[Bug rtl-optimization/70478] [LRA] S/390: Performance regression - superfluous stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #2) Thanks for having a look. I'll experiment a bit with adding a '?' constraint modifier to see what impact it has on benchmarks. In fact it would match the real

[Bug bootstrap/60244] GCC-trunk rev.207809, Segmentation fault when executing ".../xgcc -dumpspecs"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60244 --- Comment #9 from Vladimír Čunát --- More information about my case: it's x86_64, Linux, gcc-5.3.0 from tarball being built by gcc-4.8.3. I re-tried with --enable-debug and ran the segfaulting command in gdb (I filtered seemingly uninteresting

[Bug target/70490] __atomic_load_n(const __int128 *, ...) generates CMPXCHG16B with no warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70490 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug rtl-optimization/59393] [4.9/5/6 regression] mips16 code size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59393 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 31 Mar 2016, law at redhat dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59393 > > Jeffrey A. Law changed: > >What|Removed |Added > -

[Bug target/70490] __atomic_load_n(const __int128 *, ...) generates CMPXCHG16B with no warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70490 --- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > The question is if e.g. XMM aligned loads are atomic or not. If they are, > we'd have to use some pattern that would ensure RA etc. doesn't optimize > that into a

[Bug c++/69564] [5/6 Regression] lto and/or C++ make scimark2 LU slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564 --- Comment #27 from Richard Biener --- So, dealII slowdown is confirmed. 447.dealII 11440252 45.4 S 11440255 44.8 S 447.dealII 11440254 45.1 S 11440256 44.6 S 447.dealII

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/70485] Duplicate typedef results in missing debug info

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70485 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug target/70453] gcc generates invalid instruction vextractu64x4 (should be: vextracti64x4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70453 Kirill Yukhin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/70484] Wrong optimization with aliasing and access via char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70484 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||alias, wrong-code Status|UN

[Bug rtl-optimization/70484] Wrong optimization with aliasing and access via char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70484 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- It's DSE1 that does this. trying to replace QImode load in insn 9 from SImode store in insn 7 deferring rescan insn with uid = 9. deferring rescan insn with uid = 17. -- replaced the loaded MEM with (reg 9

[Bug libstdc++/70493] New: std::setlocale("") throws exception

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70493 Bug ID: 70493 Summary: std::setlocale("") throws exception Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug target/70482] Opimization opportunity to vectorize basic block for -mavx target.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70482 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70494] New: Capturing an array of vectors in a lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70494 Bug ID: 70494 Summary: Capturing an array of vectors in a lambda Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) > McCpId* pCpId = static_cast(&newCpId); > > and it's further use. You can't use an object of McId via a pointer to > McCpId but you call > > pCpId-

[Bug c++/70494] Capturing an array of vectors in a lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70494 Paolo Monteverde changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paolo.monteverde at gmail dot com --

[Bug rtl-optimization/70484] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong optimization with aliasing and access via char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70484 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.3.4 Summary|Wrong optimiza

[Bug rtl-optimization/70484] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong optimization with aliasing and access via char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70484 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug rtl-optimization/70484] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong optimization with aliasing and access via char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70484 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|---

[Bug libstdc++/66145] [5/6 Regression] std::ios_base::failure objects thrown from libstdc++.so use old ABI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145 Malcolm Parsons changed: What|Removed |Added CC||malcolm.parsons at gmail dot com ---

[Bug libstdc++/66145] [5/6 Regression] std::ios_base::failure objects thrown from libstdc++.so use old ABI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Malcolm Parsons from comment #10) > Why doesn't this apply to the std::ios_base exceptions? Because the C++11 standard mandated an ABI change for std::ios_base::failure, by giving it a std::s

[Bug c++/70494] Capturing an array of vectors in a lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70494 James Greenhalgh changed: What|Removed |Added Target||*-*-* Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/70495] New: false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70495 Bug ID: 70495 Summary: false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug target/67896] Inconsistent behaviour between C and C++ for types poly8x8_t and poly16x8_t

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67896 --- Comment #6 from James Greenhalgh --- Author: jgreenhalgh Date: Fri Apr 1 09:45:44 2016 New Revision: 234665 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234665&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport: [PATCH] Do not set structural equality on polynomial ty

[Bug libstdc++/70493] std::setlocale("") throws exception

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70493 --- Comment #1 from Michi Henning --- Ah, on reading http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/ section 8.2, it appears that it's OK to throw in this case. It would be nice to have a better diagnostic in the exception though. It could show

[Bug rtl-optimization/68749] FAIL: gcc.dg/ifcvt-4.c scan-rtl-dump ce1 "2 true changes made"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68749 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-

[Bug target/67896] Inconsistent behaviour between C and C++ for types poly8x8_t and poly16x8_t

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67896 James Greenhalgh changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/26461] liveness of thread local references across function calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26461 Andy Robbins changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andy at miniciv dot com --- Comment #12 f

[Bug bootstrap/60244] GCC-trunk rev.207809, Segmentation fault when executing ".../xgcc -dumpspecs"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60244 --- Comment #10 from Vladimír Čunát --- Now I see the segfault does not happen if I use binutils-2.23 instead of 2.26. Perhaps the cause is in there then.

[Bug target/70496] New: [6 regression] inadvertent change to ASM_APP_OFF for .arm / .thumb directives.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70496 Bug ID: 70496 Summary: [6 regression] inadvertent change to ASM_APP_OFF for .arm / .thumb directives. Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: no

[Bug target/70496] [6 regression] inadvertent change to ASM_APP_OFF for .arm / .thumb directives.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70496 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/70497] New: Missed CSE of subregs on GIMPLE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70497 Bug ID: 70497 Summary: Missed CSE of subregs on GIMPLE Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/70497] Missed CSE of subregs on GIMPLE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70497 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70498] New: Libiberty Demangler segfaults (3)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70498 Bug ID: 70498 Summary: Libiberty Demangler segfaults (3) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug libstdc++/70483] string_view::compare and coparision operators are not constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70483 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Status|UNCON

[Bug target/69890] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/chkp-* on x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69890 --- Comment #9 from Ilya Enkovich --- Author: ienkovich Date: Fri Apr 1 10:40:51 2016 New Revision: 234666 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234666&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/testsuite/ PR target/69890 * gcc.dg/strlenopt.h (

[Bug c++/70495] false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70495 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- b+b has type int

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/70496] [6 regression] inadvertent change to ASM_APP_OFF for .arm / .thumb directives.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70496 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug c++/70495] false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70495 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug target/70496] [6 regression] inadvertent change to ASM_APP_OFF for .arm / .thumb directives.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70496 --- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan --- Created attachment 38152 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38152&action=edit Patch. Patch I'm testing.

[Bug c++/70495] false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70495 --- Comment #3 from András --- > b+b has type int Note: this does not give the warning. You can see the linked example for more details.

[Bug c++/68475] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE: in merge_exception_specifiers, at cp/typeck2.c:2115 with -fno-exceptions on invalid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68475 --- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell --- Author: nathan Date: Fri Apr 1 12:10:17 2016 New Revision: 234667 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234667&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/68475 * decl.c (check_redeclaration_exception_spe

[Bug c++/68475] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE: in merge_exception_specifiers, at cp/typeck2.c:2115 with -fno-exceptions on invalid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68475 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/70497] Missed CSE of subregs on GIMPLE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70497 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- union U { int i[16]; char c[4]; }; char foo(int i) { union U u; u.i[0] = i; return u.c[1]; } I have a prototype that for the above generates movl%edi, %eax movsbl %ah, %eax ins

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- I believe we should add these two checks: --- a/gcc/cp/init.c +++ b/gcc/cp/init.c @@ -2430,7 +2430,8 @@ warn_placement_new_too_small (tree type, tree nelts, tree size, tree oper) though the size of a mem

[Bug c++/70495] false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70495 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to András from comment #3) > > b+b has type int > Note: this does not give the warning. You can see the linked example for > more details. I know, but b+b+b adds b to an int and still produces an

[Bug testsuite/70004] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/scalar_shift_1.c scan-assembler-times neg\\td[0-9]+, d[0-9]+ 4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70004 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Fri Apr 1 12:22:05 2016 New Revision: 234669 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234669&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline r233964. 2016-03-04 Kyrylo Tkac

[Bug c++/70495] false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70495 --- Comment #5 from András --- @Jonathan: could you, please, give me a link, which explains why this "conversion to int" takes place (where it comes from)? Thanks!

