[Bug c++/105696] invalid use of constexpr static class member accepted as constant expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105696 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=92171 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Or is a dup of bug 92171.
[Bug c++/105696] invalid use of constexpr static class member accepted as constant expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105696 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=79083 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I suspect this is basically the same as PR 79083.
[Bug c++/105696] New: invalid use of constexpr static class member accepted as constant expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105696
Bug ID: 105696
Summary: invalid use of constexpr static class member accepted
as constant expression
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: yiz152 at ucsd dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 53017
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53017=edit
Test case
G++ 12.1.0 accepts constexpr static class members referenced using class member
access syntax (see below/attached). The working draft states
(https://eel.is/c++draft/class.static#general-1) that in such cases, the object
expression (this->val) is evaluated, thereby breaking constexpr-ness (cf.
https://eel.is/c++draft/expr.const#5.1).
Compiled/tested with gcc 12.1.0, clang 13.0.1, -pedantic -Wall -Wextra
-std=c++1z. Also tested with -std=c++11,-std=c++14. Code/error (same as the
attached file):
#include
struct A {
constexpr static int a = 17;
};
struct B {
A val;
int foo() {
// gcc compiles without warning; clang rejects
return std::integral_constant::value;
}
int good_foo() {
// gcc compiles without warning, correct
return std::integral_constant::value;
}
void bar() {
char a[val.a]; // gcc compiles without warning, clang warns -Wvla
(void) a;
}
void var_bar(int len) {
char a[len]; // gcc compiles with -Wvla, clang does as well
(void) a;
}
};
int main() {}
gcc -v:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/12.1.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /build/gcc/src/gcc/configure
--enable-languages=c,c++,ada,fortran,go,lto,objc,obj-c++ --enable-bootstrap
--prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib --libexecdir=/usr/lib --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --with-bugurl=https://bugs.archlinux.org/
--with-linker-hash-style=gnu --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
--enable-cet=auto --enable-checking=release --enable-clocale=gnu
--enable-default-pie --enable-default-ssp --enable-gnu-indirect-function
--enable-gnu-unique-object --enable-linker-build-id --enable-lto
--enable-multilib --enable-plugin --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
--disable-libssp --disable-libstdcxx-pch --disable-werror
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --enable-link-serialization=1
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.1.0 (GCC)
[Bug libcc1/105695] GCC 10.3.1 (20220519) build failure with GCC 12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105695 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- The problem is -std=gnu++98 I think.
[Bug libcc1/105695] New: GCC 10.3.1 (20220519) build failure with GCC 12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105695 Bug ID: 105695 Summary: GCC 10.3.1 (20220519) build failure with GCC 12 Product: gcc Version: 10.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libcc1 Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: sam at gentoo dot org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 53016 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53016=edit build.log.xz ``` /bin/bash ./libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -std=gnu++98 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1 -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../include -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../libgcc -I ../gcc -I/var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/c-family -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../libcpp/include -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/c -W -Wall -fvisibility=hidden -pipe -march=native -fdiagnostics-color=always -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -ggdb3 -O2 -MT libcc1plugin.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libcc1plugin.Tpo -c -o libcc1plugin.lo /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/libcc1plugin.cc libtool: compile: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -std=gnu++98 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1 -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../include -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../libgcc -I ../gcc -I/var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/c-family -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../libcpp/include -I /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/c -W -Wall -fvisibility=hidden -pipe -march=native -fdiagnostics-color=always -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -ggdb3 -O2 -MT libcc1plugin.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libcc1plugin.Tpo -c /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/libcc1plugin.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/libcc1plugin.o In file included from /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/hash-table.h:248, from /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/coretypes.h:461, from /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/gcc-plugin.h:29, from /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/libcc1plugin.cc:34: /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/vec.h: In member function ‘void vec::reverse()’: /var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/gcc-10-20220519/libcc1/../gcc/vec.h:2086:10: error: ‘swap’ is not a member of ‘std’ 2086 | std::swap (ptr[i], ptr[l - i - 1]); | ^~~~ make[2]: *** [Makefile:600: libcc1plugin.lo] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory '/var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/build/libcc1' make[1]: *** [Makefile:14552: install-libcc1] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory '/var/tmp/portage.notmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519/work/build' make: *** [Makefile:2438: install] Error 2 * ERROR: sys-devel/gcc-10.3.1_p20220519::gentoo failed (install phase): ``` I've attached the full log (xz compressed b/c of size). ``` $ gcc --version gcc (Gentoo Hardened 12.1.1_p20220521 p5) 12.1.1 20220521 Copyright (C) 2022 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. ```
