[Bug sanitizer/113728] libasan uses incorrect prctl prototype

2024-02-26 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113728 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |MOVED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug sanitizer/113728] libasan uses incorrect prctl prototype

2024-02-17 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113728 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- This has been worked around in glibc. Should we close this issue?

[Bug target/113874] GNU2 TLS descriptor calls do not follow psABI on x86_64-linux-gnu

2024-02-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113874 --- Comment #20 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #19) > (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #9) > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #7) > > > > The __tls_get_addr call with the default approach potentially needs

[Bug target/113874] GNU2 TLS descriptor calls do not follow psABI on x86_64-linux-gnu

2024-02-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113874 --- Comment #18 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #16) > I do wonder why __tls_get_addr would have to call the overloaded malloc, can > we just not force-bind it to the glibc local malloc (and make sure that's >

[Bug target/113874] GNU2 TLS descriptor calls do not follow psABI on x86_64-linux-gnu

2024-02-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113874 --- Comment #11 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) > I think a glibc fix would be very much preferred. It's a bit of a maintenance nightmare because we have to update the code slightly each time new registers

[Bug target/113874] GNU2 TLS descriptor calls do not follow psABI on x86_64-linux-gnu

2024-02-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113874 --- Comment #9 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #7) > > The __tls_get_addr call with the default approach potentially needs to solve > > the same problem, doesn't it? > > Isn't __tls_get_addr called via the PLT entry?

[Bug target/113874] GNU2 TLS descriptor calls do not follow psABI on x86_64-linux-gnu

2024-02-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113874 --- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer --- > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4) > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3) > > > Created attachment 57385 [details] > > > A patch > > > > > > Try this. > > > > This doesn't work properly. To work

[Bug target/113874] GNU2 TLS descriptor calls do not follow psABI on x86_64-linux-gnu

2024-02-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113874 --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer --- Brought to the x86-64 ABI list: GCC and the GNU2 TLS descriptor call ABI

[Bug target/113874] New: GNU2 TLS descriptor calls do not follow psABI on x86_64-linux-gnu

2024-02-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Target: x86_64-linux-gnu Consider this test case: struct tls { long a, b, c, d

[Bug libgcc/113803] libgcc unwinder stops at calls to null function pointer on some targets

2024-02-07 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113803 --- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer --- I we knew that the last successfully executed instruction was an indirect call or branch (assumed to be tail call), we could use the return address at the top of the stack, for architectures where call

[Bug libgcc/113803] New: libgcc unwinder stops at calls to null function pointer on some targets

2024-02-07 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Originally reported as a glibc bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31349 If a null pointer is called

[Bug sanitizer/113728] New: libasan uses incorrect prctl prototype

2024-02-02 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
: sanitizer Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Target: powerpc64le

[Bug libgcc/113401] Memory (resource) leak in -ftrampoline-impl=heap

2024-01-22 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113401 --- Comment #8 from Florian Weimer --- Which version of the manual page are you looking at? https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/pthread_cleanup_push.3.html seems pretty clear about the scope-based nature (search for discussion of

[Bug libgcc/113401] Memory (resource) leak in -ftrampoline-impl=heap

2024-01-22 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113401 --- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer --- Sorry, pthread_cleanup_push is purely scope-based, like the existing handler. It cannot be used to push a handler to some unscoped cleanup function list that persists even after the current function

[Bug libgcc/113401] Memory (resource) leak in -ftrampoline-impl=heap

2024-01-22 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113401 --- Comment #4 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #3) > for platforms using pthreads as the underlying resource, then perhaps we can > do this without thread_atexit (which I do not see in many places) by using >

[Bug c++/112293] Enhance error reporting with fix-it for missing in gcc 14

2024-01-21 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112293 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9

[Bug libgcc/113403] [14 Regression] __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr should be dynamically linked by default

2024-01-16 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113403 --- Comment #12 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11) > Or put it in libgcc_eh.a and libgcc_s.so.1? Yes, that's what I came up with as well (conceptually, not a patch, and I only have a background in ELF), but

[Bug libgcc/113403] [14 Regression] __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr should be dynamically linked by default

2024-01-16 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113403 --- Comment #8 from Florian Weimer --- In the current implementation, as far as I understand it, avoiding multiple objects is just an optimization, not a correctness issue. STB_GNU_UNIQUE is for correctness (although I don't think we'd

[Bug libgcc/113403] __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr should be dynamically linked by default

2024-01-15 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113403 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- Weak symbols have no meaning for ELF DSOs, so this wouldn't work for libgcc_s on ELF targets. Instead we automatically link against dynamic libgcc_s if certain symbols not in libgcc.a are referenced.