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug c++/70495] false warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70495 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/implicit_cast#Integral_promotion

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- Better testcase: // PR c++/70488 // { dg-do compile } typedef __typeof__ (sizeof 0) size_t; void* operator new (size_t, void *p) { return p; } void* operator new[] (size_t, void *p) { return p; } struct S

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- That said, the function also contains bogus loop like: /* Descend into a struct or union to find the member whose address is being used as the agument. */ while (TREE_CODE (oper) == COMPONENT_REF)

[Bug c++/70499] New: internal compiler error: in make_ssa_name_fn, at tree-ssanames.c:266

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70499 Bug ID: 70499 Summary: internal compiler error: in make_ssa_name_fn, at tree-ssanames.c:266 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/67896] Inconsistent behaviour between C and C++ for types poly8x8_t and poly16x8_t

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67896 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.4

[Bug target/48863] A Bug When Assembler Instructions with C Expression Operands in arm-elf-gcc 4.5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48863 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNC

[Bug c++/70449] [6 Regression] ICE with -Wall on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in pp_string, at pretty-print.c:928

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70449 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/70500] New: Template deduction should fail on narrowing conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70500 Bug ID: 70500 Summary: Template deduction should fail on narrowing conversion Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug lto/68881] [6 Regression] UNRESOLVED/FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/attr-weakref-1 -O2 -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881 --- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka --- Hi, I am testing the attached patch and would apprechiate testing on any additional targets. It implements the optimization of weakref to non-weakref in the case the target is defined in same TU. Unfortunately

[Bug c++/70501] New: internal compiler error: in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2249

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70501 Bug ID: 70501 Summary: internal compiler error: in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2249 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/70502] New: inconsistent behavior of -Werror=

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70502 Bug ID: 70502 Summary: inconsistent behavior of -Werror= Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assig

[Bug c++/70501] internal compiler error: in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2249

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70501 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70501] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2249

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70501 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0 Summary|internal compiler

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 --- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt --- So we have an unreachable call to pow with the wrong number of arguments. I suppose the expansion logic for builtin_pow should tolerate this situation and just do nothing with it.

[Bug c++/70452] [5/6 Regression] Regression in C++ parsing performance between 4.9.3 and 5.3.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70452 --- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka --- Created attachment 38155 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38155&action=edit patch that reuses the function copies I attached a small patch (not commented yet) that reduces the runtime (of

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 --- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt --- (I should say, presumably unreachable. This source code looks pretty dicey in the first place, but nonetheless we should probably tolerate it at this stage of optimization.)

[Bug c++/70452] [5/6 Regression] Regression in C++ parsing performance between 4.9.3 and 5.3.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70452 --- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka --- So with the patch instead of making ~200k total copies of the same fn (one for each recursive call) we only make ~15 total copies (the maximum recursion depth of the function).

[Bug c++/70476] C++11: Function name declared in unnamed namespace extern "C" gets exernal linkage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70476 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- And this means the functions I thought were local to src/c++11/thread.cc are not ... drat.

[Bug target/65248] Copy relocation against protected symbol doesn't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65248 jb999 at gmx dot de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jb999 at gmx dot de --- Comment #8

[Bug target/70496] [6 regression] inadvertent change to ASM_APP_OFF for .arm / .thumb directives.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70496 --- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan --- Author: ramana Date: Fri Apr 1 14:58:53 2016 New Revision: 234675 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234675&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix PR target/70496 While doing the unified asm rewrite - I inadv

[Bug target/70496] [6 regression] inadvertent change to ASM_APP_OFF for .arm / .thumb directives.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70496 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/70503] New: extern "C" functions in src/c++11/thread.cc are global in libstdc++.a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70503 Bug ID: 70503 Summary: extern "C" functions in src/c++11/thread.cc are global in libstdc++.a Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/70489] ICE in cxx_eval_increment_expression initializing a VLA in a constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70489 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 64977, which changed state. Bug 64977 Summary: constexpr variable initialization by reference in lambda rejected https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64977 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/64977] constexpr variable initialization by reference in lambda rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64977 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 --- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt --- Created attachment 38156 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38156&action=edit Patch that permits this to compile The attached patch allows the compilation to succeed in spite of the incorrec

[Bug c++/70449] [6 Regression] ICE with -Wall on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in pp_string, at pretty-print.c:928

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70449 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 38157 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38157&action=edit gcc6-pr70449.patch Untested fix that attempts not to handle the case of fun being instantiation of the current_

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org Tar

[Bug rtl-optimization/70504] New: FLD, FLD, FXCH emitted instead of FLD, FLD in the needed order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70504 Bug ID: 70504 Summary: FLD, FLD, FXCH emitted instead of FLD, FLD in the needed order Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug target/70504] FLD, FLD, FXCH emitted instead of FLD, FLD in the needed order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70504 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target|

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 --- Comment #12 from Hadula, Tomasz --- > The reduced testcase doesn't have the pattern you describe in > the description. Well, of course, I couldn't verify that for sure, because the reduced testcase was so severely mutilated that I couldn't p

[Bug c/70250] Compilation hangs without optimization.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70250 --- Comment #3 from brijesh singh --- Here is output of gcc -v aaa.c: Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gcc COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.9/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-linux-gnu Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pk

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Apr 1 15:27:11 2016 New Revision: 234676 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234676&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/70488 * init.c (warn_placement_new_too_small): Test

[Bug target/69890] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/chkp-* on x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69890 --- Comment #10 from Ilya Enkovich --- Author: ienkovich Date: Fri Apr 1 15:31:43 2016 New Revision: 234677 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234677&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/testsuite/ Backport from mainline r234666. 2016-

[Bug target/69890] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/chkp-* on x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69890 Ilya Enkovich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/53440] [arm] generic thunk code fails for method which uses '...'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53440 --- Comment #7 from Ramana Radhakrishnan --- A patch to fix this for TARGET_32BIT is here. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00060.html

[Bug target/70404] pr70174.c fails on s390x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70404 --- Comment #5 from Andreas Krebbel --- Author: krebbel Date: Fri Apr 1 15:35:54 2016 New Revision: 234678 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234678&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR70404 S/390: Fix insv expansion. While the expander accepts general

[Bug target/70404] pr70174.c fails on s390x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70404 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/70488] [6 Regression] ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement new too small on VLA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/70465] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] Poor code for x87 asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70465 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||b7.10110111 at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/70504] FLD, FLD, FXCH emitted instead of FLD, FLD in the needed order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70504 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/70501] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2249

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70501 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/70503] extern "C" functions in src/c++11/thread.cc are global in libstdc++.a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70503 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Ah, but gimple_call_combined_fn already performs this. So perhaps all you need is the tree-inline.c part?

[Bug c++/70501] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2249

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70501 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Note that a patch for PR70307 I've just posted contains a more exhaustive testcase: .

[Bug libstdc++/70503] [4.9/5/6 Regression] extern "C" functions in src/c++11/thread.cc are global in libstdc++.a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70503 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.3.6 Summary|extern "C" fu

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 --- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt --- The tree-inline part only shows up after fixing the part in tree-ssa-math-opts.c, where the initial failure occurs. The DECL is already encoded as a BUILT_IN_POW by the time we get that far.

[Bug middle-end/70457] ICE (segfault) in gimple_expand_builtin_pow on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- I've missed the pass_optimize_widening_mul::execute in your patch, that is also another spot where you'd want to call it. But the sincos hunks should be safe as is.

  1   2   >