[pushed] c++: pack in base-specifier in lambda [PR100006]

Normally cp_parser_base_clause prevents unexpanded packs, but in a lambda check_for_bare_parameter_packs allows it. Then we weren't finding the pack when scanning the lambda body. This doesn't fix a valid variant like template void sink (Ts&&...); template void f() { sink ([] {

[pushed] c++: deduction guide using alias [PR99180]

alias_ctad_tweaks was expecting that all deduction guides for the class would be suitable for deduction from the alias definition; in this case, the deduction guide uses 'true' and the alias B uses 'false', so deduction fails. But that's OK, we just don't use that deduction guide. I also noticed

[PATCH] c++: variadic class placeholder template deduction [PR97134]

do_class_deduction handles specially the case where we're deducing one placeholder from another equivalent one, but here the initializer passed to do_class_deduction is wrapped in an EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION (we're being called from unify during get_partial_spec_bindings). This patch makes

[PATCH] Fix logic error in 32-bit trampolines, PR target/98952

Fix logic error in 32-bit trampolines, PR target/98952. The test in the PowerPC 32-bit trampoline support is backwards. It aborts if the trampoline size is greater than the expected size. It should abort when the trampoline size is less than the expected size. I verified this by creating a

[GCC 9] [PR47785] COLLECT_AS_OPTIONS

On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 10:32 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > > On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 19:54, Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > > > > > OK with those changes. Did you try if the diagnostics are visible > > > > (when you add -Wl,-debug or/and -Wl,-v to the link command?) > > > Made the changes

Re: [Bug libstdc++/99402] [10/11 Regression] std::copy creates _GLIBCXX_DEBUG false positive for attempt to subscript a dereferenceable (start-of-sequence) iterator

On 08/04/21 3:07 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 11/03/21 18:51 +0100, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote: I eventually prefer to propose this version. Compared to the previous one I have the _M_can_advance calling the former one with correct number of elements to check for advance. And the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC

On Fri, 09 Apr 2021 11:54:59 -0500 will schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 10:43 -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > > gcc/ > > 2021-04-09 Michael Meissner > > (movcc_fpmask): Replace > > movcc_p9. Add IEEE 128-bit fp support. > >

[PATCH] x86: Define _serialize as macro

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:40 AM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 1:03 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 12:59:16PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > So yes, a better solution would be nice but I can't see any since > > > > > > the > > > > > >

[committed] add test case for PR 55288

The false positive warning disappeared years ago. r11-8099 adds a test but I leave the bug open since it's a request for a better suppression mechanism that what's available in GCC today. Martin

[committed] aarch64: Fix push/pop_options with --with-cpu

If a toolchain is configured with --with-cpu=X and gcc is then run with an explicit -march=Y option, we ignore the X cpu setting and tune for generic Y code: if (!selected_cpu) { if (selected_arch) { --> selected_cpu = _cores[selected_arch->ident];

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC

On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 10:43 -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > Add IEEE 128-bit fp conditional move on PowerPC. > > This patch has been posted various times in the past. My memory is the last > time I changed the patch, I addressed the concerns posted at that time. Since > then the patch seems to

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC

On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 10:42 -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC. > > This patch has been posted various times in the past. My memory is the last > time I changed the patch, I addressed the concerns posted at that time. Since > then the patch seems to

Re: [PATCH] [OpenACC] Fix an ICE where a loop with GT condition is collapsed.