[Bug libgcc/113401] Memory (resource) leak in -ftrampoline-impl=heap

2024-01-15 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113401 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #1) > (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #0) > > > The fix is to register a TLS destructor to > > deallocate that page, too. On glibc, that also fixes another

[Bug libgcc/113402] Incorrect symbol versions for __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr in libgcc_s.so.1

2024-01-15 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113402 --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer --- I should say I have only tested this on x86-64, but it is likely that this impacts other supported ABIs as well.

[Bug libgcc/113403] New: __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr should be dynamically linked by default

2024-01-15 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- There are hidden definitions of __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created

[Bug libgcc/113402] New: Incorrect symbol versions for __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr

2024-01-15 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- The symbols are about to be added to GCC 14, but they use a GCC_7.0.0 symbol version

[Bug target/113401] New: Memory (resource) leak in -ftrampoline-impl=heap

2024-01-15 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Target: x86_64-*, aarch64-* Consider this test program: #include #include #include static void *volatile compiler_barrier; void * thread_routine (void

[Bug target/113312] Update __attribute__((interrupt)) for Intel FRED

2024-01-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113312 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #12

[Bug target/103370] [12/13/14 Regression] Assembler error building glibc for ColdFire soft-float

2024-01-02 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103370 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #11

[Bug target/110627] m68k: “Tried to convert PC relative branch to absolute jump” while building iconvdata/iso-2022-jp.c from glibc

2024-01-02 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110627 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug libstdc++/113159] More robust std::sort for silly comparator functions

2023-12-28 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113159 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug target/113059] [14 regression] fftw fails tests for -O3 -m32 -march=znver2 since r14-6210-ge44ed92dbbe9d4

2023-12-22 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113059 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug c/113050] __atomic_* builtins should use -Wdiscarded-qualifiers instead of -Wincompatible-pointer-types

2023-12-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113050 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/113082] builtin transforms do not honor errno

2023-12-19 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113082 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Joseph - I wonder if the standard folks can be convinced to amend most > library function documentation as to not altering 'errno' (like memcpy, > strlen,

[Bug c/113050] __atomic_* builtins should use -Wdiscarded-qualifiers instead of -Wincompatible-pointer-types

2023-12-17 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113050 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fw at gcc dot gnu.org Ever

[Bug c/113050] -Wincompatible-pointer-types emitted as a warning, not an error, for __atomic_load

2023-12-17 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113050 --- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #1) > The warning should be -Wdiscared-qualifiers, which is not an error for C. > > What confused me is that the volatile qualifier is already accepted for the >

[Bug c/113050] -Wincompatible-pointer-types emitted as a warning, not an error, for __atomic_load

2023-12-17 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113050 --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer --- The warning should be -Wdiscared-qualifiers, which is not an error for C. What confused me is that the volatile qualifier is already accepted for the first argument. I believe it's valid for the second

[Bug preprocessor/110558] __has_include argument expansion results in unexpected filename

2023-12-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110558 --- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer --- It tries to read "my. header.h" for some reason, even though the MAKE_INCLUDE_PATH macro produces "my.header.h" in other contexts (not just in #include directives). I doubt this is related to bug 80753.

[Bug c/112954] New: Spelling hint for typos in parameter types in function prototypes

2023-12-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- This is used to be accepted with a warning as a function declaration without a prototype, treating “int32t

[Bug tree-optimization/112831] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in type_has_mode_precision_p, at tree.h:6767

2023-12-03 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112831 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- Created attachment 56776 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56776=edit valgrind output

[Bug tree-optimization/112831] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in type_has_mode_precision_p, at tree.h:6767

2023-12-03 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112831 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fweimer at redhat dot com |fw at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libgcc/109289] Conflicting types for built-in functions in libgcc/emutls.c

2023-12-02 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109289 --- Comment #4 from Florian Weimer --- What I can I do here to help? What's an easy emutls target to build?

