https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105499
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |c
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105499
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|diagnostic |documentation
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105495
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105494
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103212
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.1.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987
Bug 19987 depends on bug 95187, which changed state.
Bug 95187 Summary: Failure to optimize bool check into consecutive literals
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95187
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95187
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107412
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #2)
> Make sure we only use "plain" accesses on machines that allow all unaligned
> accesses? p8 and later I think. The load-with-length insns are even later,
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97784
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105499
--- Comment #5 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> __extension__ disables all compatibility warnings.
>
> This is by design really as headers sometimes needs to be written using C
> code and need to turn off
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107432
--- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> I think we do support FIX_TRUNC_EXPR or FLOAT_EXPR for float <-> int
> conversion of vectors like we now support {CONVERT,NOP}_EXPR for
> just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107472
Bug ID: 107472
Summary: Support for the Linux kernel's memory-management APIs
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107470
Bug ID: 107470
Summary: GCC falsely accepts friend declaration with
mismatching requirements
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107468
Bug ID: 107468
Summary: std::from_chars doesn't always round to nearest
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107473
Bug ID: 107473
Summary: Unexpected warning / error with strncpy
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107331
--- Comment #1 from d.mentock at mpie dot de ---
Created attachment 53802
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53802=edit
test program that triggers the reported bug with gcc 10.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107471
Bug ID: 107471
Summary: mismatching constraints in common_iterator
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106140
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107362
federico changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||federico.perini at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107472
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
> In particular, note the GPF flags
GFP, even
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105499
--- Comment #6 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
To be clear... I'm not sure about what kind of compatibility warnings one can
get, but it is OK to silence valid extensions, i.e. those that will not give an
error. But invalid extensions, i.e. those that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105464
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is very similar to PR 107183. It looks like reg-stack is causing the
difference too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107476
Bug ID: 107476
Summary: Spurious stringop-overflow warning
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107474
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107466
--- Comment #3 from Mara Sophie Grosch ---
Standard explicitly allows using unsigned short though:
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/numeric/random/subtract_with_carry_engine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106878
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-hbfypl at hansdejong dot eu
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107331
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105499
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
__extension__ is supposed to disable compatibility warnings since they are
written in GNU C. Just happens that you enabled compatibility warnings to C++
which are also disabled.
This is the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105490
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107471
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
--- Comment #2 from Jacob Abrams ---
I mean to say it similarly reproduces with:
GNU C11 (GNU Toolchain for the Arm Architecture 11.2-2022.02 (arm-11.14))
version 11.2.1 20220111 (arm-none-eabi)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107470
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96830
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||h2+bugs at fsfe dot org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105663
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107477
Bug ID: 107477
Summary: spurious -Wrestrict warning
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
--- Comment #1 from Jacob Abrams ---
Created attachment 53805
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53805=edit
preprocessed file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.2.1
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107456
Thiago Macieira changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thiago at kde dot org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107453
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105550
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96004
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-31
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107477
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Adding:
if (s < 0) __builtin_unreachable();
"fixes" the warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80755
Helmut Grohne changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||helmut at subdivi dot de
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107469
Bug ID: 107469
Summary: Build of GDC on FreeBSD 14 fails due to outdated value
of __FreeBSD_version
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107362
--- Comment #3 from Bálint Aradi ---
> I'm getting the same issue on a recursive tree structure, I will post my
> testcase here instead of opening a new bug.
I am not sure, whether the two bugs are identical. If I understand correctly,
you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99670
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
I don't think this is a problem with interaction in between the two
passes, IPA-SRA obscures the picture a bit but is not really involved.