Thanks for the review. Please see my comments below. On 09/04/2021 13:48, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Hi Abid, > > I think that's the same issue as https://gcc.gnu.org/PR98088 > if so, please add 'PR middle-end/98088' to the changelog. Done > > I think the second testcase is covered, but you could

Re: [committed] libgomp: Silence false positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning [PR99984]

On 4/9/21 10:30 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:28:47AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: pthread_setspecific second argument is const void *, so that one can call it even with pointers to const, but the function only stores the pointer and does nothing else, so the new assumption

[Patch] OpenMP: Fix combined-target handling for lastprivate/reduction/linear [PR99928]

Besides the subject line fix, it fixes a inconsistency with lastprivate between Fortran and C – see patch comment -, which caused it to fail with the current patch. (ie.: If lastprivate is on 'parallel' it is not marked tofrom; I wonder whether there is a valid C/Fortran testcase which triggers

Re: [committed] libgomp: Silence false positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning [PR99984]

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:28:47AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: > > pthread_setspecific second argument is const void *, so that one can > > call it even with pointers to const, but the function only stores the > > pointer and does nothing else, so the new assumption of > > -Wmaybe-uninitialized >

Re: [committed] libgomp: Silence false positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning [PR99984]

On 4/9/21 2:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: Hi! pthread_setspecific second argument is const void *, so that one can call it even with pointers to const, but the function only stores the pointer and does nothing else, so the new assumption of -Wmaybe-uninitialized that functions

Re: [PATCH] Make static vars inside of target regions or declare target routines implicitly declare target to (PR middle-end/90779)

Hi! So I recently had reason to verify how 'static' variables behave in OpenACC compute construct regions as well as OpenACC 'routine'. Two weeks ago I started writing a few testcases -- and today then wondered if maybe there's something in the GCC archives about this. And there is: directly

[committed] c++: Add testcase for already fixed PR [PR90215]

We accept this testcase after r11-7985. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR c++/90215 * g++.dg/cpp1z/fold-lambda4.C: New test. --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/fold-lambda4.C | 30 +++ 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+) create mode 100644

[PATCH 2/2] Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC

Add IEEE 128-bit fp conditional move on PowerPC. This patch has been posted various times in the past. My memory is the last time I changed the patch, I addressed the concerns posted at that time. Since then the patch seems to have gone into a limbo state. This patch adds the support for

[PATCH 1/2] Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC

Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC. This patch has been posted various times in the past. My memory is the last time I changed the patch, I addressed the concerns posted at that time. Since then the patch seems to have gone into a limbo state. This patch adds the support for the IEEE

[PATCH 0/2] Add IEEE 128-bit min/max support on PowerPC

These patches have been posted quite a few times before. My memory is I addressed the concerns posted with the last set of changes in November. These two patches add support for the ISA 3.1 (power10) instructions xsmaxcqp, xsmincqp, xscmpeqqp, xscmpgeqp, and xscmpgtqp. I have tested these

Re: [PATCH v2] c++: Fix two issues with auto function parameter [PR99806]

On 4/8/21 4:50 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 04:37:00PM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote: On Thu, 8 Apr 2021, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote: When we have a member function with auto parameter like this: struct S { void f(auto); }; cp_parser_member_declaration

Re: [PATCH] c++: Don't substitute into constraints on lambdas [PR99874]

On 4/8/21 5:01 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: On Thu, 8 Apr 2021, Jason Merrill wrote: On 4/7/21 12:10 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: We currently substitute through a lambda's constraints whenever we regenerate it via tsubst_lambda_expr. This is the wrong approach because it can lead to hard errors due

[PATCH][wwwdocs][pushed] Document branch_changer.py and its usage.

Hello. These are changes that mention how to use maintainer-scripts/branch_changer.py. The content of the patch was consulted with Richi who's been using the instructions. Martin --- htdocs/branch-closing.html | 31 +++ htdocs/releasing.html | 24

[committed] testsuite: Guard gcc.target/aarch64/pr70398.c

Not all hosts can link static executables. It depends on which development libraries are installed. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, pushed to trunk. Richard gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.target/aarch64/pr70398.c: Require a target that can link static executables. ---

[committed] testsuite: Remove bfloat_cpp_typecheck.C XFAILs

These tests are passing on all my runs, and it looks like they are for Christophe's runs too. We can reapply with a tighter target selector if this is still a problem for some configurations. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, pushed to trunk. Richard gcc/testsuite/ *

[committed] testsuite: Add some vect_variable_length XFAILs

This patch adds XFAILs for some tests that fail with variable-length vectors. For pr96573.c I'd wondered about instead extending the regexp. The code we generate isn't very good though, so it doesn't seem worth matching. (Fixing the bad code is on the todo list.) Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu,

Re: [PATCH] [OpenACC] Fix an ICE where a loop with GT condition is collapsed.