[Bug libgcc/109289] Conflicting types for built-in functions in libgcc/emutls.c

2023-12-01 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109289 --- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer --- Jan, do you actually experience a build failure? The part you quoted only shows warnings. Thomas, the safe thing to do would be to use __builtin_calloc and __builtin_realloc in those spots because it

[Bug c/108476] Please turn -Wreturn-type on by default for C

2023-11-30 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108476 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug c/96284] Outdated C features should be made errors with newer standards

2023-11-30 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96284 Bug 96284 depends on bug 91093, which changed state. Bug 91093 Summary: Error on implicit int by default https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91093 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/91093] Error on implicit int by default

2023-11-30 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91093 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c/91092] Error on implicit function declarations by default

2023-11-30 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91092 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/96284] Outdated C features should be made errors with newer standards

2023-11-30 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96284 Bug 96284 depends on bug 106416, which changed state. Bug 106416 Summary: -Wint-conversion should be an error, not a pedwarn https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106416 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/106416] -Wint-conversion should be an error, not a pedwarn

2023-11-30 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106416 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug middle-end/32667] block copy with exact overlap is expanded as memcpy

2023-11-28 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32667 --- Comment #55 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to post+gcc from comment #52) > For the point discussed earlier with the `restrict` in the musl memcpy, I > had another look at the definition of `restrict` and it's not entirely clear > to me

[Bug middle-end/32667] block copy with exact overlap is expanded as memcpy

2023-11-23 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32667 --- Comment #32 from Florian Weimer --- There's this in standards.texi: Most of the compiler support routines used by GCC are present in @file{libgcc}, but there are a few exceptions. GCC requires the freestanding environment provide

[Bug c++/111918] #pragma GCC diagnostic pop does not restore error status of -Wnarrowing

2023-10-22 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111918 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- It does not work. I think the problem is the quoted reset code with old_kind. It was introduced in r5-2858 to fix PR59304. It's necessary because global warning options serve a dual purpose: recording

[Bug c++/111918] #pragma GCC diagnostic pop does not restore permerror status of -Wnarrowing

2023-10-22 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111918 --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer --- diagnostic_classify_diagnostic overwrites DK_UNSPECIFIED in context->classify_diagnostic[OPT_Wnarrowing] with DK_WARNING here: /* Record the command-line status, so we can reset it back on DK_POP.

[Bug c++/111918] New: #pragma GCC diagnostic pop does not restore permerror status of -Wnarrowing

2023-10-22 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
: diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org CC: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org, jason at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Consider this test case

[Bug c/109827] Pointer/integer mismatch in ?: not covered by -Wint-conversion

2023-10-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109827 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/44209] [meta-bug] Some warnings are not linked to diagnostics options

2023-10-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209 Bug 44209 depends on bug 109827, which changed state. Bug 109827 Summary: Pointer/integer mismatch in ?: not covered by -Wint-conversion https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109827 What|Removed |Added

[Bug other/44209] [meta-bug] Some warnings are not linked to diagnostics options

2023-10-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209 Bug 44209 depends on bug 109826, which changed state. Bug 109826 Summary: Incompatible pointer types in ?: not covered by -Wincompatible-pointer-types https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109826 What|Removed

[Bug c/109826] Incompatible pointer types in ?: not covered by -Wincompatible-pointer-types

2023-10-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109826 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/109826] Incompatible pointer types in ?: not covered by -Wincompatible-pointer-types

2023-10-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109826 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fw at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/109827] Pointer/integer mismatch in ?: not covered by -Wint-conversion

2023-10-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109827 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fw at gcc dot gnu.org

[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 >

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

2023-10-10 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106101 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #28

[Bug c++/106310] [12/13 Regression] lookup after this-> seems wrong for dependent lookup since r12-6754-g30f2c22def739211

2023-09-08 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106310 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #14

