[Bug target/88473] AVX512: constant folding on mask does not remove unnecessary instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88473 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||crazylht at gmail dot com --- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu --- Fixed in GCC11 by https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=388cb292a94f98a276548cd6ce01285cf36d17df
[Bug target/88798] AVX512BW code does not use bit-operations that work on mask registers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88798 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||crazylht at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu --- Fixed in GCC11 by https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=388cb292a94f98a276548cd6ce01285cf36d17df
[Bug target/88808] bitwise operators on AVX512 masks fail to use the new mask instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88808 --- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu --- Fixed in GCC11.
[Bug other/91085] fixincludes breaks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085 --- Comment #12 from Bruce Korb --- I'll put it on my to-do list, but I might be participating in a fire evacuation tonight or tomorrow and I haven't built GCC in several years now. I'm going to guess that you have to not do the substitution when the line contains something like: #[ \t]*if[ \t]+__glibc_has
[Bug target/88808] bitwise operators on AVX512 masks fail to use the new mask instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88808 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:388cb292a94f98a276548cd6ce01285cf36d17df commit r11-2796-g388cb292a94f98a276548cd6ce01285cf36d17df Author: liuhongt Date: Thu Aug 13 14:20:43 2020 +0800 Enable bitwise operation for type mask. Enable operator or/xor/and/andn/not for mask register, kxnor is not enabled since there's no corresponding instruction for general registers. gcc/ PR target/88808 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_preferred_reload_class): Allow QImode data go into mask registers. * config/i386/i386.md: (*movhi_internal): Adjust constraints for mask registers. (*movqi_internal): Ditto. (*anddi_1): Support mask register operations (*and_1): Ditto. (*andqi_1): Ditto. (*andn_1): Ditto. (*_1): Ditto. (*qi_1): Ditto. (*one_cmpl2_1): Ditto. (*one_cmplsi2_1_zext): Ditto. (*one_cmplqi2_1): Ditto. (define_peephole2): Move constant 0/-1 directly into mask registers. * config/i386/predicates.md (mask_reg_operand): New predicate. * config/i386/sse.md (define_split): Add post-reload splitters that would convert "generic" patterns to mask patterns. (*knotsi_1_zext): New define_insn. gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.target/i386/bitwise_mask_op-1.c: New test. * gcc.target/i386/bitwise_mask_op-2.c: New test. * gcc.target/i386/bitwise_mask_op-3.c: New test. * gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr88465.c: New testcase. * gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-kunpckwd-1.c: Adjust testcase. * gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-kunpckwd-3.c: Ditto. * gcc.target/i386/avx512dq-kmovb-5.c: Ditto. * gcc.target/i386/avx512f-kmovw-5.c: Ditto. * gcc.target/i386/pr55342.c: Ditto.
[Bug target/71453] Spills to vector registers are sub-optimal.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71453 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00cb3494cab397b5655ab42fd69310883c12137c commit r11-2793-g00cb3494cab397b5655ab42fd69310883c12137c Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue Sep 3 14:41:02 2019 -0700 x86: Add cost model for operation of mask registers. gcc/ PR target/71453 * config/i386/i386.h (struct processor_costs): Add member mask_to_integer, integer_to_mask, mask_load[3], mask_store[3], mask_move. * config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h (ix86_size_cost, i386_cost, i386_cost, pentium_cost, lakemont_cost, pentiumpro_cost, geode_cost, k6_cost, athlon_cost, k8_cost, amdfam10_cost, bdver_cost, znver1_cost, znver2_cost, skylake_cost, btver1_cost, btver2_cost, pentium4_cost, nocona_cost, atom_cost, slm_cost, intel_cost, generic_cost, core_cost): Initialize mask_load[3], mask_store[3], mask_move, integer_to_mask, mask_to_integer for all target costs. * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_register_move_cost): Using cost model of mask registers. (inline_memory_move_cost): Ditto. (ix86_register_move_cost): Ditto.
[Bug tree-optimization/96730] New: ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu with `-O1` to `-O3` (in verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2352)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96730
Bug ID: 96730
Summary: ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu with `-O1` to `-O3` (in
verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2352)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: cnsun at uwaterloo dot ca
Target Milestone: ---
$ gcc-trunk -O1 t.c
during GIMPLE pass: esra
t.c: In function ‘d’:
t.c:10:1: internal compiler error: in verify_sra_access_forest, at
tree-sra.c:2352
10 | int main() {}
| ^~~
0x734000 verify_sra_access_forest(access*)
/tmp/tmp.uva1EAuUpA-gcc-builder/gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:2352
0xf42be2 verify_all_sra_access_forests()
/tmp/tmp.uva1EAuUpA-gcc-builder/gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:2403
0xf46bb4 analyze_all_variable_accesses
/tmp/tmp.uva1EAuUpA-gcc-builder/gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:3450
0xf470e1 perform_intra_sra
/tmp/tmp.uva1EAuUpA-gcc-builder/gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:4527
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
$
$ cat t.c
struct a {
int b;
int c;
} d() {
struct a e[9];
int f = 3362953455;
e[f] = e[6];
e[6].c = 1;
}
int main() {}
$
$ gcc-trunk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc-trunk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /tmp/tmp.uva1EAuUpA-gcc-builder/gcc/configure
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto --enable-multiarch
--prefix=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20200820 (experimental) [master revision
:01cb32abf:04e23a4051fb3c049f85b9e6e2fc58f937337aff] (GCC)
[Bug c/96729] New: hang on x86_64-linux-gnu with `-g -O3`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96729
Bug ID: 96729
Summary: hang on x86_64-linux-gnu with `-g -O3`
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: cnsun at uwaterloo dot ca
Target Milestone: ---
$ timeout -s 9 60 gcc-trunk -g -O3 t.c
Killed
$
$ cat t.c
int a, b, d, e;
int c[9][4];
int main() {
for (;;) {
long g;
if (e)
continue;
d = 3;
for (; d < 22; d++) {
a = 0;
for (; a < 55; a = a + 6) {
b = 0;
for (; b < 9; b++) {
g = 0;
c[b][g] = 3;
}
}
}
}
}
$
$ gcc-trunk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc-trunk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /tmp/tmp.uva1EAuUpA-gcc-builder/gcc/configure
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto --enable-multiarch
--prefix=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20200820 (experimental) [master revision
:01cb32abf:04e23a4051fb3c049f85b9e6e2fc58f937337aff] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -g -O2 t.c
$
$
[Bug analyzer/95152] ICE in get_or_create_mem_ref, at analyzer/region-model.cc:6938 since r10-5950-g757bf1dff5e8cee3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95152 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #7 from David Malcolm --- As noted in the above commit, I removed the offending function in r11-2694-g808f4dfeb3a95f50f15e71148e5c1067f90a126d and can no longer reproduce this; marking it as fixed (for GCC 11).
