https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96636
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.1.2
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100170
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Meissner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5485e820cd0554886af282265198c7433c64c7b9
commit r12-2521-g5485e820cd0554886af282265198c7433c64c7b9
Author: Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87616
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Michael Gorbovitski from comment #2)
> Slightly simplified test case (no need for double-argument template):
here is one which is valid C++98 which shows even GCC 4.1.2 has the same ICE
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44282
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ondrej.kolacek at centrum dot
cz
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57227
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96553
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96552
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96636
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91099
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631
--- Comment #2 from fsb4000 at yandex dot ru ---
Sure.
$ g++ -c -std=c++20 -save-temps main.cpp
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=C:\tools\msys64\mingw64\bin\g++.exe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27775
--- Comment #5 from Rich Newman ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> Clang 3.0 also reject this, so I am not sure whether is actually valid, but
> the repeated messages are suspicious.
>
EDG accepts it, and I can see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101596
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
Formal patch has been posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/576071.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87616
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tangyixuan at mail dot
dlut.edu.cn
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96656
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-08-18 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96781
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57136
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang started to accept this code in clang 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568
Tobias Schlüter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96400
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43189
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96359
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69698
Bug 69698 depends on bug 96743, which changed state.
Bug 96743 Summary: ICE on flexible array in initializer list using lambdas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 96743, which changed state.
Bug 96743 Summary: ICE on flexible array in initializer list using lambdas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97191
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||16994
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101622
Bug ID: 101622
Summary: Type erasure (upcasting) in constexpr/consteval
context
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34849
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9760
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Still happens on the trunk.
Note armv7-a produces reasonable code though as it uses ubfx which is new for
armv7-a:
push{r4, lr}
mov r4, r0
movsr0, #8
lsrsr1,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43233
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|x86_64-*-* |x86_64-*-*, aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44711
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35358
Bug 35358 depends on bug 35360, which changed state.
Bug 35360 Summary: Static (base/offset/size rule) should be extended to handle
array elements
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35360
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35360
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101622
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39821
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |target
--- Comment #5 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42588
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43182
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #7 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43037
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44278
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
--- Comment #48 from Jonathan Wakely ---
No, as previously stated, it's suspended until the Core issue is resolved and
the standard is changed.
https://wg21.link/cwg325
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40783
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94331
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97046
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46281
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 51204
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51204=edit
gcc12-pr78103.patch
Untested partial fix.
The patch does 2 things, one is (shown on the first testcase) optimize sign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93963
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93308
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or is it because of the new pseudo that is created for the temporary?
Seems when the combiner is splitting the insns itself using find_split_point,
it tries to reuse i2dest if possible for the middle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101544
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If reusing i2dest for the find_split_case is fine (I must say I'm a little bit
worried about uses of the pseudo in debug insns, whether if we reuse it for
something else we properly adjust those insns (or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94327
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 51205
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51205=edit
gcc12-pr101611.patch
Full untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46209
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||66369
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47673
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100906
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101623
Bug ID: 101623
Summary: [GCOV] Wrong coverage of callee function
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101624
Bug ID: 101624
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree
that contains 'decl with RTL' structure, have
'const_decl' in maybe_optimize_ubsan_ptr_ifn, at
fix=/home/tonyb/tmp/gcc/install
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.1.1 20210726 (GCC)
gcc -std=gnu99 -Os -m32 -Wall -W -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wundef
-Wchar-subscripts -Wcomment -Wdeprecated-declarations -Wdisabled-optimization
-Wdiv-by-zero -Wfloat-eq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40361
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
So the cross jumping opportunity since at least 5.4 even with a conditional
return.
ldr r3, .L8
stmfd sp!, {r4, lr}
ldr r3, [r3]
ldr r4, .L8+4
cmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43908
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-04-28 10:10:19 |2021-7-26
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101627
Bug ID: 101627
Summary: List-directed read with trailing characters after
quotes
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100440
--- Comment #13 from David.Smith at lmu dot edu ---
Thanks for working on the bug I reported in May.
I am hoping you can give me some information that I can pass on to
the users of my open-source software who use gfortran to run it.
Can you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101626
Bug ID: 101626
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at
tree-sra.c:2376
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14842
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15533
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
This looks improved in GCC 4.4.7 and above:
fn(unsigned short):
movzbl a, %edx
xorb%al, %al
orl %edx, %eax
ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34011
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
good function:
.L3:
movdqu (%rdi,%rax), %xmm0
pslld %xmm1, %xmm0
movups %xmm0, (%rsi,%rax)
addq$16, %rax
cmpq$1024, %rax
jne .L3
bad function:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52070
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2012-02-01 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30101
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54802
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
In GCC 5+, we are able to figure out both do bswap.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51084
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2012-01-07 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39744
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed again:
Before FRE:
z = 1;
_4 = MEM[(struct X *)].y.z;
Note fre we are able to do the right thing but dom does not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38209
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2007-12-10 13:40:29 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50272
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
In GCC 5+ we can get rid of the loop fully (in the reduced testcase).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0 testcase, after the combiner
> splitter kicks in, the combiner doesn't even try that 4 insn combination.
It
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0 testcase, after the combiner
> > splitter kicks in, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56610
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56711
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > > Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56369
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60826
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57186
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56924
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32629
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63525
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48297
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-03-28 09:34:02 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That is true, but I think even for vector >> scalar and scalar >> scalar shifts
it will be quite rare to support logical and not support arithmetic shifts.
And on x86, as can be seen in the PR98856 changes,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101447
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf6d414415e14e13be16abf23375160733567d20
commit r12-2512-gbf6d414415e14e13be16abf23375160733567d20
Author: Ashimida
Date: Mon Jul 26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> for arithmetic V[24]DImode >> V[24]DImode
> logical ((x >> y) ^ (0x8000ULL >> y)) - (0x8000ULL
> >> y)
> can be used.
I guess it would be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92713
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
"ICE in libsupc++ building an offload compiler targeting amdgcn-unknown-amdhsa"
(Subject)
I wonder whether that ICE is just because of the lack of exception support and
whether it might work when using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think except for x86 it is very unusual to support logical but not arithmetic
vector right shifts, are you aware of any other target that suffers from these?
Even vector by vector shifts are rare, if my
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
The same strategy to implement arithmetic shift in terms of logical shift works
not just for vector>>vector but also vector>>scalar and scalar>>scalar. But it
is probably not worth the trouble indeed,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101628
Bug ID: 101628
Summary: Preprocessor errors on extended characters in #if 0
code block
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101629
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ce0b26e6e1e6c348b1d54f1f462a44df6fe47f5
commit r12-2517-g1ce0b26e6e1e6c348b1d54f1f462a44df6fe47f5
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101628
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to PR 62661 which was closed as invalid.
Basically the C++ standard says the tokens inside the #if blocks need to be
valid tokens still.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631
Bug ID: 101631
Summary: gcc permits object reference to object outside of its
lifetime during constant evaluation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msharov at users dot
sourceforge.n
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo