[Bug c++/110555] New: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault when using std::ranges::range auto as a template parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110555 Bug ID: 110555 Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault when using std::ranges::range auto as a template parameter Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status:

[Bug tree-optimization/110554] veclowering introduces invalid wide Boolean values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110554 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/110554] veclowering introduces invalid wide Boolean values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110554 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Actually the issue is: signed-boolean:32 _8 = _7 > 1; That is not [-1,0] but still [0,1] ... (VRP says it is too). Let me see where that is built.

[Bug tree-optimization/110554] veclowering introduces invalid wide Boolean values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110554 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- So originally we have: signed-boolean:32 _8 = _7 > 1; _Bool _9 = (_Bool) _8; (int) _9; I think if we swap around where the convert was, it will fix the issue. That is: (bit_and (convert @0) {

[Bug tree-optimization/110554] veclowering introduces invalid wide Boolean values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110554 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- It is this one: /* Handle cases of two conversions in a row. */ (for ocvt (convert float fix_trunc) (for icvt (convert float) (simplify (ocvt (icvt@1 @0)) ... /* A truncation to an unsigned

[Bug tree-optimization/110531] Vect: slp_done_for_suggested_uf is not initialized in tree-vect-loop.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110531 Hao Liu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/110554] veclowering introduces invalid wide Boolean values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110554 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||internal-improvement,

[Bug tree-optimization/110554] more invalid wide Boolean values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110554 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/110554] New: more invalid wide Boolean values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110554 Bug ID: 110554 Summary: more invalid wide Boolean values Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/110515] [12/13/14 Regression] llvm-15.0.7 possibly invalid code on -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110515 --- Comment #7 from Sergei Trofimovich --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6) > Turning off PRE also allows it to pass but I guess it's the same as with SRA. > -fno-strict-aliasing also helps, -fno-ipa-modref doesn't. I suspect >

[Bug c++/110552] ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110552 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Looks like it is a lambda inside a decltype is causing it. The reason why I say that is if I change __apply_fn's operator() not to take a second argument and

[Bug fortran/103796] ICE in gfc_conv_expr_val, at fortran/trans-expr.c:9446 since r8-6395-gf8862a1b2afad9d1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103796 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/110552] ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110552 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-07-04 Keywords|

[Bug c++/110552] ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110552 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 55471 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55471=edit changed slightly to produce valid code

[Bug c++/110552] ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110552 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 55470 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55470=edit reduced but invalid code This is the reduced testcase I got but it became invalid code; maybe the original is

[Bug c++/110552] ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110552 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||c++-lambda Blocks|

[Bug target/110438] generating all-ones zmm needs dep-breaking pxor before ternlog

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110438 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov --- Patch available: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/8f73371d732237ed54ede44b7bd88...@ispras.ru/T/#u

[Bug c++/110552] ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110552 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- reducing ...

[Bug sanitizer/110553] -fsanitize=undefined needs -latomic on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110553 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I wonder what function uses 64bit values for atomics in ubsan. I only saw 32bit values (well I saw pointers and size_t in backtrace and 32bit in ubsan).

[Bug sanitizer/110553] New: -fsanitize=undefined needs -latomic on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110553 Bug ID: 110553 Summary: -fsanitize=undefined needs -latomic on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/110551] [11/12/13/14 Regression] an extra mov when doing 128bit multiply

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110551 --- Comment #3 from Moncef Mechri --- > Please next time attach (which you can do paste in the box) or paste inline > the testcase rather than just link to godbolt . Noted. Apologies. > It is an older regression though. > ``` > #include > >

[Bug c++/110552] New: ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110552 Bug ID: 110552 Summary: ICE on valid code in maybe_instantiate_noexcept Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/110551] [11/12/13/14 Regression] an extra mov when doing 128bit multiply

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110551 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords|

[Bug target/110551] [11/12/13/14 regression] Suboptimal codegen for 128 bits multiplication on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110551 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 55468 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55468=edit testcase Please next time attach (which you can do paste in the box) or paste inline the testcase rather than just

[Bug c/110376] Wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110376 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Shaohua Li from comment #3) > You post a commit for fixing this bug. Does this mean this report is not a > DUP of 110228? The commit was just a testcase (more testcases the better really);

[Bug rtl-optimization/110551] New: [11 / 12 / 13 /14 regression] Suboptimal codegen for 128 bits multiplication on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110551 Bug ID: 110551 Summary: [11 / 12 / 13 /14 regression] Suboptimal codegen for 128 bits multiplication on x86_64 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/110487] [12/13/14 Regression] invalid wide Boolean value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|12.4|14.0 Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/110487] [12/13/14 Regression] invalid wide Boolean value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487 --- Comment #13 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71b68cc559b5d30d07e6b507df7cc6d008f56aad commit r14-2299-g71b68cc559b5d30d07e6b507df7cc6d008f56aad Author: Andrew Pinski Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/110487] [12/13/14 Regression] invalid wide Boolean value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110487 --- Comment #12 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2e5c1b123d5bc4b7eca91f1eb2dab88d0bcdfcfa commit r14-2298-g2e5c1b123d5bc4b7eca91f1eb2dab88d0bcdfcfa Author: Andrew Pinski Date:

[Bug other/110550] New: libintl build without -fPIC even though --enable-shared is configured

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110550 Bug ID: 110550 Summary: libintl build without -fPIC even though --enable-shared is configured Product: gcc Version: 12.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libstdc++/109703] [12/13/14 Regression] __builtin_unreachable() reached since r13-6915-gbf78b43873b0b7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109703 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vaibhavawale3 at gmail dot com ---

[Bug libstdc++/110549] Undefined behavior sanitizer triggered in basic_string::_M_construct that uses iterator overload with input iterator tag

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110549 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/110549] New: Undefined behavior sanitizer triggered in basic_string::_M_construct that uses iterator overload with input iterator tag

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110549 Bug ID: 110549 Summary: Undefined behavior sanitizer triggered in basic_string::_M_construct that uses iterator overload with input iterator tag Product: gcc

[Bug target/106895] powerpc64 unable to specify even/odd register pairs in extended inline asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106895 --- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #6) > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5) > > Constraints are completely the wrong tool for this. Just use modes, which > > *are* the right tool? >

[Bug c/110376] Wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110376 --- Comment #3 from Shaohua Li --- You post a commit for fixing this bug. Does this mean this report is not a DUP of 110228?

[Bug c++/110523] [14 Regression] ICE in redeclare_class_template, at cp/pt.cc:6391 on json-3.11.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110523 --- Comment #8 from David Binderman --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #7) > I have tried to start a git bisect and the current range is > g:f3d87219dd502d5c .. g:9757e4440bd8755d. > > This is 15 commits. I messed this one up and

[Bug tree-optimization/110546] Function clone not treated as valid allocator with -Wmismatched-dealloc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110546 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||11.1.0, 12.1.0

[Bug fortran/110548] New: Segfault with optional argument and OpenMP tasks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110548 Bug ID: 110548 Summary: Segfault with optional argument and OpenMP tasks Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/110547] New: Improper finalization calls with OpenMP tasks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110547 Bug ID: 110547 Summary: Improper finalization calls with OpenMP tasks Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #34 from Sergei Trofimovich --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #33) > On Tue, 4 Jul 2023, slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 > > > > --- Comment #32 from Sergei

[Bug c++/107437] nested generic lambdas fail requiring unneded captures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107437 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/110542] use of allocated storage after deallocation in a constant expression: std::array of std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110542 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > + val = std::move(*__old_start); If this is changed to just val = *__old_start then the error comes back. 110542.cc: In function 'int

[Bug libstdc++/110542] use of allocated storage after deallocation in a constant expression: std::array of std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110542 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- The GCC error is fixed by this change: --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/vector.tcc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/vector.tcc @@ -701,6 +701,10 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER pointer

[Bug tree-optimization/110546] New: Function clone not treated as valid allocator with -Wmismatched-dealloc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110546 Bug ID: 110546 Summary: Function clone not treated as valid allocator with -Wmismatched-dealloc Product: gcc Version: 13.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug libstdc++/110542] use of allocated storage after deallocation in a constant expression: std::array of std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110542 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- I don't understand why GCC *doesn't* fail without the fix above, when that code clearly gets used during constant evaluation and the runtime version of that function *does* access objects outside their

[Bug libstdc++/110542] use of allocated storage after deallocation in a constant expression: std::array of std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110542 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- There seem to be two separate bugs here, which I don't understand. The clang error is fixed by: --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_uninitialized.h +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_uninitialized.h @@

[Bug libstdc++/110542] use of allocated storage after deallocation in a constant expression: std::array of std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110542 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug gcov-profile/110545] New: gcda files not generated for some shared libs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110545 Bug ID: 110545 Summary: gcda files not generated for some shared libs Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/110544] New: [14 regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr71264.c ICEs after r14-2150

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110544 Bug ID: 110544 Summary: [14 regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr71264.c ICEs after r14-2150 Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #33 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 4 Jul 2023, slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 > > --- Comment #32 from Sergei Trofimovich --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #32 from Sergei Trofimovich --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #29) > I can't reproduce the original failure on trunk or with GCC 13.1, but the > testcase from comment#16 is now fixed. I also cannot reproduce the testcase

[Bug c++/92562] Allow [[maybe_unused]] in class member declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92562 Marc Mutz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marc.mutz at hotmail dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug analyzer/110543] New: RFE: Add optional trim of the analyzer diagnostics through system headers.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110543 Bug ID: 110543 Summary: RFE: Add optional trim of the analyzer diagnostics through system headers. Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/110523] [14 Regression] ICE in redeclare_class_template, at cp/pt.cc:6391 on json-3.11.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110523 --- Comment #7 from David Binderman --- I have tried to start a git bisect and the current range is g:f3d87219dd502d5c .. g:9757e4440bd8755d. This is 15 commits.

[Bug libstdc++/110542] New: use of allocated storage after deallocation in a constant expression: std::array of std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110542 Bug ID: 110542 Summary: use of allocated storage after deallocation in a constant expression: std::array of std::vector Product: gcc Version: 13.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/110491] Wrong code at -O2 on x86_64-linux-gnu (a recent regression)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110491 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/110491] Wrong code at -O2 on x86_64-linux-gnu (a recent regression)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110491 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:819285ef10a87d663f8c181c06aa88d1d9f75aed commit r14-2296-g819285ef10a87d663f8c181c06aa88d1d9f75aed Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/110541] New: Invalid VEC_PERM_EXPR mask element size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110541 Bug ID: 110541 Summary: Invalid VEC_PERM_EXPR mask element size Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/110523] [14 Regression] ICE in redeclare_class_template, at cp/pt.cc:6391 on json-3.11.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110523 --- Comment #6 from David Binderman --- The only C++ related commit in that range is: commit db38b285ba61c5b888adc0d117177bfd774c1153 Author: Patrick Palka Date: Fri Jun 30 15:05:22 2023 -0400 c++: fix up caching of level lowered ttps

[Bug c/110491] Wrong code at -O2 on x86_64-linux-gnu (a recent regression)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110491 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug c++/110523] [14 Regression] ICE in redeclare_class_template, at cp/pt.cc:6391 on json-3.11.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110523 --- Comment #5 from David Binderman --- The compiler seems to break as follows: /home/dcb38/gcc/results.20230701/bin/gcc /home/dcb38/gcc/results.20230703.asan.ubsan/bin/gcc

[Bug c/110376] Wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110376 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d4800a23d8d14213f9e461cd47e97a5c7271b1a9 commit r14-2291-gd4800a23d8d14213f9e461cd47e97a5c7271b1a9 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #31 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #30) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #29) > > I can't reproduce the original failure on trunk or with GCC 13.1, but the > > testcase from comment#16 is now

[Bug c++/110523] [14 Regression] ICE in redeclare_class_template, at cp/pt.cc:6391 on json-3.11.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110523 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com ---

[Bug target/104914] [MIPS] wrong comparison with scrabbled int value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104914 --- Comment #5 from YunQiang Su --- Another possible fix is to emit a SLL for extendsidi2, but I am worrying about it may break something else.

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #30 from Zhendong Su --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #29) > I can't reproduce the original failure on trunk or with GCC 13.1, but the > testcase from comment#16 is now fixed. I also cannot reproduce the testcase > from

[Bug tree-optimization/110540] New: [14 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression since r14-1163-gd8b058d3ca4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110540 Bug ID: 110540 Summary: [14 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression since r14-1163-gd8b058d3ca4 Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/110531] Vect: slp_done_for_suggested_uf is not initialized in tree-vect-loop.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110531 --- Comment #11 from Kewen Lin --- (In reply to Hao Liu from comment #10) > > foo is just an example for not getting inlined, the point here is extra > > cost paid. > > My point is that the case is different from the original case in >

[Bug tree-optimization/110539] New: [14 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at since r14-338-g1dd154f6407

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110539 Bug ID: 110539 Summary: [14 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at since r14-338-g1dd154f6407 Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/110531] Vect: slp_done_for_suggested_uf is not initialized in tree-vect-loop.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110531 --- Comment #10 from Hao Liu --- > foo is just an example for not getting inlined, the point here is extra cost > paid. My point is that the case is different from the original case in tree-vect-loop.cc. For example, change the case as

[Bug tree-optimization/110538] New: [14 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression since r14-368-ge1366a7e4ce

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110538 Bug ID: 110538 Summary: [14 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression since r14-368-ge1366a7e4ce Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/110531] Vect: slp_done_for_suggested_uf is not initialized in tree-vect-loop.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110531 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Hao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c12ccf800fc7890925402d30a02f0fa9e2627cc commit r14-2290-g2c12ccf800fc7890925402d30a02f0fa9e2627cc Author: Hao Liu Date: Tue Jul 4

