[Bug c++/111771] Incorrect "is used uninitialized" warning, as if zero-initialization didn't propagate through user-provided default constructors

2023-10-11 Thread iamsupermouse at mail dot ru via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111771 --- Comment #2 from Egor --- Before calling A's constructor, it will zero `x` anyway. I was also surprised when I learned this yesterday, but it's what the standard says. 1. `()` performs value-initialization on B:

[Bug testsuite/111427] [14 regression] gfortran.dg/vect/pr60510.f fails after r14-3999-g3c834d85f2ec42

2023-10-11 Thread linkw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111427 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/111367] Error: operand out of range (0x1391c is not between 0xffffffffffff8000 and 0x7fff)

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111367 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:530babc2058be5f2b06b1541384e7b730c368b93 commit r14-4582-g530babc2058be5f2b06b1541384e7b730c368b93 Author: Kewen Lin Date: Thu Oct

[Bug testsuite/111427] [14 regression] gfortran.dg/vect/pr60510.f fails after r14-3999-g3c834d85f2ec42

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111427 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:610b845a426e26fa86724e5c9d6f74c7a4baf741 commit r14-4581-g610b845a426e26fa86724e5c9d6f74c7a4baf741 Author: Kewen Lin Date: Thu Oct

[Bug target/109812] GraphicsMagick resize is a lot slower in GCC 13.1 vs Clang 16 on Intel Raptor Lake

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109812 --- Comment #19 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1e127de18dbee47b88fa0ce74a1c7f4d658dc68 commit r14-4571-ge1e127de18dbee47b88fa0ce74a1c7f4d658dc68 Author: Zhang, Jun Date: Fri

[Bug target/111778] PowerPC constant code change uses an undefined shift

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111778 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- On the date. It is the author date vs commit date. You can see that here https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=8f1a70a4fbcc6441c70da60d4ef6db1e5635e18a .

[Bug target/108315] -mcpu=power10 changes ABI

2023-10-11 Thread rui314 at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108315 --- Comment #20 from Rui Ueyama --- Last time I tried, mold-produced binaries crash on a real POWER10 machine, but I couldn't debug it due to some issue (gdb's issue or something but I don't remember exactly what that was.) Let me try again

[Bug rtl-optimization/102147] IRA dependent on 32-bit vs 64-bit pointer size

2023-10-11 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102147 --- Comment #9 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to CVS Commits from comment #8) > The master branch has been updated by Vladimir Makarov > : > > https://gcc.gnu.org/g:51ca05031959d3accffe873e87d4bc4fbd22e9e9 > > commit

[Bug target/108315] -mcpu=power10 changes ABI

2023-10-11 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108315 --- Comment #19 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Rui Ueyama from comment #11) > I'll try to add a POWER10 support to mold using Qemu. I noticed some Power10 mold code was committed in March. Does that mean this is "fixed" in mold now? If

[Bug target/111778] PowerPC constant code change uses an undefined shift

2023-10-11 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111778 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |major Priority|P3

[Bug target/111778] New: PowerPC constant code change uses an undefined shift

2023-10-11 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111778 Bug ID: 111778 Summary: PowerPC constant code change uses an undefined shift Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/94889] Negate function not getting optimised to bitwise not

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94889 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug rtl-optimization/26190] combine misses some distributivity

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26190 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug rtl-optimization/18395] [meta-bug] combine needs to be templatized like a peepholer

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18395 Bug 18395 depends on bug 26190, which changed state. Bug 26190 Summary: combine misses some distributivity https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26190 What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/88808] bitwise operators on AVX512 masks fail to use the new mask instructions

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88808 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/111777] [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread law at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[no subject]

2023-10-11 Thread ปวีณา พีเอสเครดิต via Gcc-bugs
บริการสินเชื่ออนุมัติง่ายทันใจ สำหรับท่านเจ้าของกิจการที่ต้องการทุนไปหมุนเวียนในธุรกิจและขยายธุรกิจของท่าน ⏩ เอกสารไม่ยุ่งยาก อนุมัติไว วงเงินสูง 5 ล้านบาท ⏩ มีที่จัดตั้งกิจการ บริษัท หจก.ชัดเจนสามารถตรวจสอบได้ ⏩ ไม่ต้องใช้หลักทรัพย์ ⏩ ติดแบล็คลิสเครดิตบูโรกู้ได้จริง 100 % ⏰ ใช้เวลาแค่ 30 นาที

[Bug middle-end/111777] [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to seurer from comment #3) > Note: "mary.benn...@embecosm.com" does not work for a CC address and I > don't see another Mary Bennett. I added Jeff to the CC who committed the patch upon Mary so

[Bug middle-end/111777] [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 --- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- Oops, wrong system. On the failing one it shows: makeinfo (GNU texinfo) 5.1

[Bug middle-end/111777] [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Build||powerpc64-linux-gnu

[Bug middle-end/111777] [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- We currently require texinfo 4.7: https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html

[Bug middle-end/111777] [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Waht version of makeinfo/texinfo is installed there?