The lost opportunity here is that IPA-CP cannot propagate the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107475
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
*** Bug 107474 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107476
--- Comment #1 from pkoning at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I should mention that I reproduced this (a) on an M1 Mac running gcc (GCC)
13.0.0 20220827 (experimental), and also on an x86 Linux running gcc (GCC)
12.2.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107471
--- Comment #2 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
Great, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
The code which is causing the ICE:
pNewNode->LinkRegisters[cllr_offset] = ((uint32_t)pQList->Head & (0x3FFFUL
<< (2U))) | cllr_mask;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106878
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwhitakera at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78244
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106583
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107481
Bug ID: 107481
Summary: bpf: add __builtin_preserve_enum_value
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105353
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107479
Bug ID: 107479
Summary: bpf: add __builtin_btf_type_id
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107124
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107482
--- Comment #1 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 53807
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53807=edit
color-check.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106602
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Vineet Gupta from comment #3)
> Interestingly, if one builds for -march=rv64gc_zbs # single bit extension
>
> then the optimal code seq for bitmanip is generated, while no zbs
> instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105432
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107480
Bug ID: 107480
Summary: bpf: add __builtin_preserve_type_info
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107482
jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|microblazeel-linux-gnu |microblazeel-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107482
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2022-October/239794.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106602
--- Comment #5 from Vineet Gupta ---
Gimple for the test is
_1 = a_2(D) << 6;
_3 = _1 & 274877906880; // 0x3f__ffc0
And 0x3f__ffc0 = 0x40__ - 0x40
For !TARGET_ZBA there's a combiner pattern to match the seq of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105706
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107482
Bug ID: 107482
Summary: out-of-bounds heap access in IRA
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90620
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
src/proto_htx.c:463:1: error: VOIDmode on an output
}
^
(insn 1768 4216 1773 339 (parallel [
(reg:SI 5 r5 [1471])
(const_int 0 [0])
(mem/v:SI (reg/f:SI 8 r8 [orig:696
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90620
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-31
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39060
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
>The testcase is a little fragile, it looks like some memory access is not OK.
Looks like it is still not fixed in the end:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/604748.html
The patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106602
Vineet Gupta changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeffreyalaw at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71424
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105431
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105511
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105423
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106649
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105522
--- Comment #8 from Sergey Fedorov ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #6)
> it seems to fail "forever" (at least back to 5.5)
Any chance of fixing this before the next update of GCC?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106725
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Thornburgh ---
Correction: A compilation line was missed:
+$ gcc -flto -c -O2 main.c lto.c
$ gcc -c -O2 ext.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107484
Bug ID: 107484
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in
decls_match)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107485
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Wait is broken on the GCC 10 branch? Or broken just for GCC 10.1.0?
Can you update known to work and known to fail? Because the patch for PR
95171 is on the GCC 10 branch and was only included for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107485
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Yes expand_vector_condition needs a similar fix just as PR 104450 did.
Basically the bug is latent even on the trunk still.
Something like:
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107057
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4acc4c2be84d66075d60736623c3a7134d129eaa
commit r13-3587-g4acc4c2be84d66075d60736623c3a7134d129eaa
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107483
Bug ID: 107483
Summary: c++: fatal error: Killed signal terminated program
cc1plus due to out of memory
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107482
--- Comment #4 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The original ASAN report from the unmodified code:
==3761891==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow on address
0x603000450ef8 at pc 0x01a78e5c bp 0x7ffdcf35f2a0 sp 0x7ffdcf35f298
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55583
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5c5ef2f9ab545b680cd4bb6c540a9dadb12ead86
commit r13-3586-g5c5ef2f9ab545b680cd4bb6c540a9dadb12ead86
Author: liuhongt
Date: Thu Oct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107485
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107484
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107486
Bug ID: 107486
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in deref_rvalue, at
analyzer/region-model.cc:3317
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106602
--- Comment #6 from Vineet Gupta ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Vineet Gupta from comment #3)
> > Interestingly, if one builds for -march=rv64gc_zbs # single bit extension
> >
> > then the optimal code seq for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107485
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Yes expand_vector_condition needs a similar fix just as PR 104450 did.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107057
--- Comment #11 from Hongtao.liu ---
Fixed in GCC13, and open a separate bug PR107487 for #c9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106725
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Thornburgh ---
I spent a little more time on this, and here's a more concrete reproducer of
GCC's current behavior.
The setup again has 3 files: main.c, lto.c, and ext.c. lto.c is a simple
getter-setter interface
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107483
Tiezhu Yang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seehearfeel at 126 dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107483
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you attach the preprocessed source of which file gcc is failing out of
memory on?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107483
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-11-01
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107483
--- Comment #4 from Tiezhu Yang ---
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/lldb/unittests/Instruction/RISCV/TestRISCVEmulator.cpp
This issue is introduced in the following commit:
$ git log -p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107485
Bug ID: 107485
Summary: gcc-10 ICE with -fnon-call-exception
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105499
--- Comment #8 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
It is bad that __extension__ does two completely different things:
1. Disable warnings associated with GNU extensions, like ({ ... }).
2. Disable compatibility warnings that do not correspond to GNU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107485
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|gcc-10 ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107487
Bug ID: 107487
Summary: Issue an error for illegal digit constraint.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo