[Bug libgomp/87995] [9 regression] libgomp.c/../libgomp.c-c++-common/cancel-taskgroup-3.c fails consistently after r265930

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87995 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sat Dec 8 08:58:24 2018 New Revision: 266904 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266904&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libgomp/87995 * testsuite/libgomp.c-c++-common/cancel-t

[Bug libgomp/87995] [9 regression] libgomp.c/../libgomp.c-c++-common/cancel-taskgroup-3.c fails consistently after r265930

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87995 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/88390] [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88390 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |rtl-optimization --- Comment #4 from Eri

[Bug c++/88410] [8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: output_operand: invalid expression as operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88410 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/88410] [8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: output_operand: invalid expression as operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88410 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug rtl-optimization/88390] [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88390 --- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sat Dec 8 11:07:53 2018 New Revision: 266906 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266906&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/88390 * dwarf2cfi.c (struct dw_cfi

[Bug rtl-optimization/88390] [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88390 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/87861] [9 regression] ICE in output_constructor_regular_field, at varasm.c:5165

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87861 --- Comment #10 from Andreas Schwab --- http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2018-12/msg00950.html

[Bug fortran/88304] [9 Regression] ICE in use_pointer_in_frame, at tree-nested.c:267

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sat Dec 8 13:37:49 2018 New Revision: 266907 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266907&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR fortran/88304 * tree-nested.c (convert_local_reference

[Bug c++/86228] ordered comparison between pointer and zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86228 eracpp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eracpp at eml dot cc --- Comment #2 from eracpp

[Bug libfortran/88411] [9 Regression] Random crashes for ASYNCHRONOUS writes (bad locking?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88411 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug libfortran/88411] [9 Regression] Random crashes for ASYNCHRONOUS writes (bad locking?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88411 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig --- The problem appears to be that the record length is set to zero a file with the same unit number is opened again. Hmm... some more digging is needed.

[Bug libfortran/88411] [9 Regression] Random crashes for ASYNCHRONOUS writes (bad locking?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88411 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig --- Hm, maybe something else. It seems we're actually writing direct access files in the main thread, even when using asynchronous I/O. Hmm...

[Bug fortran/87937] [8 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type" and "associate"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 Martin Diehl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m.diehl at mpie dot de --- Comment #15 fr

[Bug fortran/88412] Associate segmentation fault assigning to derived type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88412 Martin Diehl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 Askar Safin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||safinaskar at mail dot ru --- Comment #7 f

[Bug fortran/88357] ICE in parse_associate, at fortran/parse.c:4568

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88357 --- Comment #8 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Sat Dec 8 18:09:05 2018 New Revision: 266908 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266908&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-12-08 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/88357

[Bug fortran/88357] ICE in parse_associate, at fortran/parse.c:4568

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88357 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/88357] ICE in parse_associate, at fortran/parse.c:4568

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88357 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Askar Safin from comment #7) > "g++ -fstrict-enums" doesn't disable warning if I use "enum class" instead > of plain enum. Yes because they have different semantics ...

[Bug fortran/88304] [9 Regression] ICE in use_pointer_in_frame, at tree-nested.c:267

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/88364] [9 Regression] Wrong-code due to CLOBBER

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88364 Bug 88364 depends on bug 88304, which changed state. Bug 88304 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in use_pointer_in_frame, at tree-nested.c:267 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/88417] New: partial specialization of static template variable inside class template gives wrong result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88417 Bug ID: 88417 Summary: partial specialization of static template variable inside class template gives wrong result Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 --- Comment #9 from Askar Safin --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8) > Yes because they have different semantics ... So, you mean that "enum class" is less strict than normal enums? This is very strange. Today I normally use "enum cl

[Bug fortran/88025] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_apply_init, at fortran/expr.c:4468

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88025 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Sun Dec 9 01:02:41 2018 New Revision: 266913 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266913&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-12-08 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/88025

[Bug fortran/88025] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_apply_init, at fortran/expr.c:4468

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88025 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Sun Dec 9 03:10:41 2018 New Revision: 266914 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266914&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-12-08 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/88025

[Bug fortran/88025] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_apply_init, at fortran/expr.c:4468

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88025 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug fortran/87945] [9 Regression] ICE in var_element, at fortran/decl.c:281

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87945 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Sun Dec 9 04:02:44 2018 New Revision: 266915 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266915&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 20180-12-08 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/87945

[Bug fortran/87945] [9 Regression] ICE in var_element, at fortran/decl.c:281

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87945 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/88418] New: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2305 (error: unrecognizable insn)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88418 Bug ID: 88418 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2305 (error: unrecognizable insn) Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywor

[Bug target/46250] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2110 (unrecognizable insn) with -fPIC -mcmodel=large and __thread variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46250 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #6

[Bug target/58067] ICE in GFortran recog.c:2158

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58067 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #12

[Bug target/49670] internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2104

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #11

[Bug target/82887] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2287 (unrecognizable insn) with _mm512_extracti64x4_epi64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82887 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #3

[Bug target/49670] internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2104

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670 --- Comment #12 from Jeffrey Walton --- (In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #11) > I believe this is irrelevant by now. Yeah, no doubt. May as well close it.

[Bug target/49670] internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2104

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670 Jeffrey Walton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/88419] New: [9 Regression] [ICE] "Same canonical type node for different types" for CTAD in noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88419 Bug ID: 88419 Summary: [9 Regression] [ICE] "Same canonical type node for different types" for CTAD in noexcept Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Se

[Bug fortran/88048] [8/9 Regression] ICE in check_data_variable, at fortran/resolve.c:15491

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88048 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Sun Dec 9 06:09:47 2018 New Revision: 266916 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266916&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-12-08 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/88048

[Bug fortran/88048] [8/9 Regression] ICE in check_data_variable, at fortran/resolve.c:15491

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88048 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Sun Dec 9 06:29:17 2018 New Revision: 266917 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266917&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-12-08 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/88048

[Bug fortran/88048] [8/9 Regression] ICE in check_data_variable, at fortran/resolve.c:15491

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88048 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/88035] missing _mm512_reduce_round_pd() et al

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88035 MCCCS changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment #1 from MCCCS