[Bug middle-end/111777] [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||build, documentation

[Bug bootstrap/111777] New: [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849

2023-10-11 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111777 Bug ID: 111777 Summary: [14 regression] build breaks after r14-4558-g400efdddf3d849 Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug analyzer/111537] ICE: in set_cell_span, at text-art/table.cc:148 with D front-end and -fanalyzer

2023-10-11 Thread ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111537 --- Comment #8 from Iain Buclaw --- Looking at C++ FE, I see they construct the string literal using build_string (4, "foo") because I can see the terminating 0 in the pretty-printed string. --- unit-size align:8

[Bug tree-optimization/111694] [13/14 Regression] Wrong behavior for signbit of negative zero when optimizing

2023-10-11 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111694 Andrew Macleod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/111694] [13/14 Regression] Wrong behavior for signbit of negative zero when optimizing

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111694 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f0efc4b25cba1bd35b08b7dfbab0f8fc81b55c66 commit r13-7945-gf0efc4b25cba1bd35b08b7dfbab0f8fc81b55c66 Author: Andrew

[Bug modula2/111756] Re-building all-gcc after source changes fails to link

2023-10-11 Thread gaius at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111756 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/111776] ICE on delete expression with multiple viable destroying operator delete

2023-10-11 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111776 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Last

[Bug analyzer/111537] ICE: in set_cell_span, at text-art/table.cc:148 with D front-end and -fanalyzer

2023-10-11 Thread ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111537 --- Comment #7 from Iain Buclaw --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #5) > Is D correctly building that string_cst? Are D strings 0-terminated? Yes, D strings are 0-terminated. The way I've done it is, the string is constructed using

[Bug target/111774] boringssl performance gap between clang and gcc for x25519 operations

2023-10-11 Thread daniel at binaryparadox dot net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111774 --- Comment #3 from cpu --- > What happens if you enable the above for GCC too? That appears to have helped, but not closed the gap: ``` Did 39600 Ed25519 key generation operations in 1001716us (39532.2 ops/sec) Did 41000 Ed25519 signing

[Bug c++/111776] New: ICE on delete expression with multiple viable destroying operator delete

2023-10-11 Thread leni536 at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111776 Bug ID: 111776 Summary: ICE on delete expression with multiple viable destroying operator delete Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/111774] boringssl performance gap between clang and gcc for x25519 operations

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111774 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-linux-gnu --- Comment #2 from

[Bug target/111774] boringssl performance gap between clang and gcc for x25519 operations

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111774 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/108697] constructing a path-range-query is expensive

2023-10-11 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108697 Andrew Macleod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/104351] ICE in gfc_generate_initializer, at fortran/expr.cc:5140

2023-10-11 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104351 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot

[Bug middle-end/111775] New: -Wstrict-flex-arrays missing diagnostics with unions

2023-10-11 Thread crrodriguez at opensuse dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111775 Bug ID: 111775 Summary: -Wstrict-flex-arrays missing diagnostics with unions Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/111774] New: boringssl performance gap between clang and gcc for x25519 operations

2023-10-11 Thread daniel at binaryparadox dot net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111774 Bug ID: 111774 Summary: boringssl performance gap between clang and gcc for x25519 operations Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug analyzer/111537] ICE: in set_cell_span, at text-art/table.cc:148 with D front-end and -fanalyzer

2023-10-11 Thread dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111537 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- Oops; the above got truncated; the string_cst prints as follows in gdb (gdb) pt string_cst unit-size align:8 warn_if_not_align:0 symtab:0 alias-set -1 canonical-type

[Bug analyzer/111537] ICE: in set_cell_span, at text-art/table.cc:148 with D front-end and -fanalyzer

2023-10-11 Thread dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111537 --- Comment #5 from David Malcolm --- It's complaining about the read from the string literal. If I change the string in the reproducer from "hello world" to "foo", I see: (gdb) pt string_cst unit-size align:8

[Bug analyzer/111537] ICE: in set_cell_span, at text-art/table.cc:148 with D front-end and -fanalyzer

2023-10-11 Thread dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111537 --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3) > Thanks; that reproducer works for me. ...or rather, demonstrates the ICE in a way that I can see in the debugger.