[Bug c++/105694] New: ICE: in finish_expr_stmt, at cp/semantics.cc:892
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105694
Bug ID: 105694
Summary: ICE: in finish_expr_stmt, at cp/semantics.cc:892
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hewillk at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
11.3 Regression
#include
int main() {
std::apply([](auto...) {
[](std::index_sequence) {
([](auto... tuples) {
(std::get(tuples), ...);
}(I), ...);
}(std::make_index_sequence<3>{});
}, std::tuple(1, 2, 3.0));
}
https://godbolt.org/z/KPorc1fnK
[Bug c++/105693] New: Requires-clause constructor is not selected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105693
Bug ID: 105693
Summary: Requires-clause constructor is not selected
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fchelnokov at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
In the following program struct template A has deleted default constructor for
T=int:
#include
template
struct A {
A() = default;
A() requires (std::same_as) = delete;
};
A a;
The program is rejected by Clang and MSVC, but not by GCC. Demo:
https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/G7T5xv35q
[Bug fortran/105691] Incorrect calculation of INDEX(str1,str2) at compile time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105691
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There is no need to special case the substring length of 1 case with my
suggested patch. Here's an update to eliminate the special case.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc b/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
index 233cc42137f..fa9938d6a1e 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
@@ -3589,49 +3589,31 @@ gfc_simplify_index (gfc_expr *x, gfc_expr *y, gfc_expr
*b, gfc_expr *kind)
mpz_set_si (result->value.integer, len + 1);
return result;
}
- else if (lensub == 1)
+ else
{
- for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
+ /* Start at the tail of the string, offset by the length of the
+substring, and search for a match moving towards the head of
+string. */
+ for (i = len - lensub; i >= 0; i--)
{
- for (j = 0; j < lensub; j++)
+ /* If the first character does not match, then the rest of the
+string cannot match. */
+ if (x->value.character.string[i]
+ == y->value.character.string[0])
{
- if (y->value.character.string[j]
- == x->value.character.string[len - i])
+
+ /* Compare substring to starting location in string. */
+ for (j = 0, count = 0; j < lensub; j++, count++)
{
- index = len - i + 1;
- goto done;
+ if (x->value.character.string[i + j]
+ != y->value.character.string[j])
+ break;
}
- }
- }
- }
- else
- {
- for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
- {
- for (j = 0; j < lensub; j++)
- {
- if (y->value.character.string[j]
- == x->value.character.string[len - i])
+
+ if (count == lensub)
{
- start = len - i;
- if (start <= len - lensub)
- {
- count = 0;
- for (k = 0; k < lensub; k++)
- if (y->value.character.string[k]
- == x->value.character.string[k + start])
- count++;
-
- if (count == lensub)
- {
- index = start + 1;
- goto done;
- }
- }
- else
- {
- continue;
- }
+ index = i + 1;
+ goto done;
}
}
}
[Bug fortran/105691] Incorrect calculation of INDEX(str1,str2) at compile time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105691
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-22
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There is some torched logic looking for the substring, which can never find it.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc b/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
index 233cc42137f..16b231f5707 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
@@ -3606,32 +3606,29 @@ gfc_simplify_index (gfc_expr *x, gfc_expr *y, gfc_expr
*b, gfc_expr *kind)
}
else
{
- for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
+ /* Start at the tail of the string, offset by the length of the
+substring, and search for a match moving towards the head of
+string. */
+ for (i = len - lensub; i >= 0; i--)
{
- for (j = 0; j < lensub; j++)
+ /* If the first character does not match, then the rest of the
+string cannot match. */
+ if (x->value.character.string[i]
+ == y->value.character.string[0])
{
- if (y->value.character.string[j]
- == x->value.character.string[len - i])
+
+ /* Compare substring to starting location in string. */
+ for (j = 0, count = 0; j < lensub; j++, count++)
{
- start = len - i;
- if (start <= len - lensub)
- {
- count = 0;
- for (k = 0; k < lensub; k++)
- if (y->value.character.string[k]
- == x->value.character.string[k + start])
- count++;
-
- if (count == lensub)
- {
- index = start + 1;
- goto done;
- }
- }
- else
- {
- continue;
- }
+ if (x->value.character.string[i + j]
+ != y->value.character.string[j])
+ break;
+ }
+
+ if (count == lensub)
+ {
+ index = i + 1;
+ goto done;
}
}
}
[Bug c++/104230] Non-type template arguments of reference and pointer type fail when initialized by pointer to member operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104230 --- Comment #3 from anton at socialhacker dot com --- I've found the relevant discussion about the correct way to mangle subobject references in template parameters here: https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/47 It looks like Clang already has this implemented. but I'm not sure which version of the compiler has the referenced commits.
[Bug c++/105692] New: internal compiler error: in finish_expr_stmt, at cp/semantics.cc:872
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105692
Bug ID: 105692
Summary: internal compiler error: in finish_expr_stmt, at
cp/semantics.cc:872
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: elmar.braun at web dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 53015
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53015=edit
output of compiling with -freport-bug
Reduced testcase:
template
using lambda = decltype([] {});
template
void f3() {}
template
void f2() {
f3>();
}
void f1() {
f2();
}
Compiling this with GCC 12.1.0, using the command line "g++-12.1 -std=c++20
-Wall -Wextra bug.cpp", results in the following error message:
bug.cpp: In instantiation of ‘void f2() [with T = int]’:
bug.cpp:13:10: required from here
bug.cpp:9:3: internal compiler error: in finish_expr_stmt, at
cp/semantics.cc:872
9 | f3>();
Exact version of GCC, system type, and options given when GCC was configured
can be found in the attached output from -freport-bug.
I was also able to reproduce the issue on godbolt.org
(https://godbolt.org/z/3344WMcWT). Clang 14 and the latest MSVC compile this
code without problems.
[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson ---
I can reproduce in a cross to --target=msp430-unknown-elf
--enable-languages=c,c++ with binutils-2.38 and newlib-4.2.0.20211231.
gcc-11.3.0 builds fine, but gcc-12.1.0 build fails with
In file included from
/mnt/scratch/cross/sources/gcc-12.1.0/libstdc++-v3/include/precompiled/extc++.h:61:
/mnt/scratch/cross/objdir-gcc/msp430-unknown-elf/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/random:355:69:
error: narrowing conversion of '86243' from 'long int' to 'unsigned int'
[-Wnarrowing]
355 | 0xU, 0xe9528d85U>
| ^
(several more)
and
In file included from
/mnt/scratch/cross/objdir-gcc/msp430-unknown-elf/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/pb_ds/hash_policy.hpp:475,
from
/mnt/scratch/cross/objdir-gcc/msp430-unknown-elf/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/pb_ds/detail/standard_policies.hpp:45,
from
/mnt/scratch/cross/objdir-gcc/msp430-unknown-elf/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/pb_ds/assoc_container.hpp:47,
from
/mnt/scratch/cross/sources/gcc-12.1.0/libstdc++-v3/include/precompiled/extc++.h:72:
/mnt/scratch/cross/objdir-gcc/msp430-unknown-elf/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/pb_ds/detail/resize_policy/hash_prime_size_policy_imp.hpp:73:32:
error: narrowing conversion of '116731' from 'long unsigned int' to
'std::size_t' {aka 'unsigned int'} [-Wnarrowing]
73 | /* 14*/ 116731ul,
|^~~~
(many more)
[Bug ada/100486] Ada build fails for 32bit Windows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486 --- Comment #74 from Arnaud Charlet --- The patch is desirable even outside of this PR, so we'll keep it. And as shown by PR105507, we have other exception propagation that crept in unintentionally, so I'll also have a look at these when I get a chance.
[Bug ada/100486] Ada build fails for 32bit Windows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486 --- Comment #73 from Christoph Reiter --- In a similar bug 105507 we figured out that the MSYS2 build was broken because it was linking libgcc both statically and dynamically via dependencies, and that breaks exceptions with dwarf-2. So in theory the above patch could be reverted. I can try building with it being reverted to confirm, if wanted.