[Bug target/110899] RFE: Attributes preserve_most and preserve_all

2023-08-08 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110899 --- Comment #10 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Michael Matz from comment #9) > > > I don't see how that helps. Imagine a preserve_all function foo that > > > calls > > > printf. How do you propose that 'foo' saves all parts of the SSE

[Bug target/110899] RFE: Attributes preserve_most and preserve_all

2023-08-07 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110899 --- Comment #8 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Michael Matz from comment #7) > > > Does the clang implementation take into account the various problematic > > > cases that arise when calling a normal function from a (say) preserve_all > >

[Bug target/110899] RFE: Attributes preserve_most and preserve_all

2023-08-07 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110899 --- Comment #5 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Michael Matz from comment #3) > For ABIs you generally want a good mix between caller- and callee-saved > registers. The x86-64 psABI didn't do that on the SSE regs for conscious, but >

[Bug target/110899] RFE: Attributes preserve_most and preserve_all

2023-08-07 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110899 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug libgcc/109712] [13 Regression] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-07-18 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libgcc/109712] [13 Regression] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-07-18 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712 --- Comment #35 from Florian Weimer --- Backport posted, along with the warning fix: [PATCH releases/gcc-13 1/2] libgcc: Fix eh_frame fast path in find_fde_tail [PATCH

[Bug target/110627] New: m68k: “Tried to convert PC relative branch to absolute jump” while building iconvdata/iso-2022-jp.c from glibc

2023-07-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Target: m68k-linux-gnu-coldfire-soft Created attachment

[Bug middle-end/110617] RFE: Add a diagnostic-only variant of nonnull attribute

2023-07-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110617 --- Comment #11 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #10) > But Zack's reason against using __nonnull is __nonnull may cause unwanted > optimizations to *the user code*. GCC already offers options to control function

[Bug middle-end/110617] RFE: Add a diagnostic-only variant of nonnull attribute

2023-07-11 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110617 --- Comment #9 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #6) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > > I think a -f... option to disable the code generation effects would make > > more sense than adding another

[Bug libgcc/110179] unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c:406: assignment makes integer from pointer without a cast

2023-07-10 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110179 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libgcc/110179] unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c:406: assignment makes integer from pointer without a cast

2023-07-10 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
|ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2023-07-10 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fw at gcc dot gnu.org See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi

[Bug libgcc/109712] [13 Regression] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-07-10 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712 --- Comment #33 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #32) > (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #31) > > Will propose a backport to 13 in ~2 weeks. > > Any news on the backport? There is aim to release GCC

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

2023-07-04 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
: diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Blocks: 99715 Target Milestone: --- If compiled with -Wall -Werror -O3, the code below produces

[Bug c/110442] New: IFUNC resolvers which use __builtin_cpu_supports crash with -fsanitize=address

2023-06-27 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- With -O2 -fsanitize=address, this code: “ #include void f1 (void) { puts ("f1"); } void f2 (void) {

[Bug analyzer/110172] Leak false positives from -fanalyzer with -fexceptions (even on C code)

2023-06-20 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110172 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug libgcc/109712] [13/14 Regression] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-06-07 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712 --- Comment #31 from Florian Weimer --- Will propose a backport to 13 in ~2 weeks.

[Bug libgcc/109712] [13/14 Regression] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-06-06 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
dot gnu.org |fw at gcc dot gnu.org Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED --- Comment #27 from Florian Weimer --- Patch posted: [PATCH] libgcc: Fix eh_frame fast path in find_fde_tail <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-June/620731.html>

[Bug libgcc/109712] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-06-05 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712 --- Comment #24 from Florian Weimer --- (With the missing ; added, of course.)

[Bug libgcc/109712] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-06-05 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712 --- Comment #23 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Thomas Neumann from comment #21) > It must be something more complex. value is small here (more precisely: 1888 > in the crashes later), which is not a valid pointer address. We probably >

[Bug libgcc/109712] Segmentation fault in linear_search_fdes

2023-06-05 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109712 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #20

[Bug c++/110000] GCC should implement exclude_from_explicit_instantiation

2023-05-28 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 --- Comment #7 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Nikolas Klauser from comment #6) > Does that make sense? Not quite. I was trying to suggest that you also need to suppress all inter-procedural analysis. This will inhibit quite a few useful

[Bug c++/110000] GCC should implement exclude_from_explicit_instantiation

2023-05-27 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug target/100811] Consider not omitting frame pointers by default on targets with many registers

2023-05-25 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100811 --- Comment #7 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) > I think aarch64 defaults to -fno-omit-frame-pointer anyway. > /* Disable fomit-frame-pointer by default. */ > { OPT_LEVELS_ALL,

[Bug c/109836] New: -Wpointer-sign must be enabled by default

2023-05-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Assignment between incompatible pointers is a constraint violation and has to be diagnosed in some way. If GCC does not want to error

[Bug c/109835] -Wincompatible-function-pointer-types as a subset of -Wincompatible-pointer-types?

2023-05-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109835 --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer --- Presumably the idea is to enable -Werror=incompatible-function-pointer-types (in spirit) because it is more severe than -Wincompatible-pointer-types? I'm not sure this is actually true. Your first example

[Bug c/95445] diagnose incompatible calls to functions declared without prototype

2023-05-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95445 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c/109826] Incompatible pointer types in ?: not covered by -Wincompatible-pointer-types

2023-05-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109826 --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer --- I guess the main issue here is that the common type void * for both the second and third operand is implicitly converted to many pointer types, including the original types of those operands. So while

[Bug c/109827] New: Pointer/integer mismatch in ?: not covered by -Wint-conversion

2023-05-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- This: int p; long *q; void * f1 (int x) { return x ? p : q; } void * f2 (int x) { return x ? q : p

[Bug c/109826] New: Incompatible pointer types in ?: not covered by -Wincompatible-pointer-types

2023-05-12 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
: diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- This: int *p; long *q; char * f (int x) { return x ? p : q; } warns as follows: warning

[Bug libgcc/109540] Y2038: GCC gthr-posix.h weakref symbol invoking function has impact on time values

2023-05-05 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=103133 CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #13 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10) > > If you have g

[Bug c/66425] (void) cast doesn't suppress __attribute__((warn_unused_result))

2023-04-24 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425 --- Comment #50 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #49) > All that means is for APIs for which cast to void as silencing is meant to > be ok should be using [[nodiscard]] rather than >

[Bug libstdc++/108969] [13/14 Regression] Initializing iostreams in the library needs a GLIBCXX_3.4.31 versioned symbol

2023-04-19 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108969 --- Comment #23 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #20) > So, when the @@GLIBCXX_3.4.31 alias is weak, at least the F36 linker puts > into the binary not just one but both symbols and so the aliasing isn't > broken.

[Bug libstdc++/108969] [13 Regression] Initializing iostreams in the library needs a GLIBCXX_3.4.31 versioned symbol

2023-02-28 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108969 --- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2) > --- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/globals_io.cc > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/globals_io.cc > @@ -43,6 +43,12 @@ > // In macro form: > //

[Bug target/104688] gcc and libatomic can use SSE for 128-bit atomic loads on Intel and AMD CPUs with AVX

2023-02-15 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104688 --- Comment #30 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #29) > (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #28) > > Maybe this belongs in the ABI manual? For example, the POWER ABI says that > > memcpy needs to work on

[Bug sanitizer/108777] Add support for --param asan-kernel-mem-intrinsic-prefix=1

2023-02-13 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108777 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug c/108694] need a new warning option for preparing migration to ISO C 23

2023-02-07 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108694 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug sanitizer/100114] libasan built against latest glibc doesn't work

2023-02-06 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100114 --- Comment #13 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Alexander Enaldiev from comment #12) > But here I see status 'RESOLVED FIXED'. Do you presume, my today's issue > isn't connected? It could still be the same bug. It's supposed to be fixed

[Bug libgcc/108433] canadian cross aarch64/x86_64/aarch64 fails to build

2023-01-17 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108433 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug tree-optimization/107608] [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c and pr95115.c

2023-01-16 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107608 --- Comment #35 from Florian Weimer --- I backported the fixes for building glibc to 2.34 last week, I really expect the testsuite to be clean there (on x86-64), and on later releases as well.

[Bug libgcc/71744] Concurrently throwing exceptions is not scalable

2023-01-08 Thread fw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71744 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

  1   2   3   4   5   >