[Bug analyzer/111537] ICE: in set_cell_span, at text-art/table.cc:148 with D front-end and -fanalyzer

2023-10-11 Thread dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111537 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-10-11 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/111771] Incorrect "is used uninitialized" warning, as if zero-initialization didn't propagate through user-provided default constructors

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111771 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Did you miss that the implicit B constructor will just call A's constructor ?

[Bug c/111769] Annotate function definitions and calls to facilitate link-time checking

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111769 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- IIRC there was a bug about this specific thing which was closed as fixed with the use of LTO ...

[Bug tree-optimization/111282] `a & (b ^ ~a)` (or `a & ~(a ^ b)`) not optimized to `a & b` in gimple

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111282 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/111282] `a & (b ^ ~a)` (or `a & ~(a ^ b)`) not optimized to `a & b` in gimple

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111282 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e8d418df3dc609f27487deece796d4aa69004b8c commit r14-4561-ge8d418df3dc609f27487deece796d4aa69004b8c Author: Andrew Pinski Date:

[Bug analyzer/111537] ICE: in set_cell_span, at text-art/table.cc:148 with D front-end and -fanalyzer

2023-10-11 Thread ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111537 --- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #1) > Am trying to reproduce locally, but when I run this in my BUILDDIR/gcc: > ./gdc -B. -S -fanalyzer oob.d > I get: > d21: error: cannot find source code for

[Bug fortran/90608] Inline non-scalar minloc/maxloc calls

2023-10-11 Thread mikael at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90608 --- Comment #10 from Mikael Morin --- (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #8) > (...) that is it was using too loops in a row in some cases. > ... *two* loops in a row ... (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #9) > > Thanks Mikael!

[Bug c++/111773] Inconsistent optimization of replaced operator new()

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111773 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I think both of these are valid things to do according to the standard and the requirements of operator new.

[Bug c++/111773] New: Inconsistent optimization of replaced operator new()

2023-10-11 Thread vlad at solidsands dot nl via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111773 Bug ID: 111773 Summary: Inconsistent optimization of replaced operator new() Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug regression/111709] [13/14 Regression] Miscompilation of sysdeps/ieee754/dbl-64/s_fma.c

2023-10-11 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111709 --- Comment #11 from John David Anglin --- This is proving difficult to bisect due to _Floatn issues. I know commit b85e79dce149df68b92ef63ca2a40ff1dfa61396 is good and commit b939a5cc4143908ddda4b85a848c313136ff6e0c is bad. The following

[Bug rtl-optimization/111772] New: ICE on gfortran.dg/transpose_conjg_1.f90 in regrename.cc

2023-10-11 Thread fkastl at suse dot cz via Gcc-bugs
ported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 14.0.0 20231011 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug c++/111771] New: Incorrect "is used uninitialized" warning, as if zero-initialization didn't propagate through user-provided default constructors

2023-10-11 Thread iamsupermouse at mail dot ru via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111771 Bug ID: 111771 Summary: Incorrect "is used uninitialized" warning, as if zero-initialization didn't propagate through user-provided default constructors Product: gcc

[Bug target/111768] X86: -march=native does not support alder lake big.little cache infor correctly

2023-10-11 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111768 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov --- I think it's similar to attempting -march=native under distcc, which is already warned about on Gentoo wiki: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Distcc The difference here is that Intel so far decided to make

[Bug tree-optimization/111766] Missed optimization with __builtin_unreachable and ands

2023-10-11 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111766 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Macleod --- Imports: bb_3(D) Exports: _2 bb_3(D) _2 : bb_3(D)(I) bb_3(D) [irange] int [0, 3] MASK 0x3 VALUE 0x0 : _2 = bb_3(D) & 1; if (_2 == 0) goto ; [INV] else goto ; [INV]

[Bug target/111768] X86: -march=native does not support alder lake big.little cache infor correctly

2023-10-11 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111768 --- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu --- I checked Alderlake's L1 cachesize and it is indeed 48, and L1 cachesize in alderlake_cost is set to 32. But then again, we have a lot of different platforms that share the same cost and they may have

[Bug tree-optimization/111764] [11/12/13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

2023-10-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111764 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- /* Try to simplify the vector initialization by applying an adjustment after the reduction has been performed. */ if (!reduc_info->reused_accumulator

[Bug tree-optimization/111764] [11/12/13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

2023-10-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111764 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/111768] X86: -march=native does not support alder lake big.little cache infor correctly

2023-10-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111768 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- I'd say "don't do this" (bootstrap with -march=native). Alternatively use a taskset to confine to either big or little cores.

[Bug c/111769] Annotate function definitions and calls to facilitate link-time checking

2023-10-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111769 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- If you compile with debug info enabled the info should be already there, just nothing looks at this (and mismatches) at link time.

[Bug target/111768] X86: -march=native does not support alder lake big.little cache infor correctly

2023-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111768 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I think on those soc we should ignore the cache info or set it to some common value between the 2.

[Bug tree-optimization/111770] predicated loads inactive lane values not modelled

2023-10-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111770 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-10-11 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/111770] New: predicated loads inactive lane values not modelled

2023-10-11 Thread tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111770 Bug ID: 111770 Summary: predicated loads inactive lane values not modelled Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal

[Bug modula2/111675] Incorrect parameter value passed when attempting to pass a field of a packed record as a parameter

2023-10-11 Thread gaius at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111675 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug modula2/111675] Incorrect parameter value passed when attempting to pass a field of a packed record as a parameter

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111675 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2b783fe2e8103d97db7c5d6c1514ba16091f39f6 commit r14-4556-g2b783fe2e8103d97db7c5d6c1514ba16091f39f6 Author: Gaius Mulley Date:

[Bug fortran/90608] Inline non-scalar minloc/maxloc calls

2023-10-11 Thread tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90608 --- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina --- (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #8) > Created attachment 56091 [details] > Rough patch > > Here is a rough patch to make the scalarizer support minloc calls. > It regresses on minloc_1.f90 at

[Bug fortran/90608] Inline non-scalar minloc/maxloc calls

2023-10-11 Thread mikael at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90608 --- Comment #8 from Mikael Morin --- Created attachment 56091 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56091=edit Rough patch Here is a rough patch to make the scalarizer support minloc calls. It regresses on minloc_1.f90 at least,

[Bug c/111769] New: Annotate function definitions and calls to facilitate link-time checking

2023-10-11 Thread david at westcontrol dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111769 Bug ID: 111769 Summary: Annotate function definitions and calls to facilitate link-time checking Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug bootstrap/111768] Bootstrap failure with -march=native on Intel Alder Lake CPUs because of differing cache sizes

2023-10-11 Thread sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111768 Sam James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug bootstrap/111768] New: Bootstrap failure with -march=native on Intel Alder Lake CPUs because of differing cache sizes

2023-10-11 Thread sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111768 Bug ID: 111768 Summary: Bootstrap failure with -march=native on Intel Alder Lake CPUs because of differing cache sizes Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/111528] aarch64: Test gfortran.dg/pr80494.f90 fails with -fstack-protector-strong with gcc-13 since r13-7813-gb96e66fd4ef3e3

2023-10-11 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111528 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/111760] risc-v regression: COND_LEN_* incorrect fold/simplify in middle-end

2023-10-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111760 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug preprocessor/111767] New: cast __mmask32 parameter to __mmask8 from macro function

2023-10-11 Thread joony.wie at samsung dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111767 Bug ID: 111767 Summary: cast __mmask32 parameter to __mmask8 from macro function Product: gcc Version: 13.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/110701] [14 Regression] Wrong code at -O1/2/3/s on x86_64-linux-gnu

2023-10-11 Thread roger at nextmovesoftware dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110701 Roger Sayle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/111519] [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d

2023-10-11 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/111519] [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:16a4df27436c8f594a784028591dd3e47cabe5c0 commit r13-7944-g16a4df27436c8f594a784028591dd3e47cabe5c0 Author: Jakub Jelinek

[Bug tree-optimization/111519] [13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r13-455-g1fe04c497d

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e75bf1985fdc9a5d3a307882a9251d8fd6e93def commit r14-4552-ge75bf1985fdc9a5d3a307882a9251d8fd6e93def Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/106245] Failure to optimize (u8)(a << 7) >> 7 pattern to a & 1

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106245 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c41492423140e1573df68d1c98e825ae7593741f commit r14-4551-gc41492423140e1573df68d1c98e825ae7593741f Author: Roger Sayle Date: Wed

[Bug middle-end/101955] (signed<<31)>>31 should become -(signed&1)

2023-10-11 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101955 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c41492423140e1573df68d1c98e825ae7593741f commit r14-4551-gc41492423140e1573df68d1c98e825ae7593741f Author: Roger Sayle Date: Wed

[Bug tree-optimization/111760] risc-v regression: COND_LEN_* incorrect fold/simplify in middle-end

2023-10-11 Thread rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111760 --- Comment #6 from Robin Dapp --- Yes, thanks for filing this bug separately. The patch doesn't disable all of those optimizations, of course I paid special attention not mess up with them. The difference here is that we valueize, add

[Bug target/106101] [12 Regression] ICE in reg_bitfield_target_p since r12-4428-g147ed0184f403b

2023-10-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106101 --- Comment #31 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #30) > And you can even make it a pointer to a pointer of char to hit the same bug > to get around the even more fuzziness of freeing an int rather than a >