[Bug ada/105507] Ada build fails for 32bit Windows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105507 Christoph Reiter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #11 from Christoph Reiter --- I went with --with-boot-ldflags="-static-libstdc++" and --with-stage1-ldflags="-static-libstdc++" now, and everything works nicely. Thanks for your help and insight. I'll document the dwarf-2 limitation downstream, so this hopefully wont happen again.
[Bug fortran/105691] Incorrect calculation of INDEX(str1,str2) at compile time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105691
--- Comment #1 from mecej4 ---
When a program contains an expression that involves the INDEX intrinsic
function, and it is possible to calculate its result value at compile time, the
computed value is sometimes incorrect.
program main
i = index("fortran.f90", "fortran", back=.true.) ! It should get '1'
call prnt(i)
contains
subroutine prnt(i)
integer i
print *,'i = ',i
end subroutine
end program
The program prints '0' instead of '1'. Looking at the assembly code generated
shows that the argument value in the argument I passed to PRNT() is zero.
[Bug fortran/105691] New: Incorrect calculation of INDEX(str1,str2) at compile time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105691 Bug ID: 105691 Summary: Incorrect calculation of INDEX(str1,str2) at compile time Product: gcc Version: 11.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: xecej4 at outlook dot com Target Milestone: ---
[Bug c/105690] New: -Warray-bounds sensitive false positive with -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105690
Bug ID: 105690
Summary: -Warray-bounds sensitive false positive with -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: sirl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
this minimized testcase issues
# gcc-12 -O2 -Warray-bounds -c testcase.c
testcase.c: In function 'fun3.part.0':
testcase.c:16:13: warning: array subscript [0, 19] is outside array bounds of
'table_t[20]' [-Warray-bounds=]
16 | if (gtable[idx].mode)
| ~~^
testcase.c:8:9: note: while referencing 'gtable'
8 | table_t gtable[20];
| ^~
with target linux-x86_64. It happens with gcc-12@r12-r8405 or
gcc-trunk@r13-555. The testcase is quite sensitive, even choosing a buffer size
smaller than 257 stops the warning. With gcc-7 to gcc-11 I don't get the
warning.
int gvar1;
void fun1(int, char *, int);
void fun2(int, char *);
typedef struct {
int exist;
int mode;
} table_t;
table_t gtable[20];
void fun3(int idx)
{
char buffer[257];
if (idx < 0 || idx >= 20 || gtable[idx].exist == 0)
return;
fun2(idx, buffer);
if (gtable[idx].mode)
fun2(idx, buffer);
}
void fun4()
{
fun3(gvar1);
}
int fun2_maxlen;
void fun2(int idx, char * text)
{
if (!(idx < 0 || idx >= 20 || gtable[idx].exist == 0))
fun1(idx, text, fun2_maxlen);
}
[Bug c/105688] Cannot build GCC 11.3 on Fedora 36
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 --- Comment #5 from Artem S. Tashkinov --- Using the official tar.xz file of course, without any changes/modifications/patches.
[Bug c/105688] Cannot build GCC 11.3 on Fedora 36
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 --- Comment #4 from Artem S. Tashkinov --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > How are you building gcc? > What configure options are being passed? > What make options are being passed? > Do you have any env variables set that might effect configure/make? > Are you building in the source directory or a different directory? #! /bin/sh WD=/tmp/OBJDIR GD=`pwd` export CFLAGS="-O2 -pipe -mtune=generic" export CXXFLAGS=$CFLAGS export LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1" mkdir -p "$WD" && cd "$WD" && \ "$GD"/configure --disable-stage1-checking --with-system-zlib \ --enable-languages="c,c++,lto" --prefix=/opt/gcc \ --disable-sjlj-exceptions --enable-newlib-io-long-long \ --with-gcc-major-version-only --without-isl --enable-multilib nice make -j16
[Bug c/105688] Cannot build GCC 11.3 on Fedora 36
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-05-22 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- How are you building gcc? What configure options are being passed? What make options are being passed? Do you have any env variables set that might effect configure/make? Are you building in the source directory or a different directory?
[Bug c/105675] Segmentation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105675 --- Comment #4 from Ruslan Mkoyan --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > This is a won't fix stitutation. > > You have & on a type repeated 237,679 times. > > With a recusive decent compiler, you run out of stack space with that many > times. > #17 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #18 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #19 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #20 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #21 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #22 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #23 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #24 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #25 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #26 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #27 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #28 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #29 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #30 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #31 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #32 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.cc:22948 > #33 0x00b7c653 in cp_parser_declarator (parser=0x772bd7b8, > dcl_kind=CP_PARSER_DECLARATOR_NAMED, flags=0, ctor_dtor_or_conv_p=0x0, > parenthesized_p=, member_p=false, friend_p=false, > static_p=false) at
[Bug c/105689] New: Bogus `-Wstringop-overflow=` after accessing field, then containing struct (wrong "region size")
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105689
Bug ID: 105689
Summary: Bogus `-Wstringop-overflow=` after accessing field,
then containing struct (wrong "region size")
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: sagebar at web dot de
Target Milestone: ---
The following code wrongly produces a warning `[-Wstringop-overflow=`:
Compile (using `gcc -c -O2 infile.c`)
```
struct subobject {
int field1;
int field2;
};
struct myobject {
struct subobject sub;
};
extern void access_1(int *a);
extern __attribute__((access(read_write, 1))) void access_2(struct subobject
*);
void myfunc(struct myobject *me) {
// { void *p __attribute__((unused)) = >sub; }
access_1(>sub.field1);
access_2(>sub);
}
```
=== Output (gcc-12) ===
>infile.c: In function 'myfunc':
>infile.c:16:9: warning: 'access_2' accessing 8 bytes in a region of size 4
>[-Wstringop-overflow=]
> 16 | access_2(>sub);
> | ^~
>infile.c:11:52: note: in a call to function 'access_2' declared with attribute
>'access (read_write, 1)'
> 11 | extern __attribute__((access(read_write, 1))) void access_2(struct
> subobject *);
> |^~~~
=== Output (expected) ===
>
=== Notes ===
- By uncommenting the line `{ void *p __attribute__((unused)) = >sub; }`,
the warning goes away, even though that line literally does nothing. (see
Theory below)
- I was able to observe this bug in gcc-12.1.0 and gcc-11.2.0
=== Theory ===
It seems that this has got something to do with some internal, hidden attribute
(relating to the "region size") attached to some field-expression the first
time that field is accessed, only that when accessing `me->sub.field1` (where
`offsetof(field1) == 0`) before `me->sub`, that "region size" attribute
wrongfully also gets attached to `me->sub`. Then, when an access to `me->sub`
actually happens, gcc seems to think that the "region size" of `me->sub` as a
whole matches the size of the previously accessed field (`me->sub.field1`).
This seems further compounded by the fact that this only happens when `field1`
is the first field of `subobject` (i.e. has offset 0). If we insert another
field `int field0;` before it, the warning also disappears (so something in
gcc's logic appears to make it think that `region_size_of()
== region_size_of()`)
[Bug c/105688] Cannot build GCC 11.3 on Fedora 36
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 --- Comment #2 from Artem S. Tashkinov --- This workaround of mine is not really good: after `make install` you end up with /opt/gcc/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.29 which is not GCC's but the system one (/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.30.so).
[Bug c/105688] Cannot build GCC 11.3 on Fedora 36
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 --- Comment #1 from Artem S. Tashkinov --- In /tmp/OBJDIR/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs I replaced the built libstdc++.so.29 _three times_ with the system one (libstdc++.so.30) and it all worked. Still this looks like a serious bug which is worth resolving. Google doesn't find anything relevant, so people may get stuck.
