https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110838
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Andre Simoes Dias Vieira
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b170ab1d051dc97b2e5c03984dbe406939364adc
commit r13-8499-gb170ab1d051dc97b2e5c03984dbe406939364adc
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91838
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Andre Simoes Dias Vieira
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c6e171ff827f8ff1bd160babac0dd24933972664
commit r13-8498-gc6e171ff827f8ff1bd160babac0dd24933972664
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114485
Bug ID: 114485
Summary: [14] Wrong code with -O3 -march=rv64gcv on riscv
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112624
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-26
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101140
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114484
--- Comment #1 from vincenzo Innocente ---
xmmintrin.h
includes mm_malloc.h
which
#include
which
using std::abs;
(among others)
see
https://godbolt.org/z/cxo65rnr9
or this excerpt from c++ -E dump
```
# 32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 100557, which changed state.
Bug 100557 Summary: [11/12/13/14 Regression] Internal compiler error: Error
reporting routines re-entered.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100557
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100557
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114484
Bug ID: 114484
Summary: #include changes ::abs in std::abs
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114483
Bug ID: 114483
Summary: #include changes ::abs in std::abs
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100557
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c0e199e4dbe652cd16d7248f0bfe166540f5d95b
commit r14-9674-gc0e199e4dbe652cd16d7248f0bfe166540f5d95b
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114477
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Changing them seems like a bad idea.
Maybe we could keep the pointer constructors for internal use (possibly making
them private and adding friend decls as needed) and *also* add the ones taking
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114272
--- Comment #4 from Richard Ball ---
Fixed on Trunk so far
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114272
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Ball :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cab53aae43cf94171b01320c08302e47a5daa391
commit r14-9672-gcab53aae43cf94171b01320c08302e47a5daa391
Author: Richard Ball
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101140
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104817
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112624
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114477
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113765
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Running auto-fdo without guessing branch probabilities is somewhat odd idea in
general. I suppose we can indeed just avoid setting full_profile flag. Though
the optimization passes are not that much tested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114476
--- Comment #5 from Robin Dapp ---
So the result is -9 instead of 9 (or vice versa) and this happens (just) with
vectorization. We only vectorize with -fwrapv.
>From a first quick look, the following is what we have before vect:
(loop)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It compiles OK with GCC 11.4.0 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, it just takes a very
long time. I think you probably just ran out of memory or stack space.
-ftime-report shows:
Time variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #8 from Douglas Boffey ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Just to check what options are you using passing to gcc?
Using the default options:
g++ -o test-poly a-test-poly.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
the code does compile for x86_64-linux-gnu on the trunk (though very slowly).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Just to check what options are you using passing to gcc?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114482
Bug ID: 114482
Summary: remove_unreachable_eh_regions could use a work queue
instead of being recusive
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
remove_unreachable_eh_regions_worker has a deep recusive which could cause
issues on host with limited stack space.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114057
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Interestingly r14-7272-g57f611604e8bab causes quite some BB vectorization
cases to be rejected - I would have expected it to only get us more
vectorization?
-innerf.f:277:72: optimized: basic block part
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114481
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114481
Bug ID: 114481
Summary: [14 Regression] 14% exec time slowdown of 433.milc on
aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
Douglas Boffey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||douglas.boffey at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-26
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Douglas Boffey from comment #1)
> Unable to add attachment.
try compressing it first.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112303
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> > Looks like so, can you test that? I think !(bb->count >= new_count) is
> > good,
> > we're using this kind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114479
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kmatsui at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #1 from Douglas Boffey ---
Unable to add attachment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114479
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
Bug ID: 114480
Summary: g++: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
signal terminated program cc1plus
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110730
--- Comment #5 from Shuangcheng Ni ---
Thanks for the bug fix. TBH it is hard to pinpoint the issue, as the code
triggers a runtime error rather than a linkage error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114057
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114479
Bug ID: 114479
Summary: std::is_array_v changed from false to true in
GCC 14
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114057
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113724
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
With release checking we ICE with
t.c: In function 'main':
t.c:46:11: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
46 | #pragma omp target data map(S1.p[:N],S1.p,S1.a,S1.b)
| ^~~
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113765
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Can somebody prepare a patch along this line?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113724
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.2.1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114478
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114478
Bug ID: 114478
Summary: isnormal builtin unavailable from m2
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: modula2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113390
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112303
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> Looks like so, can you test that? I think !(bb->count >= new_count) is good,
> we're using this kind of compare regularly.
Sure, I'll test that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113208
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
Honza, can you please have a look here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112303
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Looks like so, can you test that? I think !(bb->count >= new_count) is good,
we're using this kind of compare regularly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] Wrong |[12/13 Regression] Wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c4f2c84e8fa369856aee76679590eb613724bfb0
commit r14-9668-gc4f2c84e8fa369856aee76679590eb613724bfb0
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111736
--- Comment #30 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:471967ab8b4c49338ba77defbe24b06cc51c0093
commit r14-9667-g471967ab8b4c49338ba77defbe24b06cc51c0093
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114403
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Just as hint we've had wrong upper bounds on vectorized loops/epilogues which
would trigger wrong unrolling. But then unrolling also always hints as
eventually having wrong range-info.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114471
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114471
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f4e92d62dccb96ade753f3a8f49be1b5f61c31f1
commit r14-9666-gf4e92d62dccb96ade753f3a8f49be1b5f61c31f1
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114464
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114464
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:226a220d0056396e825e12435cc0da52cbd5ac56
commit r14-9665-g226a220d0056396e825e12435cc0da52cbd5ac56
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112724
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114439
--- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The change also fixed full icu4c-73.2 build for me. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112724
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:10accfde57951db9f726e996f1b0be165df00f5c
commit r14-9663-g10accfde57951db9f726e996f1b0be165df00f5c
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114027
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
Thanks for reporting.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114027
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66090b8f438daff7b529f9adae0d6d5be7aa2a1f
commit r13-8497-g66090b8f438daff7b529f9adae0d6d5be7aa2a1f
Author: Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114027
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4470611e20f3217ee81647b01fda65b6a62229aa
commit r14-9662-g4470611e20f3217ee81647b01fda65b6a62229aa
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114464
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114477
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86862
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note here is the backtrace:
```
t.cc: In instantiation of ‘class std::base’:
t.cc:6:7: required from ‘class std::derived’
6 | class derived : public base {};
| ^~~
t.cc:7:23: required
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96396
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79786
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE tree check: expected|[11/12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114476
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.0|13.3
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114475
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Summary|[14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39787
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.0
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114473
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.3
Priority|P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114472
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80679
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114471
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70037
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect this is a dup of another bug too where the ABI for constraints just
was defined ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96396
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86862
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
```
namespace std {
template struct char_traits {};
}
template class Traits>
struct b { virtual ~b(); };
template
struct d : public b {};
extern template class d;
```
Note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114027
chenglulu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chenglulu at loongson dot cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114477
Jiang An changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de34 at live dot cn
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79371
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101168
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I noticed s390 has the similar issue, see PR 95782 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101168
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95782
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|13.0|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95782
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target|powerpc64le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100500
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99764
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109813
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109813
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-26
Summary|ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99764
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-12-01 00:00:00 |2024-3-25
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96806
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109987
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80211
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
See Also|
101 - 199 of 199 matches
Mail list logo