[Bug analyzer/95152] ICE in get_or_create_mem_ref, at analyzer/region-model.cc:6938 since r10-5950-g757bf1dff5e8cee3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95152 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6b31b6b52612a6d4a7a84e71f6331464d68400d4 commit r11-2792-g6b31b6b52612a6d4a7a84e71f6331464d68400d4 Author: David Malcolm Date: Thu Aug 20 17:50:14 2020 -0400 analyzer: add regression tests [PR95152] PR analyzer/95152 reports various ICEs in region_model::get_or_create_mem_ref. I removed this function as part of the state rewrite in r11-2694-g808f4dfeb3a95f50f15e71148e5c1067f90a126d. I've verified that these two test cases reproduce the issue with 10.2 and don't ICE with trunk; adding them as regression tests. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR analyzer/95152 * gcc.dg/analyzer/pr95152-4.c: New test. * gcc.dg/analyzer/pr95152-5.c: New test.
[Bug fortran/95352] ICE on select rank with assumed-size selector and lbound intrinsic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95352 --- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 11:15:27PM +, jrfsousa at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95352 > > --- Comment #4 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa --- > I have tested the patch posted by Steve Kargl and it seems to do the trick. > > Can I do anything to get this going? > I don't use git, so have way to move forward. If you want to package the patch and add the testcase, I would appreciate it.
[Bug d/96250] d: Field access in parentheses causes error: need 'this' for 'field' of type 'type'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96250 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf465206b7012a9049821c68236093969d7767da commit r10-8650-gbf465206b7012a9049821c68236093969d7767da Author: Iain Buclaw Date: Fri Aug 21 01:52:28 2020 +0200 d: Adjust backport of PR96250 for front-end implementation. gcc/d/ChangeLog: 2020-08-21 Iain Buclaw PR d/96250 * dmd/expressionsem.c (ExpressionSemanticVisitor::visit(TypeExp)): Fix cast from Expression to VarExp.
[Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919 --- Comment #31 from Marietto --- they don't reply to messages and they don't fix old bugs. And new users aren't interested to use xen anymore. So,it's a waste of time.
[Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919 --- Comment #30 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to Marietto from comment #28) > I'm not a coder. can u explain to me carefully what should I do ? thanks. Usually packages provide a mechanism to prevent compiler warnings from causing errors (by avoiding -Werror). I don't know how this one does it. I'd try adding WERROR=0 to the invocation of the command you are using to build it. The link is a diff from a Wiki edit, not a guide. This also isn't the right place to get help with third party software. I'd talk to the Intel GVT-g developers.
[Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919 --- Comment #29 from Marietto --- I get this error : gcc -m64 -DBUILD_ID -fno-strict-aliasing -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wno-unused-but-set-variable -Wno-unused-local-typedefs -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -nostdinc -fno-builtin -fno-common -Werror -Wredundant-decls -Wno-pointer-arith -pipe -g -D__XEN__ -include /etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include/xen/config.h '-D__OBJECT_FILE__="trace.o"' -Wa,--strip-local-absolute -MMD -MF ./.trace.o.d -I/etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include -I/etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include/asm-x86/mach-generic -I/etc/xen/igvtg-xen/xen/include/asm-x86/mach-default -DXEN_IMG_OFFSET=0x20 '-D__OBJECT_LABEL__=common$trace.o' -msoft-float -fno-stack-protector -fno-exceptions -Wnested-externs -DHAVE_GAS_VMX -DHAVE_GAS_SSE4_2 -DHAVE_GAS_EPT -DHAVE_GAS_RDRAND -DHAVE_GAS_FSGSBASE -DHAVE_GAS_RDSEED -U__OBJECT_LABEL__ -DHAVE_GAS_QUOTED_SYM '-D__OBJECT_LABEL__=common/trace.o' -mno-red-zone -mno-sse -fpic -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -DGCC_HAS_VISIBILITY_ATTRIBUTE -c trace.c -o trace.o trace.c: In function ‘__trace_hypercall’: trace.c:829:19: error: taking address of packed member of ‘struct ’ may result in an unaligned pointer value [-Werror=address-of-packed-member] 829 | uint32_t *a = d.args; | ^ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
[Bug fortran/95352] ICE on select rank with assumed-size selector and lbound intrinsic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95352 --- Comment #4 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa --- I have tested the patch posted by Steve Kargl and it seems to do the trick. Can I do anything to get this going? Best regards, José Rui
[Bug d/96250] d: Field access in parentheses causes error: need 'this' for 'field' of type 'type'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96250 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw --- Done.
[Bug d/96254] d: ICE using non-local variable: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96254 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw --- Done.
[Bug d/96250] d: Field access in parentheses causes error: need 'this' for 'field' of type 'type'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96250 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ee11a23b334d5fea08b80c2d87874388ed51d08e commit r10-8649-gee11a23b334d5fea08b80c2d87874388ed51d08e Author: Iain Buclaw Date: Tue Jul 21 19:32:54 2020 +0200 d: Field access in parentheses causes error: need 'this' for 'field' of type 'type' 1. Fixes an ICE in the front-end if a struct symbol were to appear twice in the compilation unit. 2. Fixes a rejects-valid bug in the front-end where `(symbol)' was being resolved as a `var' expression, instead of `this.var'. gcc/d/ChangeLog: PR d/96250 * dmd/dstruct.c (StructDeclaration::semantic): Error if redefinition of struct exists in compilation. * dmd/expressionsem.c (ExpressionSemanticVisitor::visit(TypeExp)): Rewrite resolved field variables as 'this.var' before semantic. * dmd/parse.c (Parser::parseUnaryExp): Mark '(type) una_exp' as a parenthesized expression. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR d/96250 * gdc.test/fail_compilation/fail17492.d: New test. * gdc.test/compilable/b9490.d: New test. * gdc.test/compilable/ice14739.d: New test. * gdc.test/fail_compilation/ice21060.d: New test. * gdc.test/fail_compilation/imports/ice21060a/package.d: New file. * gdc.test/fail_compilation/imports/ice21060b/package.d: New file. * gdc.test/fail_compilation/imports/ice21060c/package.d: New file. * gdc.test/fail_compilation/imports/ice21060d/package.d: New file. * gdc.test/runnable/b16278.d: New test.