Hi Abid, I think that's the same issue as https://gcc.gnu.org/PR98088 if so, please add 'PR middle-end/98088' to the changelog. I think the second testcase is covered, but you could also add the first testcase to c-c++-common/goacc/collapse-2.c – the first testcase in the PR is for a zero-trip

[committed] testsuite: Fix gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-7.c

This test was failing on aarch64 targets because we inlined the test function into main, making it vectorisable. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu and x86_64-linux-gnu, pushed to trunk as (hopefully) obvious. Richard gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-7.c: Add a noipa attribute. Expect

[committed] testsuite: Tweak mem-shift-canonical.c

mem-shift-canonical.c started failing after the fix for PR97684. We used to generate things like: add x7, x1, x5, lsl 2 // 54 [c=4 l=4] *add_lsl_di ld1 {v0.s}[1], [x7] // 18 [c=4 l=4] aarch64_simd_vec_setv4si/2 where the add_lsl_di was generated by LRA. After

[committed] testsuite: XFAIL two insv_1.c tests [PR87763]

This patch XFAILs the remaining regressions in PR87763. We should still fix them at some point, but that's not GCC 11 material. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, pushed to trunk. Richard gcc/testsuite/ PR target/87763 * gcc.target/aarch64/insv_1.c: XFAIL two scan tests. ---

[committed] testsuite: Skip gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_[68].f90 for Arm targets [PR78314]

For the reasons discussed in PR78314, ieee_support_halting doesn't work correctly for arm* and aarch64*. I think the easiest thing is to skip these tests until the PR is fixed. This doesn't mean that the PR is unimportant. It just doesn't seem useful to have the unpredictable failures described

[committed] aarch64: Use x30 as temporary in SVE TLSDESC patterns

gcc.dg/torture/tls/tls-reload-1.c started ICEing for SVE some time during the GCC 11 cycle (not sure when). The problem is that we had an output reload on a call_insn, which isn't a supported combination. This patch uses LR_REGNUM instead. The resulting "blr x30" might not perform as well on

Re: [committed] libstdc++: Fix doxygen markup for group close commands

On 08/04/21 21:43 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 06/04/21 16:54 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: A change in Doxygen 1.8.16 means that "// @}" is no longer recognized by Doxygen, so doesn't close a @{ group. A "///" comment needs to be used. There are a few cases of /* @} */ which need a

Re: [committed] libstdc++: Simplify noexcept-specifiers for move constructors

On 08/04/21 17:50 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: This puts the logic for the noexcept-specifier in one place, and then reuses it elsewhere. This means checking whether the move constructor can throw doesn't need to do overload resolution and then check whether some other constructor can throw, we

Re: [PATCH] [OpenACC] Fix an ICE where a loop with GT condition is collapsed.

Hi Abid! Is enabled for accessing GCC (that is, )? If not, please request as indicated on : "send an email to the overseers mail account at this site telling what project you want write access to and who approved that access". On

[PATCH] mh-mingw: Set __USE_MINGW_ACCESS in missed C++ flags variables

This is similar to what was done in eea4e2ff0a3f5e7f37df204c070cc5d9ef339e6e (where it was added to STAGE*_CXXFLAGS), but this adds the flag to the CXXFLAGS and BOOT_CXXFLAGS variables too (as it's already added to CFLAGS and BOOT_CFLAGS). 2021-04-09 Martin Storsjö config/ChangeLog: *

[PATCH][pushed] branch_changer.py: document more behavior.