[Bug tree-optimization/101912] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|13.2|14.0

[Bug tree-optimization/97108] [10/11/12/13/14 Regression] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97108 Bug 97108 depends on bug 101912, which changed state. Bug 101912 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 101912, which changed state. Bug 101912 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/101912] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm in tzdb localtime.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101912 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 --- Comment #29 from Richard

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #28 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b083203f053f1666e9cc1ded2abdf4e1688d1ec0 commit r14-2289-gb083203f053f1666e9cc1ded2abdf4e1688d1ec0 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/110531] Vect: slp_done_for_suggested_uf is not initialized in tree-vect-loop.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110531 --- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin --- (In reply to Hao Liu from comment #7) > > int foo() { > > bool a = true; > > bool b; > > if (a || b) > > return 1; > > b = true; > > return 0; > > } > > > > still has the warning, it looks

[Bug target/104914] [MIPS] wrong comparison with scrabbled int value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104914 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/110436] [14 Regression] ICE in vectorizable_live_operation, at tree-vect-loop.cc:10170

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110436 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/110533] [x86-64] naked with -O0 and register-passed struct/int128 clobbers parameters/callee-saved regs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110533 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > >clobbering other parameters and callee-saved registers. > > > (insn 2 8 3 2 (set (reg:DI 84) > (reg:DI 5 di [ aD.2522 ])) "/app/example.cpp":3:25 -1 >

[Bug tree-optimization/110436] [14 Regression] ICE in vectorizable_live_operation, at tree-vect-loop.cc:10170

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110436 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:729aa4fa48d627c4344764676edad3b65d40a003 commit r14-2288-g729aa4fa48d627c4344764676edad3b65d40a003 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug target/104914] [MIPS] wrong comparison with scrabbled int value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104914 --- Comment #3 from YunQiang Su --- Ohhh, I think that the real problem is that: why DINS is used instead of INS when work with an INT?

[Bug tree-optimization/110531] Vect: slp_done_for_suggested_uf is not initialized in tree-vect-loop.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110531 --- Comment #7 from Hao Liu --- > int foo() { > bool a = true; > bool b; > if (a || b) > return 1; > b = true; > return 0; > } > > still has the warning, it looks something can be improved (guess we prefer > not to emit

[Bug tree-optimization/107004] [12 Regression] GCC12 warning in OOB access: array subscript is partly outside array bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107004 --- Comment #7 from sbouchex --- (In reply to sbouchex from comment #6) > The same testcase is failing on : > > [...] > g++ --version > g++ (GCC) 13.1.1 20230614 (Red Hat 13.1.1-4) > [...] > > [...] > [root@dev-sbo-eva-ol8 CorrCommon]# g++

[Bug tree-optimization/107004] [12 Regression] GCC12 warning in OOB access: array subscript is partly outside array bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107004 sbouchex changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sbouchex at infovista dot com --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/110495] fre introduces signed wrap for vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110495 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947 Bug 53947 depends on bug 110310, which changed state. Bug 110310 Summary: vector epilogue handling is inefficient https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110310 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/110310] vector epilogue handling is inefficient

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110310 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/110495] fre introduces signed wrap for vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110495 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f703d2fd3f03890a180e8cc04df087c208999e81 commit r14-2282-gf703d2fd3f03890a180e8cc04df087c208999e81 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/110310] vector epilogue handling is inefficient

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110310 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0682a32c026f1e246eb07bb8066abca4636f01d8 commit r14-2281-g0682a32c026f1e246eb07bb8066abca4636f01d8 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/110531] Vect: slp_done_for_suggested_uf is not initialized in tree-vect-loop.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110531 --- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin --- It's an arguable topic, I can't find the thread that previously some reviewers told me it's not always good to initialize the local variable. IIRC, the case is that I initialized one variable at the top, but

[Bug target/104914] [MIPS] wrong comparison with scrabbled int value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104914 YunQiang Su changed: What|Removed |Added CC||syq at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug middle-end/110228] [13/14 Regression] llvm-16 miscompiled due to an maybe uninitialized variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228 --- Comment #26 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Sergei Trofimovich from comment #24) > Trying to understand the failure mode here: > > In bug.c.033t.early_objsz I still see the explicit stores to LocalFlags: > >: > LookupFlags_15 =

[Bug target/110537] ICE for OpenMP loop with SVE (aarch64) intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110537 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug middle-end/101018] ICE when enabling OpenMP on a simple loop with SVE intrinsics (aarch64)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101018 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pgodbole at nvidia dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/110537] New: ICE for OpenMP loop with SVE (aarch64) intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110537 Bug ID: 110537 Summary: ICE for OpenMP loop with SVE (aarch64) intrinsics Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3