[Bug d/96254] d: ICE using non-local variable: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96254 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5d07caca15958980ae9cc4570a784f8b1a43403 commit r10-8647-ga5d07caca15958980ae9cc4570a784f8b1a43403 Author: Iain Buclaw Date: Tue Jul 21 19:59:00 2020 +0200 d: Fix ICE using non-local variable: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Moves no frame access error to own function, adding use of it for both when get_framedecl() cannot find a path to the outer function frame, and guarding get_decl_tree() from recursively calling itself. gcc/d/ChangeLog: PR d/96254 * d-codegen.cc (error_no_frame_access): New. (get_frame_for_symbol): Use fdparent name in error message. (get_framedecl): Replace call to assert with error. * d-tree.h (error_no_frame_access): Declare. * decl.cc (get_decl_tree): Detect recursion and error. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR d/96254 * gdc.dg/pr96254a.d: New test. * gdc.dg/pr96254b.d: New test. (cherry picked from commit 2b1c2a4bd9fb555dccde5d67d6da64547064e0e6)
[Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #28 from Marietto ---
I'm not a coder. can u explain to me carefully what should I do ? thanks.
Il giorno gio 20 ago 2020 alle ore 16:40 msebor at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> ha scritto:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
>
> --- Comment #27 from Martin Sebor ---
> The fix was applied to GCC 10 but not to GCC 9 or 8. It will not be
> backported
> there. It can be suppressed by introducing a named temporary copy of the
> pointer and using it as one other other argument to the function.
>
> void f (char *p)
> {
> char *q = p;
> sprintf (p, "%p", q);
> }
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug analyzer/93994] ICE in get_or_create_mem_ref, at analyzer/region-model.cc:6599
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93994 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- I can reproduce this with GCC 10.2, but not with trunk; the code in question was heavily rewritten in r11-2694-g808f4dfeb3a95f50f15e71148e5c1067f90a126d, which eliminated region_model::get_or_create_mem_ref. I'm going to mark this as fixed.
[Bug libstdc++/77303] std::max_element not constexpr with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77303 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|DUPLICATE |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |10.0 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- This specific issue was fixed for GCC 10.1 by r276260, although the general problem described in PR 71960 isn't fixed.
[Bug analyzer/96723] [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV: infinite recursion in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding with -Og -fanalyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96723 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- Should be fixed by the above commit.
[Bug analyzer/96723] [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV: infinite recursion in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding with -Og -fanalyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96723 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00cb0f5840795698557731c6e549a5ce99573223 commit r11-2789-g00cb0f5840795698557731c6e549a5ce99573223 Author: David Malcolm Date: Thu Aug 20 10:00:49 2020 -0400 analyzer: fix infinite recursion ICE on unions [PR96723] Attempts to store sm-state into a union in C++ triggered an infinite recursion when trying to generate a representative tree, due to erroneously trying to use the dtor of the union as a field. Fix it by filtering out non-FIELD_DECLs when walking TYPE_FIELDs in region::get_subregions_for_binding. gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog: PR analyzer/96723 * region-model-manager.cc (region_model_manager::get_field_region): Assert that field is a FIELD_DECL. * region.cc (region::get_subregions_for_binding): In union-handling, filter the TYPE_FIELDS traversal to just FIELD_DECLs. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR analyzer/96723 * g++.dg/analyzer/pr96723.C: New test.
[Bug c++/93529] Implement P1009R2, Array size deduction in new-expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93529 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-August/552336.html
[Bug bootstrap/96612] [11 Regression][submitted patch] Fails to bootstrap with older --build= than --host= compiler due to missing -std=c++11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96612 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus --- FIXED.
[Bug fortran/87711] ICE in gfc_trans_transfer, at fortran/trans-io.c:2676
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87711 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #2) For some reason the simplification of LEN_TRIM "forgets" that it is an elemental function: program p print *, len_trim( 'abc' ) ! OK print *, len_trim(['abc']) ! OK print *, len_trim( 'abc' , kind=8) ! OK print *, len_trim(['abc'], kind=8) ! ICE end
[Bug bootstrap/96612] [11 Regression][submitted patch] Fails to bootstrap with older --build= than --host= compiler due to missing -std=c++11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96612
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7ffcf5d61174dda1f39a623e15f7e5d6b98bbafc
commit r11-2787-g7ffcf5d61174dda1f39a623e15f7e5d6b98bbafc
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Thu Aug 20 21:59:00 2020 +0200
configure: Also check C++11 (flags) for ${build} compiler not only for
${host}
config/ChangeLog:
PR bootstrap/96612
* ax_cxx_compile_stdcxx.m4: Add fourth argument to check also
the CXX_FOR_BUILD compiler.
ChangeLog:
PR bootstrap/96612
* configure.ac: Run AX_CXX_COMPILE_STDCXX also for ${build}
compiler,
if not the same as ${host}.
* configure: Regenerate.
[Bug libstdc++/71960] __glibcxx_assert and Debug Mode checks can't be used in constexpr functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71960 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug fortran/96613] SIGFPE on min1() with -ffpe-trap=invalid switch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96613 --- Comment #11 from Thomas Huxhorn --- I compiled the latest git GCC and rerun the program, no more problems. Thank you all :)
[Bug fortran/96728] New: Fatal Error: Reading module inquiry functions on assumed-rank
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96728 Bug ID: 96728 Summary: Fatal Error: Reading module inquiry functions on assumed-rank Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jrfsousa at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 49091 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49091=edit Fortran code demonstrating problems. Hi all! Fatal error reading modules containing inquiry functions on specification expressions. Tested on: GNU Fortran (GCC) 9.3.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 10.2.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.0.0 20200807 (experimental) Thank you very much. Best regards, José Rui
[Bug fortran/96727] New: ICE with character length specified using specification function on assumed-rank array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96727 Bug ID: 96727 Summary: ICE with character length specified using specification function on assumed-rank array Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jrfsousa at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 49090 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49090=edit Fortran code demonstrating problems. Hi all! Using a specification function depending on an assumed-rank array argument to set character length ICEs on: GNU Fortran (GCC) 9.3.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 10.2.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.0.0 20200807 (experimental) Thank you very much. Best regards, José Rui
[Bug analyzer/96666] [11 Regression] Analyzer creates too many regions for a particular program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha --- . *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 96723 ***
[Bug analyzer/96723] [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV: infinite recursion in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding with -Og -fanalyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96723 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha --- *** Bug 9 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/96726] New: ICE with user defined specification function on assumed-rank array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96726 Bug ID: 96726 Summary: ICE with user defined specification function on assumed-rank array Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jrfsousa at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 49089 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49089=edit Fortran code demonstrating problems. Hi all! An user defined specification function with an assumed-rank argument ICEs on: GNU Fortran (GCC) 9.3.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 10.2.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.0.0 20200807 (experimental) Thank you very much. Best regards, José Rui
[Bug middle-end/90367] Spurious warning array subscript is above array bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90367 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME --- Comment #14 from Martin Sebor --- In light of comment #12, with current GCC not warning, and without a better test case that does reproduce a bogus warning with current GCC, I'm going to resolve this as WORKSFORSOME. Please reopen if you have those details.
[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 90367, which changed state. Bug 90367 Summary: Spurious warning array subscript is above array bounds https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90367 What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
[Bug fortran/96320] gfortran 8-10 shape mismatch in assumed-length dummy argument character array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320 --- Comment #24 from Damian Rouson --- This appears to be another example of an issue with a module procedure defined in the same module as its interface body. In this case, the compiler doesn't recognize a reference to the procedure: ± cat subroutine-call.f90 module hole_interface type hole_t contains procedure set_user_defined end type interface module subroutine set_diameter (this) class(hole_t) this end subroutine module subroutine set_user_defined(this) class(hole_t) this end subroutine end interface contains module procedure set_user_defined end procedure module procedure set_diameter call this%set_user_defined end procedure end module use hole_interface end ± gfortran subroutine-call.f90 subroutine-call.f90:26:6: 26 | use hole_interface | 1 Error: ‘set_user_defined’ must be a module procedure or an external procedure with an explicit interface at (1) ± gfortran --version GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.0.0 20200804 (experimental)
[Bug fortran/96100] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14638
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96100 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:300ef2fcc10e98359d14654be23bbb84a5d141e1 commit r11-2785-g300ef2fcc10e98359d14654be23bbb84a5d141e1 Author: Paul Thomas Date: Thu Aug 20 18:17:59 2020 +0100 This patch fixes PRs 96100 and 96101. 2020-08-20 Paul Thomas gcc/fortran PR fortran/96100 PR fortran/96101 * trans-array.c (get_array_charlen): Tidy up the evaluation of the string length for array constructors. Avoid trailing array references. Ensure string lengths of deferred length components are set. For parentheses operator apply string length to both the primary expression and the enclosed expression. gcc/testsuite/ PR fortran/96100 PR fortran/96101 * gfortran.dg/char_length_23.f90: New test.
[Bug fortran/96101] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2398
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96101 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:300ef2fcc10e98359d14654be23bbb84a5d141e1 commit r11-2785-g300ef2fcc10e98359d14654be23bbb84a5d141e1 Author: Paul Thomas Date: Thu Aug 20 18:17:59 2020 +0100 This patch fixes PRs 96100 and 96101. 2020-08-20 Paul Thomas gcc/fortran PR fortran/96100 PR fortran/96101 * trans-array.c (get_array_charlen): Tidy up the evaluation of the string length for array constructors. Avoid trailing array references. Ensure string lengths of deferred length components are set. For parentheses operator apply string length to both the primary expression and the enclosed expression. gcc/testsuite/ PR fortran/96100 PR fortran/96101 * gfortran.dg/char_length_23.f90: New test.
[Bug tree-optimization/92539] [8/9/10/11 Regression] -Warray-bounds false positive with -O3 (loop unroll?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92539 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10/11 Regression] |-Warray-bounds false|-Warray-bounds false |positive (loop unroll?) |positive with -O3 (loop ||unroll?) Known to fail||10.2.0, 11.0 Last reconfirmed|2019-11-19 00:00:00 |2020-8-20 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- No change in GCC 10 or 11.
[Bug bootstrap/92828] array out of bounds access in libcpp/mkdeps.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92828 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|WAITING |RESOLVED --- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor --- I see reports of successful z13 builds in gcc-testresults (https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2020-August/576248.html) so I'll assume this has been fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 92828, which changed state. Bug 92828 Summary: array out of bounds access in libcpp/mkdeps.c https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92828 What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug analyzer/96723] [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV: infinite recursion in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding with -Og -fanalyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96723 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2020-08-20 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from David Malcolm --- Thanks for filing this; am working on a fix.
[Bug middle-end/96725] warn for uses of global nonconstant unterminated char arrays where strings are required
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96725 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Severity|normal |enhancement Blocks||88443 Referenced Bugs: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443 [Bug 88443] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overflow warnings
[Bug fortran/96711] Internal Compiler Error on NINT() Function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96711 --- Comment #13 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 03:54:44PM +, bre08 at eggen dot co.uk wrote: > > PS (and maybe I need to post this separately as a suggestion) - will > there be a fast "octuple-precision floating point / integer" library > (i.e. 256 bit) for C, C++ and Fortran, or is using something like > GMP the only way forward ? I'm not aware of any effort to offer an octuple-precision library. If you need this level of accuracy, then you probably want to use David Bailey's libraries or GMP/MPFR.
[Bug middle-end/96725] New: warn for uses of global nonconstant unterminated char arrays where strings are required
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96725
Bug ID: 96725
Summary: warn for uses of global nonconstant unterminated char
arrays where strings are required
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Although using a non-constant array initialized to all non-nul characters where
a nul-terminated string is expected doesn't necessarily imply the initializer
is what's used, it is an indication that it might be used, and so a warning
would be helpful, especially in code that doesn't make use of const.
$ cat z.c && gcc -O2 -S -Wall -Wrestrict -fdump-tree-strlen=/dev/stdout z.c
char a[4] = { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
int f (void) { return __builtin_strlen (a); } // warn here
;; Function f (f, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=1932, cgraph_uid=1, symbol_order=1)
;; 1 loops found
;;
;; Loop 0
;; header 0, latch 1
;; depth 0, outer -1
;; nodes: 0 1 2
;; 2 succs { 1 }
f ()
{
long unsigned int _1;
int _3;
[local count: 1073741824]:
_1 = __builtin_strlen ();
_3 = (int) _1;
return _3;
}
[Bug middle-end/93665] missing warning on strncmp reading past unterminated array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93665 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=94208 --- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor --- pr94208 is related but not quite the same because it involves enhancing the strlen pass to detect the missing nul termination in the locally constructed array, while this bug is about the missing detection for constant non-local arrays.
[Bug tree-optimization/88443] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overflow warnings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443 Bug 88443 depends on bug 95667, which changed state. Bug 95667 Summary: [11 Regression] unintended warning for memset writing across multiple members https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95667 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug middle-end/95667] [11 Regression] unintended warning for memset writing across multiple members
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95667 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- Fixed in r11-1517.
[Bug fortran/96724] New: Bogus warnings with the repeat intrinsic and the flag -Wconversion-extra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96724 Bug ID: 96724 Summary: Bogus warnings with the repeat intrinsic and the flag -Wconversion-extra Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jrfsousa at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 49088 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49088=edit Fortran code demonstrating problems. Hi all! Getting bogus warnings using the flag -Wconversion-extra of the type: Warning: Conversion from INTEGER() to INTEGER(8) AFAIK the repeat intrinsic is "generic" on integer kind and, IMHO, no warnings should be generated. Tested on: GNU Fortran (GCC) 9.3.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 10.2.1 20200819 GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.0.0 20200807 (experimental) Thank you very much. Best regards, José Rui
[Bug fortran/93671] gfortran 8-10 ICE on intrinsic assignment to allocatable derived-type component of coarray
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93671 Andre Vehreschild changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Andre Vehreschild --- No complaints so far, closing.
[Bug fortran/96711] Internal Compiler Error on NINT() Function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96711 --- Comment #12 from B Eggen --- Thanks for your explanations, and for reminding me of the excellent library etc by David Bailey. My original quest was to have a fast method to decide for large integers quickly whether they are perfect squares. I prob need to do something different to avoid the rounding pitfalls (:-) PS (and maybe I need to post this separately as a suggestion) - will there be a fast "octuple-precision floating point / integer" library (i.e. 256 bit) for C, C++ and Fortran, or is using something like GMP the only way forward ? BW, Bernd
[Bug fortran/94958] gcc/fortran/trans-array.c:9797: possible typo ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94958 Andre Vehreschild changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING --- Comment #6 from Andre Vehreschild --- Waiting a week for regression before closing as fixed.
[Bug fortran/94958] gcc/fortran/trans-array.c:9797: possible typo ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94958 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:05814dde7024a8fa05a735cafcda72b5eb5ec0c0 commit r11-2783-g05814dde7024a8fa05a735cafcda72b5eb5ec0c0 Author: Andre Vehreschild Date: Thu Aug 20 17:50:16 2020 +0200 Fix obvious typo were errmsg_len was assigned to errmsg. gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: 2020-08-20 Andre Vehreschild PR fortran/94958 * trans-array.c (gfc_bcast_alloc_comp): Use the correct variable.
[Bug testsuite/96718] 25_algorithms/pstl/feature_test-3.cc has excess error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96718 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Summary|[11 regression] |25_algorithms/pstl/feature_ |25_algorithms/pstl/feature_ |test-3.cc has excess error |test-3.cc has excess error | |after r11-2743 | Resolution|INVALID |--- Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Last reconfirmed||2020-08-20 --- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- Ignore the above mention of a specific revision. This always fails for me even going back to r11-1 on one (just the one) of my power 8 LE test machines. I thought it might be something to do with the older binutils 2.27 version on that system but I tested with binutils 2.35 and it does the same thing. Anyone know what might be going on?
[Bug fortran/96711] Internal Compiler Error on NINT() Function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96711 --- Comment #11 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 01:47:58PM +, bre08 at eggen dot co.uk wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96711 > > --- Comment #10 from B Eggen --- > I've been experimenting with the suggested work-around > > m = anint(y) > > This works for larger numbers, even in quad precision, however, it breaks down > a long way before the integer*16 range is exhausted, consider the code below, > which starts with 2^113 and tries to double it, minus 1. The minus 1 is not > taking effect: > Of course, that is going to fail if you want an exact result. REAL(16) is a floating point format, which has 113 digits of precision. This means that integers less than 2**113 are exactly representable as REAL(16) floating point numbers. When you double (2._16)**113 to (2._16)**114, that is a prefectly fine REAL(16) floating point number. Subtracting 1._16 from (2._16)**114 is a valid floating point operation. Your problem lies in that result is rounded, and 1._16 is less than epsilon(1._16) in comparison to (2._16)**114. > I guess at some point NINT() will be fixed, can anyone suggest a robust > workaround that is valid until 2^127-1 ? If you're trying to use floating point arithmetic in computations and you need exact integral values up to 2**127-1, then there isn't a REAL type that works. If you're looking for arbitrary precision arithmetic and you want to use Fortran, I suggest that you google "David Bailey arithmetic".
[Bug c/96683] Arm: MVE ACLE intrinsics vst1q_{s8|u8|s16|u16} is not supported by GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96683 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Joe Ramsay : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:91d206adfe39ce063f6a5731b92a03c05e82e94a commit r11-2782-g91d206adfe39ce063f6a5731b92a03c05e82e94a Author: Joe Ramsay Date: Wed Aug 19 12:34:06 2020 + arm: Require MVE memory operand for destination of vst1q intrinsic Previously, the machine description patterns for vst1q accepted a generic memory operand for the destination, which could lead to an unrecognised builtin when expanding vst1q* intrinsics. This change fixes the pattern to only accept MVE memory operands. gcc/ChangeLog: PR target/96683 * config/arm/mve.md (mve_vst1q_f): Require MVE memory operand for destination. (mve_vst1q_): Likewise. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR target/96683 * gcc.target/arm/mve/intrinsics/vst1q_f16.c: New test. * gcc.target/arm/mve/intrinsics/vst1q_s16.c: New test. * gcc.target/arm/mve/intrinsics/vst1q_s8.c: New test. * gcc.target/arm/mve/intrinsics/vst1q_u16.c: New test. * gcc.target/arm/mve/intrinsics/vst1q_u8.c: New test.
[Bug c++/96720] ICE with* after include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96720
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Heh. Confirmed:
q.C:1:29: warning: extra tokens at end of #include directive
1 | #include *
| ^
In file included from /usr/include/range/v3/view.hpp:25,
from /usr/include/range/v3/all.hpp:25,
from q.C:1:
/usr/include/range/v3/view/cartesian_product.hpp: In substitution of
‘template template template using
constify_if = meta::const_if_c [with T =
ranges::cartesian_product_view; bool IsConst_ = IsConst_; Views = {Views
...}]’:
/usr/include/range/v3/view/cartesian_product.hpp:154:47: required from here
/usr/include/range/v3/view/cartesian_product.hpp:154:47: internal compiler
error: Segmentation fault
154 | constify_if * view_;
| ^
0x15a1c0a crash_signal
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/toplev.c:327
0x7f1fe406da6f ???