[Bug c/105688] New: Cannot build GCC 11.3 on Fedora 36
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 Bug ID: 105688 Summary: Cannot build GCC 11.3 on Fedora 36 Product: gcc Version: 11.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: aros at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- When trying to make gcc-11.3.0.tar.xz: /bin/sh /tmp/gcc-11.3.0/libgcc/../mkinstalldirs 32 /tmp/OBJDIR/./gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/OBJDIR/./gcc/ -B/opt/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/opt/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /opt/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/include -isystem /opt/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/sys-include -fno-checking -O2 -g -O2 -pipe -mtune=generic -DIN_GCC-W -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wno-error=format-diag -Wno-format -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wno-error=format-diag -Wold-style-definition -isystem ./include -fpic -mlong-double-80 -DUSE_ELF_SYMVER -fcf-protection -mshstk -g -DIN_LIBGCC2 -fbuilding-libgcc -fno-stack-protector -shared -nodefaultlibs -Wl,--soname=libgcc_s.so.1 -Wl,--version-script=libgcc.map -o 32/libgcc_s.so.1.tmp -g -O2 -pipe -mtune=generic -m32 -B./ _muldi3_s.o _negdi2_s.o _lshrdi3_s.o _ashldi3_s.o _ashrdi3_s.o _cmpdi2_s.o _ucmpdi2_s.o _clear_cache_s.o _trampoline_s.o __main_s.o _absvsi2_s.o _absvdi2_s.o _addvsi3_s.o _addvdi3_s.o _subvsi3_s.o _subvdi3_s.o _mulvsi3_s.o _mulvdi3_s.o _negvsi2_s.o _negvdi2_s.o _ctors_s.o _ffssi2_s.o _ffsdi2_s.o _clz_s.o _clzsi2_s.o _clzdi2_s.o _ctzsi2_s.o _ctzdi2_s.o _popcount_tab_s.o _popcountsi2_s.o _popcountdi2_s.o _paritysi2_s.o _paritydi2_s.o _powisf2_s.o _powidf2_s.o _powixf2_s.o _powitf2_s.o _mulhc3_s.o _mulsc3_s.o _muldc3_s.o _mulxc3_s.o _multc3_s.o _divhc3_s.o _divsc3_s.o _divdc3_s.o _divxc3_s.o _divtc3_s.o _bswapsi2_s.o _bswapdi2_s.o _clrsbsi2_s.o _clrsbdi2_s.o _fixunssfsi_s.o _fixunsdfsi_s.o _fixunsxfsi_s.o _fixsfdi_s.o _fixdfdi_s.o _fixxfdi_s.o _fixunssfdi_s.o _fixunsdfdi_s.o _fixunsxfdi_s.o _floatdisf_s.o _floatdidf_s.o _floatdixf_s.o _floatundisf_s.o _floatundidf_s.o _floatundixf_s.o _divdi3_s.o _moddi3_s.o _divmoddi4_s.o _udivdi3_s.o _umoddi3_s.o _udivmoddi4_s.o _udiv_w_sdiv_s.o cpuinfo_s.o tf-signs_s.o sfp-exceptions_s.o addtf3_s.o divtf3_s.o eqtf2_s.o getf2_s.o letf2_s.o multf3_s.o negtf2_s.o subtf3_s.o unordtf2_s.o fixtfsi_s.o fixunstfsi_s.o floatsitf_s.o floatunsitf_s.o fixtfdi_s.o fixunstfdi_s.o floatditf_s.o floatunditf_s.o extendsftf2_s.o extenddftf2_s.o extendxftf2_s.o trunctfsf2_s.o trunctfdf2_s.o trunctfxf2_s.o enable-execute-stack_s.o unwind-dw2_s.o unwind-dw2-fde-dip_s.o unwind-sjlj_s.o unwind-c_s.o emutls_s.o libgcc.a -lc && rm -f 32/libgcc_s.so && if [ -f 32/libgcc_s.so.1 ]; then mv -f 32/libgcc_s.so.1 32/libgcc_s.so.1.backup; else true; fi && mv 32/libgcc_s.so.1.tmp 32/libgcc_s.so.1 && (echo "/* GNU ld script"; echo " Use the shared library, but some functions are only in"; echo " the static library. */"; echo "GROUP ( libgcc_s.so.1 -lgcc )" ) > 32/libgcc_s.so /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/OBJDIR/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.30' not found (required by /usr/bin/ld) collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make[5]: *** [Makefile:995: libgcc_s.so] Error 1 I've no idea what to, please help.
[Bug libstdc++/105681] libstdc++-v3 fails to build on msp430
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105681 --- Comment #2 from David Summers --- I suspect its the newlib includes that trigger the problem. As it I did one compile, where the configure grabbed the host includes (and 64bit system); and that compile I think worked fine. My problem though, as my target is a small 16bit cpu, I need the smallest library, and newlib nano seems to work well - so that will be the library on the machine where the code is run ..,
[Bug fortran/105687] New: non-contiguous data in assumed rank
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105687 Bug ID: 105687 Summary: non-contiguous data in assumed rank Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: martin.diehl at kuleuven dot be Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 53014 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53014=edit small reproducer When passing a strided array to a select-rank statement, the information that that data is non-contiguous is somehow lost. At least when further passing the data to an assumed-size function, the arriving data differs. Note: This might be related to bug 105674. This report illustrates the actual problem I've encountered (wrong data) while the other report shows intermediate results when trying to write a minimal reproducer. code program test integer, dimension(2,2), target :: dim_2 integer, dimension(:,:), pointer :: strided integer :: i dim_2 = reshape([(i,i=1,size(dim_2))],shape(dim_2)) strided => dim_2(1:1,:) print*, 'is_contiguous(strided)', is_contiguous(strided) print*, 'is_contiguous((strided))', is_contiguous((strided)) print*, '' print*, 'call show(strided)' call show(strided,size(strided)) print*, 'call show((strided))' call show((strided),size((strided))) print*, 'call assumed_rank(strided)' call assumed_rank(strided) print*, 'call assumed_rank((strided))' call assumed_rank((strided)) contains subroutine assumed_rank(dataset) integer, intent(in), dimension(..) :: dataset select rank(dataset) rank(2) print*, 'is contiguous in select', is_contiguous(dataset) print*, 'data in select', dataset call show(dataset,size(dataset)) end select print*, '' end subroutine assumed_rank subroutine show(dataset,s) integer, intent(in) :: s integer, intent(in), dimension(*) :: dataset print*, 'is contiguous in show', is_contiguous(dataset) print*, 'data in show', dataset(1:s) print*, '' end subroutine show end program test output == is_contiguous(strided) F is_contiguous((strided)) T call show(strided) is contiguous in show T data in show 1 3 call show((strided)) is contiguous in show T data in show 1 3 call assumed_rank(strided) is contiguous in select T data in select 1 3 is contiguous in show T data in show 1 2 call assumed_rank((strided)) is contiguous in select T data in select 1 3 is contiguous in show T data in show 1 3
[Bug sanitizer/105614] mips64: sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cpp:75:38: error: static assertion failed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614 --- Comment #8 from Chris Packham --- In terms of my proposed change which fixes the problem for GCC 11.3.0 it actually triggers the same assert on GCC 12.1.0. [ALL ]In file included from /home/bagas/cross/workdir/mips64-unknown/.build/mips64-unknown-linux-gnu/src/gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cpp:21: [ERROR] /home/bagas/cross/workdir/mips64-unknown/.build/mips64-unknown-linux-gnu/src/gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cpp:75:38: error: static assertion failed [ALL ] 75 | COMPILER_CHECK(struct_kernel_stat_sz == sizeof(struct stat)); [ALL ] |~~^~ [ALL ] /home/bagas/cross/workdir/mips64-unknown/.build/mips64-unknown-linux-gnu/src/gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h:348:44: note: in definition of macro 'COMPILER_CHECK' [ALL ] 348 | #define COMPILER_CHECK(pred) static_assert(pred, "") [ALL ] |^~~~ [ALL ] /home/bagas/cross/workdir/mips64-unknown/.build/mips64-unknown-linux-gnu/src/gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cpp:75:38: note: the comparison reduces to '(104 == 216)' [ALL ] 75 | COMPILER_CHECK(struct_kernel_stat_sz == sizeof(struct stat)); [ALL ] |~~^~ [ALL ] /home/bagas/cross/workdir/mips64-unknown/.build/mips64-unknown-linux-gnu/src/gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h:348:44: note: in definition of macro 'COMPILER_CHECK' [ALL ] 348 | #define COMPILER_CHECK(pred) static_assert(pred, "") [ALL ] |^~~~ [ERROR]make[5]: *** [Makefile:616: sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.lo] Error 1 It appears that with GCC 12 we now end up with different values for _MIPS_SIM. Removing my "fix" resolves the issue for GCC 12 but I suspect something like the suggestion from https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614#c7 might resolve the issue properly.