Pushed to master after discussion with Richi. Martin maintainer-scripts/ChangeLog: * branch_changer.py: Document more how the script behaves. --- maintainer-scripts/branch_changer.py | 9 - 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git

Re: [WIP] Re: [PATCH] openmp: Fix intermittent hanging of task-detach-6 libgomp tests [PR98738]

Hi! On 2021-03-25T12:02:15+0100, I wrote: > On 2021-03-11T17:52:55+0100, I wrote: >> On 2021-02-23T22:52:38+0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 09:43:51PM +, Kwok Cheung Yeung wrote: On 19/02/2021 7:12 pm, Kwok Cheung Yeung wrote: > I have

[PATCH] [OpenACC] Fix an ICE where a loop with GT condition is collapsed.

We have seen an ICE both on trunk and devel/omp/gcc-10 branches which can be reprodued with this simple testcase. It occurs if an OpenACC loop has a collapse clause and any of the loop being collapsed uses GT or GE condition. This issue is specific to OpenACC. int main (void) { int ix, iy;

Re: [PATCH][wwwdocs][pushed] Use new release version numbering scheme in instructions.

On 4/9/21 11:02 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > bugzilla versions include the .0, so this should be "7.5.0", "7.5" > is not a valid bugzilla GCC version (it is a valid target milestone only) Ah, thanks for heads up. Fixed in current master. Martin

Re: [PATCH][wwwdocs][pushed] Use new release version numbering scheme in instructions.

On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 10:51 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > Hi. > > The patch is about usage of new versioning scheme in examples. > > Pushed, > Martin > > --- > htdocs/branch-closing.html | 8 > htdocs/releasing.html | 6 +++--- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > >

[Patch, committed] Fortran: Fix fndecl with -fcoarray=lib [PR99817]

Committed as obvious; I will backport it to GCC 10 in a while. In the original patch, there was a bogus 'else if' instead of a separate 'if'. Tobias - Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstrasse 201, 80634 München Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer:

[PATCH][wwwdocs][pushed] Use new release version numbering scheme in instructions.

Hi. The patch is about usage of new versioning scheme in examples. Pushed, Martin --- htdocs/branch-closing.html | 8 htdocs/releasing.html | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/htdocs/branch-closing.html b/htdocs/branch-closing.html index

GCC 11.0.1 Status Report (2021-04-09)

Status == GCC trunk which is to become GCC 11 is in regression and documentation fixes only mode. We're nearing the date planned for branching and releasing GCC 11 but as usual the goal is to have zero release blockers (aka P1 priority regressions) before doing so. Please help in

Re: [PATCH] Ada: hashed container Cursor type predefined equality non-conformance

Richard, On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 7:19 PM Richard Wai wrote: > Just a note that I do not have write access, so I will need someone who does > to commit this patch, if approved. Noted. We are waiting for the GCC trunk to switch to stage 1 before submitting new patches. No worry, yours is on the

[PATCH] tree-optimization/99971 - improve BB vect dependence analysis

We can use TBAA even when we have a DR, do so. For the testcase that means fully vectorizing it instead of only vectorizing the first store group resulting in suboptimal code. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, queued for stage1. 2021-04-09 Richard Biener PR

[committed] libgomp: Silence false positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning [PR99984]

Hi! pthread_setspecific second argument is const void *, so that one can call it even with pointers to const, but the function only stores the pointer and does nothing else, so the new assumption of -Wmaybe-uninitialized that functions taking such pointers will read from what those pointers will

[PATCH] combine: Avoid propagation of (clobber (const_int 0)) into DEBUG_INSNs [PR99830]

Hi! On the following testcase on aarch64 the combiner propagates (clobber:TI (const_int 0)) into a DEBUG_INSN. Such clobbers are specific to the combiner, created by gen_lowpart_for_combine: fail: return gen_rtx_CLOBBER (omode, const0_rtx); which can be embedded anywhere and the combiner