/usr/src/debug/glibc-2.31-48-g64246fccaf/signal/../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/sigaction.c:0
0x95f237 tree_class_check(tree_node*, tree_code_class, char const*, int, char
const*)
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/tree.h:3417
0x9bca6c pop_nested_class()
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/class.c:8138
0xc4794b instantiate_template_1
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:20826
0xc47f98 instantiate_template(tree_node*, tree_node*, int)
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:20881
0xc48106 instantiate_alias_template
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:20919
0xc29995 tsubst(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*)
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:15259
0xc0d5ad lookup_template_class_1
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:9876
0xc0f688 lookup_template_class(tree_node*, tree_node*, tree_node*, tree_node*,
int, int)
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:10159
0xc95b67 finish_template_type(tree_node*, tree_node*, int)
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/semantics.c:3446
0xb92d66 cp_parser_template_id
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:16838
0xba0ad5 cp_parser_class_name
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:23816
0xb7e345 cp_parser_qualifying_entity
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:6844
0xb7d837 cp_parser_nested_name_specifier_opt
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:6526
0xb7e0df cp_parser_nested_name_specifier
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:6770
0xb98bdd cp_parser_using_declaration
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:19956
0xba3a5a cp_parser_member_declaration
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:25049
0xba3755 cp_parser_member_specification_opt
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:24909
0xba152a cp_parser_class_specifier_1
/home/mpolacek/src/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:24006
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See
[Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #27 from Martin Sebor ---
The fix was applied to GCC 10 but not to GCC 9 or 8. It will not be backported
there. It can be suppressed by introducing a named temporary copy of the
pointer and using it as one other other argument to the function.
void f (char *p)
{
char *q = p;
sprintf (p, "%p", q);
}
[Bug target/94531] gcc.target/arm/its.c fails for cortex-m3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94531 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #0) > I've noticed that gcc.target/arm/its.c fails when targetting > cortex-m3 or m33, but that's probably true with all cortex-m versions. > Since I have extending testing to more CPUs, I've noticed that the test fails for M3, M4 and M33, but passes for M7 (which has '1' as max_insns_skipped tuning, while other v7m CPUs have '2'). If these are the expected results, that's not easy to describe in the testcase :-)
[Bug tree-optimization/96722] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Clobbers on NULL since r8-1519
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
So the problematic transformation happens in einline:
BEFORE:
void foo(S*) (struct S * a)
{
[0.00%] [count: INV]:
if (a_2(D) != 0B)
goto ; [0.00%] [count: INV]
else
goto ; [0.00%] [count: INV]
[100.00%] [count: INV]:
MEM[(struct &)a_2(D)] ={v} {CLOBBER};
[0.00%] [count: INV]:
return;
}
after:
void foo(S*) (struct S * a)
{
[0.00%] [count: INV]:
if (a_2(D) != 0B)
goto ; [0.00%] [count: INV]
else
goto ; [0.00%] [count: INV]
[0.00%] [count: INV]:
// predicted unlikely by early return (on trees) predictor.
goto ; [0.00%] [count: INV]
[100.00%] [count: INV]:
MEM[(struct &)a_2(D)] ={v} {CLOBBER};
[0.00%] [count: INV]:
return;
}
So as seen, the CFG is more complex as there's an extra GIMPLE_PREDICT.
main then inlines to:
Scope blocks after cleanups:
{ Scope block #0
{ Scope block #7 ../pr96722.C:8 Originating from : extern void S (struct S
*, int);
}
{ Scope block #8 ../pr96722.C:14 Originating from : extern void S (struct S
*, int);
}
}
int main() ()
{
int _5;
[100.00%] [count: INV]:
_5 = 0;
return _5;
}
No longer having address taken: s
Scope blocks after cleanups:
{ Scope block #0
{ Scope block #7 ../pr96722.C:8 Originating from : extern void S (struct S
*, int);
{ Scope block #8 Originating from :#0
}
}
{ Scope block #9 ../pr96722.C:14 Originating from : extern void S (struct S
*, int);
}
}
int main() ()
{
int _5;
[100.00%] [count: INV]:
MEM[(struct &)0B] ={v} {CLOBBER};
_5 = 0;
return _5;
}
So I bet it's hidden in a CFG cleanup where it somehow removes the clobber?
I guess it was latent before my revision..
[Bug fortran/96711] Internal Compiler Error on NINT() Function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96711 --- Comment #10 from B Eggen --- I've been experimenting with the suggested work-around m = anint(y) This works for larger numbers, even in quad precision, however, it breaks down a long way before the integer*16 range is exhausted, consider the code below, which starts with 2^113 and tries to double it, minus 1. The minus 1 is not taking effect: -> ./aint_working.e 10384593717069655257060992658440192.00 the next two lines should end in ...83 20769187434139310514121985316880384.00 20769187434139310514121985316880384.00 20769187434139310514121985316880383 The source code is: program aint_working ! does not work in quad precision (real*16) ! -> echo '2^113' | bc = 10384593717069655257060992658440192 ! -> echo '2^114' | bc = 20769187434139310514121985316880384 integer(kind=16) :: i, j, k integer, parameter :: idp=selected_real_kind(9,99) integer, parameter :: iqp=selected_real_kind(19,199) integer, parameter :: i16=selected_int_kind(38) real(kind=iqp) :: x, y, z x=10384593717069655257060992658440192.0q0 ! that is 2^113 i=10384593717069655257060992658440192_16 ! as above, but integer k=20769187434139310514121985316880384_16 ! that is 2^114 write(*,'(1x,f50.10)') x write(*,*) 'the next two lines should end in ...83' write(*,*) y=(x+x)-1.0q0 write(*,'(1x,f50.10)') y z=(x-1.0q0)+x ! see if this helps write(*,'(1x,f50.10)') z j=(i+i)-1_16 write(*,*) write(*,'(1x,i39)') j ! this is correct result (2^114-1) stop end program aint_working I guess at some point NINT() will be fixed, can anyone suggest a robust workaround that is valid until 2^127-1 ? Thanks, Bernd
[Bug c/96427] Missing align attribute for anchor section from local variables
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96427 --- Comment #6 from zhongyunde at tom dot com --- Created attachment 49087 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49087=edit adjust the alignment according the attibute If user don't specify the alignment, so we can do some optimization. otherwise, we can obey it firstly, similiar to the patch attached?
[Bug middle-end/96680] [11 Regression][OpenMP][LTO] Declare variant + ICE in lto_fixup_prevailing_decls, at lto/lto-common.c:2595
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96680 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus --- Some regression hunting: * Fails with r11-652-g79ea774f9a9d36d986152d93f9eae4a9ba36b37b * Works on OG10 = devel/omp/gcc-10 and presumably GCC 10. My bet is that the following commit causes the issue, but that trunk version fails to build here: r11-382-g7a50e7087567cffb21e81fff566546b8a8dac270 (2020-05-14) Namely: openmp: cgraph support for late declare variant resolution
[Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919 --- Comment #26 from Marietto --- I'm using ubuntu 20.04 and gcc 9.3
[Bug c/84919] [8/9 Regression] error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919 Marietto changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marietto2008 at gmail dot com --- Comment #25 from Marietto --- Hello. I'm trying to configure and compile GVT-g to enable the passthrough of the integrated GPU that I have on my motherboard,the model "Intel Corporation UHD Graphics 630 (Desktop 9 Series) (rev 02)". This is the tutorial that I'm following : https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gvt-dev/2017-June/001238.html I reached this point and then the compilation stopped for an error that it seems to be the same as this. root@ziomario-z390aoruspro:/etc/xen/gvt-linux# make CHK include/config/kernel.release CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h CHK include/generated/timeconst.h CHK include/generated/bounds.h CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh DESCEND objtool CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/pager.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/parse-options.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/run-command.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/sigchain.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/subcmd-config.o LD /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/libsubcmd-in.o AR /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/libsubcmd.a GEN /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/arch/x86/insn/inat-tables.c CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.o LD /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/arch/x86/objtool-in.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/builtin-check.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/elf.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/special.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/objtool.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/libstring.o CC /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/str_error_r.o ../lib/str_error_r.c: In function ‘str_error_r’: ../lib/str_error_r.c:24:3: error: passing argument 1 to restrict-qualified parameter aliases with argument 5 [-Werror=restrict] 24 | snprintf(buf, buflen, "INTERNAL ERROR: strerror_r(%d, %p, %zd)=%d", errnum, buf, buflen, err); | ^~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors mv: impossibile eseguire stat di '/etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/.str_error_r.o.tmp': File o directory non esistente make[3]: *** [Build:18: /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/str_error_r.o] Errore 1 make[2]: *** [Makefile:40: /etc/xen/gvt-linux/tools/objtool/objtool-in.o] Errore 2 make[1]: *** [Makefile:61: objtool] Errore 2 make: *** [Makefile:1616: tools/objtool] Errore 2 I don't understand where is the patch ?
[Bug target/96479] AArch64: return SIMD register with -mgeneral-regs-only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96479 --- Comment #6 from qiaopeixin at huawei dot com --- Fix on https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=a5a635fc4331b6d5f1a1e688e1153abd2ff194a5
[Bug target/96479] AArch64: return SIMD register with -mgeneral-regs-only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96479 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Now fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/96633] missed optimization?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96633 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #2) > Martin added me to CC so I assume he wants me to chime in. Yes, you understood very well and thanks for the reply. ... > With that out of the way: striving to get efficient branchless code on this > code is not very valuable in practice, because the caller is likely to > perform a conditional branch on the result anyway. So making isWhitespace > branchless simply moves the misprediction cost to the caller, making the > overall code slower. That's very important observation!
[Bug analyzer/96723] New: [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV: infinite recursion in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding with -Og -fanalyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96723 Bug ID: 96723 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV: infinite recursion in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding with -Og -fanalyzer Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: analyzer Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: zsojka at seznam dot cz Target Milestone: --- Host: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Created attachment 49086 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49086=edit reduced testcase Compiler output: $ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -Og -fanalyzer testcase.C x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault signal terminated program cc1plus Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions. (gdb) bt #0 0x7772a0b6 in _int_malloc () from /lib64/libc.so.6 #1 0x7772b9e4 in malloc () from /lib64/libc.so.6 #2 0x01fec7f5 in operator new(unsigned long) () #3 0x016c75e3 in ana::region_model_manager::get_field_region (this=this@entry=0x7fffcc10, parent=parent@entry=0x10336890, field=field@entry=0x775e8f00) at /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/analyzer/region-model.h:2352 #4 0x016ac2f6 in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding (this=0x10336890, mgr=0x7fffcc10, relative_bit_offset=..., size_in_bits=..., type=0x774ad000, out=0x7fffbec8) at /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/analyzer/region.cc:314 #5 0x016ac33f in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding (this=0x10336510, mgr=0x7fffcc10, relative_bit_offset=..., size_in_bits=..., type=0x774ad000, out=0x7fffbec8) at /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/analyzer/region.cc:315 #6 0x016ac33f in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding (this=0x10336190, mgr=0x7fffcc10, relative_bit_offset=..., size_in_bits=..., type=0x774ad000, out=0x7fffbec8) at /repo/gcc-trunk/gcc/analyzer/region.cc:315 #7 0x016ac33f in ana::region::get_subregions_for_binding (this=0x10335e10, mgr=0x7fffcc10, relative_bit_offset=..., size_in_bits=..., type=0x774ad000, out=0x7fffbec8) ... $ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/repo/gcc-trunk/binary-latest/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/repo/gcc-trunk/binary-trunk-r11-2779-20200820091258-g1763ec9b20c-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: /repo/gcc-trunk//configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-valgrind-annotations --disable-nls --enable-checking=yes,rtl,df,extra --disable-bootstrap --with-cloog --with-ppl --with-isl --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld --with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch --prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r11-2779-20200820091258-g1763ec9b20c-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64 Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 11.0.0 20200820 (experimental) (GCC)
[Bug c++/96721] [11 Regression] pseudo-destructor calls on pointers since r11-2238
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96721
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
build_trivial_dtor_call has:
if (INDIRECT_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (instance)))
{
if (VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (instance
goto no_clobber;
instance = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (instance);
}
so, either we adjust the caller such that for TYPE_PTR_P types it passes an
address of the instance rather than the instance itself, or we add an argument
(perhaps defaulted bool) to build_trivial_dtor_call that inhibits this behavior
for TYPE_PTR_P, or drop this if completely and adjust any caller that calls it
with a pointer or reference and expects it to destruct what it points to rather
than itself.
[Bug c++/96721] [11 Regression] pseudo-destructor calls on pointers since r11-2238
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96721 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1
[Bug c++/96721] [11 Regression] pseudo-destructor calls on pointers since r11-2238
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96721
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
More reduced testcase:
typedef int *T;
int
main ()
{
T a = nullptr;
a.~T ();
}
[Bug tree-optimization/96722] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Clobbers on NULL since r8-1519
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Let me take a look.
[Bug c++/96717] -flifetime-dse=2 breaks webkit-gtk-2.28.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96717 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- I've moved the #c3 issues into PR96721 and PR96722 as they are separate. And either this bug turns a dup of the former, or not.
[Bug tree-optimization/96722] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] Clobbers on NULL since r8-1519
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722
Bug ID: 96722
Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] Clobbers on NULL since r8-1519
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs-bisection, needs-reduction
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org,
unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org, webrown.cpp at gmail dot com
Depends on: 96717
Blocks: 96721
Target Milestone: ---
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #96717 +++
struct S { int s; ~S () {} };
void
foo (S *a)
{
if (a)
return;
a->~S ();
}
int
main ()
{
S s;
foo ();
}
is miscompiled, since r249450 aka
r8-1519-ge59a1c22fb249388e82b4fd004f33615abe36d2e at -O2.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96717
[Bug 96717] -flifetime-dse=2 breaks webkit-gtk-2.28.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96721
[Bug 96721] [11 Regression] pseudo-destructor calls on pointers since r11-2238
[Bug tree-optimization/96722] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Clobbers on NULL since r8-1519
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2020-08-20 Target Milestone|--- |8.5 CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Keywords|needs-bisection,| |needs-reduction | Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
[Bug c++/96721] [11 Regression] pseudo-destructor calls on pointers since r11-2238
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96721 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2020-08-20 Target Milestone|--- |11.0 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
[Bug c++/96721] New: [11 Regression] pseudo-destructor calls on pointers since r11-2238
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96721
Bug ID: 96721
Summary: [11 Regression] pseudo-destructor calls on pointers
since r11-2238
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs-bisection, needs-reduction
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org,
unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org, webrown.cpp at gmail dot com
Depends on: 96717
Target Milestone: ---
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #96717 +++
In
typedef int *T;
void
foo (T a)
{
if (a)
return;
a.~T ();
}
int
main ()
{
int p;
foo ();
foo (nullptr);
return 0;
}
since r11-2238-ge443d8213864ac337c29092d4767224f280d2062 the pseudo-destructor
is emitted on what the pointer points to rather than on the pointer itself.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96717
[Bug 96717] -flifetime-dse=2 breaks webkit-gtk-2.28.4
[Bug c++/96717] -flifetime-dse=2 breaks webkit-gtk-2.28.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96717
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-20
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The __builtin_trap is there because of:
if (isEmptyBucket(oldEntry)) {
do { if (!(std::addressof(oldEntry) != entry)) {
WTFReportAssertionFailure("WTF/wtf/HashTable.h", 1337, __PRETTY_FUNCTION__,
"std::
oldTable[i].~ValueType();
continue;
}
where the type of oldTable[i] and oldEntry is struct Thread *, isEmptyBucket is
== NULL check and invoking a pseudo-destructor.
Playing with this, I've come up with:
typedef int *T;
void
foo (T a)
{
if (a)
return;
a.~T ();
}
int
main ()
{
int p;
foo ();
foo (nullptr);
return 0;
}
testcase.
Starting with r11-2238-ge443d8213864ac337c29092d4767224f280d2062 we emit:
if (a != 0B) goto ; else goto ;
:
// predicted unlikely by early return (on trees) predictor.
return;
:
*a = {CLOBBER};
which doesn't look right to me, that is as if the (pseudo)destructor is run on
what the pointer points to (so if the testcase is changed to also have typedef
int V; and use a->~V (); rather than a.~T ();).
That is one thing, but I'd say in that case it ought to crash only if a is
NULL, because the pseudo destructor is invoked only in that case.
With that we have:
if (a_2(D) != 0B)
goto ; [INV]
else
goto ; [INV]
:
// predicted unlikely by early return (on trees) predictor.
goto ; [INV]
:
MEM[(int *)0B] ={v} {CLOBBER};
:
return;
before cddce1, but we then "optimize" it into:
:
MEM[(int *)0B] ={v} {CLOBBER};
return;
So, I'd say we have two bugs here, one is that the FE since r1-2238 mishandles
pseudo-destructors of pointer types, for that use the above testcase, and then
that we mishandle clobbers in DCE or so, for which the testcase is:
struct S { int s; ~S () {} };
void
foo (S *a)
{
if (a)
return;
a->~S ();
}
int
main ()
{
S s;
foo ();
foo ((S *) 0);
}
which started to be really miscompiled with r249450, but had the questionable
unconditional
MEM[(struct S *)0B] ={v} {CLOBBER};
as first stmt in main already since r197375.
So, in addition to fixing the C++ FE, I think we either shall declare that
clobbers never trap even if invoked with NULL pointers, then cddce can do the
optimization it does, but we shouldn't turn it into __builtin_trap later, or we
disable the optimization that happens during dce if the pointer in MEM_REF lhs
of a clobber is or might be NULL.
Now, whether fixing this (both or just one) fixes the above reported bug is
unclear.
[Bug c++/96717] -flifetime-dse=2 breaks webkit-gtk-2.28.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96717 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > Created attachment 49085 [details] > Preprocessed source for a.cc This was prepared on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Compile it with -O2 to see the ud2 insn in the .s output.
[Bug c++/96717] -flifetime-dse=2 breaks webkit-gtk-2.28.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96717 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Created attachment 49085 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49085=edit Preprocessed source for a.cc
[Bug c++/96716] GCC reports "object is private" when it's accessed through proper accessor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96716
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Slightly further reduced:
struct string_view
{
constexpr string_view(const char* p) : p(p) { }
const char* p;
};
struct Foo {
constexpr string_view getfoo() const {
return {};
}
private:
const char foo = 'c';
};
inline constexpr Foo foo;
template
struct Bar {
static constexpr auto bar = foo.getfoo();
};
auto& baz = Bar::bar;
[Bug c++/96716] GCC reports "object is private" when it's accessed through proper accessor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96716
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-20
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords||rejects-valid
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
struct string_view
{
constexpr string_view(const char* p) : p(p) { }
const char* p;
};
class Foo {
public:
constexpr string_view getfoo() const {
return {};
}
private:
const char foo = 'c';
};
inline constexpr Foo foo;
template
class Bar {
public:
static constexpr auto bar = foo.getfoo();
};
auto& baz = Bar::bar;
pr96716.C: In instantiation of 'constexpr const string_view Bar::bar':
pr96716.C:24:23: required from here
pr96716.C:21:25: error: 'const char Foo::foo' is private within this context
21 | static constexpr auto bar = foo.getfoo();
| ^~~
pr96716.C:13:14: note: declared private here
13 | const char foo = 'c';
| ^~~
[Bug fortran/96436] -std=f2003 -pedantic rejects valid f0.d edit descriptor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96436 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org --- Committed to master.
[Bug c++/96719] non-standard handling of alias templates used as template template arguments
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96719 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ABI Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2020-08-20 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes I think this was an intentional decision. Possibly also related to CWG 1430.
[Bug fortran/96436] -std=f2003 -pedantic rejects valid f0.d edit descriptor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96436 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2a0fd7c8ff426cc40ec678efef85e4a376ea4b5 commit r11-2777-gc2a0fd7c8ff426cc40ec678efef85e4a376ea4b5 Author: Mark Eggleston Date: Tue Aug 4 14:10:08 2020 +0100 Fortran : rejected f0.d edit descriptor PR96436 Zero length f format descriptors are valid for Fortran 95 and later. For g format descriptors from Fortran 2008 and later. Finally for D, E, EN and ES for Fortran 2018 and later. 2020-08-20 Mark Eggleston libgfortran/ PR fortran/96436 * io/format.c (parse_format_list): Add new local variable "standard" to hold the required standard to check. If the format width is zero select standard depending on descriptor. Call notification_std using the new standard variable. 2020-08-20 Mark Eggleston gcc/testsuite/ PR fortran/96436 * gfortran.dg/pr96436_1.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_2.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_3.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_4.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_5.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_6.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_7.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_8.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr96436_9.f90 * gfortran.dg/pr96436_10.f90
