
t & (val);
return 0;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102213
Bug ID: 102213
Summary: Incorrect executable produced from valid input code
with virtual consteval
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101947
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
Obvious kludge:
diff --git a/gcc/dwarf2out.c b/gcc/dwarf2out.c
index 07a479f6382..fb436b8c77c 100644
--- a/gcc/dwarf2out.c
+++ b/gcc/dwarf2out.c
@@ -19484,6 +19491,7 @@ loc_list_from_tree_1 (tree loc, int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83615
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
const has nothing to do with it:
typedef int **t;
class S {
public:
explicit operator t() {
return 0;
}
};
int main() {
S val;
t & (val);
return 0;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #9 from Greg Turner ---
Never mind, corrected version is quite equivalent:
--- xml_grammar_gcc_-E.cpp 2021-09-06 01:38:48.125773266 -0700
+++ xml_grammar_gcc_-E-try2.cpp 2021-09-06 01:49:24.384875598 -0700
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
# 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102046
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57f6800aefdd102cd43f0df53ca8bcbcc7202b41
commit r11-8966-g57f6800aefdd102cd43f0df53ca8bcbcc7202b41
Author: Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101925
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f584a309092896bdbe83655fb5f425ac8adc019
commit r11-8965-g7f584a309092896bdbe83655fb5f425ac8adc019
Author: Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101824
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3f29e301f299a1b4e2c535affb964f0b97b7639c
commit r11-8964-g3f29e301f299a1b4e2c535affb964f0b97b7639c
Author: Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #8 from Greg Turner ---
Actually please ignore that one pending replacement, I probably generated it
wrong...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102212
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-09-06
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #7 from Greg Turner ---
Created attachment 51412
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51412=edit
xml_grammar_gcc_-E.cpp.xz
preproc boost cpp file that tends to trigger failure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
> I would think you'd want the one generated on the bugged compiler, not mine.
> But iiuc I guess they'd be identical, assuming all is well until
> gimplification?
Yes, that's identical, it's a source file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102205
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
So ICC does the same as GCC while ICX does the same as LLVM (most likely
because it is LLVM based).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #5 from Greg Turner ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> (use -E option) to this bug. Note
Oh, /that/ kind of preprocessed! That's easy... I thought it was some kind of
re-usable pre-compiled header file thing, sorry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102205
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-09-06
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65964
Bug 65964 depends on bug 17935, which changed state.
Bug 17935 Summary: Two consecutive movzbl are generated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17935
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17935
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102202
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
We do have machinery (from profiling) to pass along min/max size which we
already
use, so I wonder if we should use those bounds in more cases.
Of course memset (..., [0, 1]) could be constant folded on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102200
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101947
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
The problem is that the dwarf2out_early_finish path does not finalize base
types so calc_die_sizes cannot compute the size of DW_OP_deref_type:
case DW_OP_deref_type:
case DW_OP_GNU_deref_type:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
>
> As for boost, I don't think any special configuration or version is required
> to make it happen ... [time passes...] got it, the specific build step that
> tends** to cause the failure is:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102195
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102186
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102207
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102207
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8a4602c2e0f81895415ba7ee23bf81dc795d1103
commit r12-3365-g8a4602c2e0f81895415ba7ee23bf81dc795d1103
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
--- Comment #3 from Greg Turner ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Can you please show how do you configure and build GCC (gcc -v).
> And can you please attach a pre-processed boost source (and command-line
> used) that can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13071
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63184
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63184
--- Comment #29 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:564efbf40077c25623cdd6ce2f911c56b5b08f6c
commit r12-3364-g564efbf40077c25623cdd6ce2f911c56b5b08f6c
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102186
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3)
> A patch is posted at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/578746.html
Fixed by r12-3363 in GCC12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14840
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #12 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13071
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Isn't doing the extern "C" around standard C++ headers declared by the C++
standard as undefined behavior?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102176
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.0
--- Comment #4 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102176
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3fb781d4b341c0d50ef1b92cd3e8734e673ef18
commit r12-3362-ga3fb781d4b341c0d50ef1b92cd3e8734e673ef18
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102206
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10980
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
We have __builtin_va_arg_pack and __builtin_va_arg_pack_len which I think
solves this problem really.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7853
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.5.0
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102178
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|11.0|12.0
Summary|SPECFP 2006
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102178
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Maybe related to PR102008, see the comment I made there. Martin, maybe you can
try moving late sink to before the last phiopt pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102212
Bug ID: 102212
Summary: The explicit conversion function should be permitted
in direct-initialization of a reference
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4284
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
# Directory in which the compiler finds libraries etc.
libsubdir =
$(libdir)/gcc/$(real_target_noncanonical)/$(version)$(accel_dir_suffix)
# Directory in which the compiler finds executables
libexecsubdir =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2252
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||
Last reconfirmed|2005-12-31 20:30:04
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-06-05 23:38:41 |2021-9-5
--- Comment #23 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1634
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
When we moved to git, gcc-cvs has become what this bug has requested. In that
it sends the exact patch which was committed to the list now.
An example is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82139
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> It is worse on the trunk:
> .L2:
> movdqu (%rdi), %xmm1
> movdqu (%rdi), %xmm0
> addq$16, %rdi
> paddd %xmm3, %xmm1
>
101 - 165 of 165 matches
Mail list logo
