[Bug middle-end/92170] Incorrect function names output when using -fstack-usage on C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92170 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou --- > This appears to be caused by code in output_stack_usage in toplev.c > searching for "." in the function name and only outputting after that point. > It is unclear to me what the intent was originally, but it dates back to the > original stack usage support commit (990495a75cd7). It's intended to keep only the unqualified name, in particular for Ada. > I achieved the expected output shown above by applying the below patch to > disable the checks: OK, but this workaround is not acceptable of course.
[Bug c++/90947] [9 Regression] Simple lookup table of array of strings is miscompiled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90947
Dimitar Yordanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dimitar.yordanov at sap dot com
--- Comment #12 from Dimitar Yordanov ---
Hi,
after the fix we hit a regression with:
$ cat > main.cpp << EOF
#include
static std::atomic a[1] { {1} };
int main(void)
{
if (!a[0].load())
__builtin_abort ();
return 0;
}
EOF
$ g++ main.cpp && ./a.out
Best wishes
Dimitar
[Bug c++/83534] C++17: typeinfo for noexcept function lacks noexcept information
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83534 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |10.0 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed in r277270, thanks! (Please include bug numbers in the changelog entry, see the changelog files for examples of the preferred form.)
[Bug c++/91979] Incorrect mangling for non-template-argument nullptr expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91979 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Thanks, once you have a copyright assignment on file please post to the gcc-patches list with a testcase. This might need a new -fabi-version to preserve the old mangling for compatibility, but I'll let Jason determine that.
[Bug c++/87403] [Meta-bug] Issues that suggest a new warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87403 Bug 87403 depends on bug 91915, which changed state. Bug 91915 Summary: New warning for duplicate if condition in if-elseif-elseif chain https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91915 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c/91915] New warning for duplicate if condition in if-elseif-elseif chain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91915 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška --- Implemented.
[Bug c/91915] New warning for duplicate if condition in if-elseif-elseif chain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91915 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- Great, thank you Marek!
[Bug middle-end/81669] trunk/gcc/fibonacci_heap.h:58: possible missing initialisation ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81669 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- Then let me fix it.
[Bug ipa/91956] [10 Regression] ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed (error: comdat-local function called by __ct .isra outside its comdat) since r275982
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91956 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Known to work||9.2.0 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|[10 Regression] ICE:|[10 Regression] ICE: |verify_cgraph_node failed |verify_cgraph_node failed |(error: comdat-local|(error: comdat-local |function called by __ct |function called by __ct |.isra outside its comdat) |.isra outside its comdat) ||since r275982 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail||10.0 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Martin, you will need probably to do something similar to what IPA ICF does: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/ipa-icf.c#L1060 in order to prevent the verifier error. Can you please take a look?
[Bug fortran/92174] New: runtime error: index 15 out of bounds for type 'gfc_expr *[15]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92174 Bug ID: 92174 Summary: runtime error: index 15 out of bounds for type 'gfc_expr *[15] Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Blocks: 63426 Target Milestone: --- Happens with UBSAN build in: $ ./xgcc -B. /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr91802.f90 -fcoarray=single ../../gcc/fortran/array.c:867:36: runtime error: index 15 out of bounds for type 'gfc_expr *[15]' #0 0x8b40d6 in gfc_set_array_spec(gfc_symbol*, gfc_array_spec*, locus*) ../../gcc/fortran/array.c:867 #1 0x953b29 in attr_decl1 ../../gcc/fortran/decl.c:8521 #2 0x95406c in attr_decl ../../gcc/fortran/decl.c:8582 #3 0x9549f2 in gfc_match_codimension() ../../gcc/fortran/decl.c:8855 #4 0xaf2ff4 in match_word ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:65 #5 0xaf4825 in decode_statement ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:464 #6 0xafaa00 in next_free ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:1272 #7 0xafb459 in next_statement ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:1504 #8 0xb03ad7 in parse_spec ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:3902 #9 0xb0d9d4 in parse_module ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:6085 #10 0xb0f9f4 in gfc_parse_file() ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:6390 #11 0xc7db45 in gfc_be_parse_file ../../gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c:208 #12 0x23dbbc5 in compile_file ../../gcc/toplev.c:456 #13 0x23e39ec in do_compile ../../gcc/toplev.c:2167 #14 0x23e401b in toplev::main(int, char**) ../../gcc/toplev.c:2302 #15 0x491ff6a in main ../../gcc/main.c:39 #16 0x7fd8f53b3e0a in __libc_start_main ../csu/libc-start.c:308 #17 0x89d1e9 in _start (/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/objdir/gcc/f951+0x89d1e9) ../../gcc/fortran/array.c:868:36: runtime error: index 15 out of bounds for type 'gfc_expr *[15]' #0 0x8b42cf in gfc_set_array_spec(gfc_symbol*, gfc_array_spec*, locus*) ../../gcc/fortran/array.c:868 #1 0x953b29 in attr_decl1 ../../gcc/fortran/decl.c:8521 #2 0x95406c in attr_decl ../../gcc/fortran/decl.c:8582 #3 0x9549f2 in gfc_match_codimension() ../../gcc/fortran/decl.c:8855 #4 0xaf2ff4 in match_word ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:65 #5 0xaf4825 in decode_statement ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:464 #6 0xafaa00 in next_free ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:1272 #7 0xafb459 in next_statement ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:1504 #8 0xb03ad7 in parse_spec ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:3902 #9 0xb0d9d4 in parse_module ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:6085 #10 0xb0f9f4 in gfc_parse_file() ../../gcc/fortran/parse.c:6390 #11 0xc7db45 in gfc_be_parse_file ../../gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c:208 #12 0x23dbbc5 in compile_file ../../gcc/toplev.c:456 #13 0x23e39ec in do_compile ../../gcc/toplev.c:2167 #14 0x23e401b in toplev::main(int, char**) ../../gcc/toplev.c:2302 #15 0x491ff6a in main ../../gcc/main.c:39 #16 0x7fd8f53b3e0a in __libc_start_main ../csu/libc-start.c:308 #17 0x89d1e9 in _start (/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/objdir/gcc/f951+0x89d1e9) ... Referenced Bugs: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 [Bug 63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined
[Bug other/63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 --- Comment #9 from postmas...@trippelsdorf-de.bounceio.net --- Your email was bounced... - ... because something went wrong between you and your recipient. Ugh! What to do next? Well, your specific problem was a *5.1.2 * error. Which means you should: Check the "trippelsdorf.de" part of "mar...@trippelsdorf.de" for misspellings or missing letters. If you find an error, correct it in your contacts list or address book for next time. Or further: It is possible that the domain is temporarily inactive. If the spelling looks correct, contact your mail provider and if necessary, contact your recipient another way (e.g., phone or text message). Get more Bounce Intelligence ™ on 5.1.2 errors here![1] Thanks, have a lovely day. Yours truly, betterbounces.net[2] Rate this email: Helpful[3] :) or... Not Helpful[4] :( Advertisement | Prefer no ads?[5] YOU MIGHT LIKE [6] [7] [8] Learn more about RevenueStripe...[9] - © 2017 betterbounces.net, All rights reserved. Privacy[10] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] 1. https://www.betterbounces.net/email-error/5.1.2?utm_source=7o9&utm_medium=direct&utm_campaign=trippelsdorf.de&utm_content=SeretV2 2. http://bit.ly/1AqkgOr 3. https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1609211/rtm01?tv=SeretV2&esc=5.1.2&t=27818211-B9DB-4990-BF56-279DB7A31B61.1&s=7o9&r=Helpful 4. https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1609211/rtm01?tv=SeretV2&esc=5.1.2&t=27818211-B9DB-4990-BF56-279DB7A31B61.1&s=7o9&r=Not%20helpful 5. https://betterbounces.net/b/Y1lM9w9S1KeLJcXVUarv1OJFNUggPr2joqvuXnfzPULQaWlkIsfqBNRgrwhzFkMcrwIXvcetvsYz6BSAduUDUOX259ENsI7e3HBFe_L9qqkswLxxp.9W4Mz9nic1fEk3b_JEBlfwrWyjYIBRM6OLFt_OXq_MrKuT9FbPDZoBNzGNE4gztylPle8NHh464vf7titT91WI150sPs4r2y2APILF5Fb_KY7JnWSvrTPQ_RLqzm5WLiQf9amSPLQH7QgRd8lCWQ4bR3m1tmgDiOA8gRm3nrwbzcD8VlcvTaFC97beBR7DkxYkepMKkVIkSZK8 6. http://stripe.rs-1117-a.com/stripe/redirect?cs_email=f34cde757c9729b925454a1cf67de4ac&cs_sendid=1571732777069&cs_esp=threatwave&cs_offset=0&cs_stripeid=2454 7. http://stripe.rs-1117-a.com/stripe/redirect?cs_email=f34cde757c9729b925454a1cf67de4ac&cs_sendid=1571732777069&cs_esp=threatwave&cs_offset=1&cs_stripeid=2454 8. http://stripe.rs-1117-a.com/stripe/redirect?cs_email=f34cde757c9729b925454a1cf67de4ac&cs_sendid=1571732777069&cs_esp=threatwave&cs_offset=2&cs_stripeid=2454 9. http://branding.rs-1117-a.com/?utm_source=contentstripe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=rs_2454&utm_content=animatedlogo 10. https://www.betterbounces.net/privacy-policy
[Bug ipa/91969] Compiling testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr85421.C with -fdump-ipa-inline ICEs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91969 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Component|gcov-profile|ipa Known to work||9.2.0 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail||10.0 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Started with r273603. I can take a look.
[Bug c++/90947] [9 Regression] Simple lookup table of array of strings is miscompiled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90947 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 47082 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47082&action=edit gcc10-pr90947.patch Here is an untested patch that fixes it for -std=c++17/-std=c++2a, though not for C++11/14, next_initialized_field (TYPE_FIELDS (type)) for std::atomic is NULL in those cases, as that class contains no non-static data members directly, just has __atomic_base as a base class. The initializer has init list type in both cases, dunno if we don't need to treat those specially or how else to fix C++11/14.
[Bug tree-optimization/92005] [10 Regression] switch code generation regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92005 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > Switch conversion should probably run late (again?). I can work on that.
[Bug gcov-profile/91971] Profile directory concatenated with object file path
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91971 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Confirmed. Can you please send the patch to mailing list?
[Bug lto/91576] [10 Regression] error: invalid conversion in gimple call since r272749
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91576 --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --- Honza?
[Bug target/92175] New: x86 backend claims V4SI multiplication support, preventing more optimal pattern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92175 Bug ID: 92175 Summary: x86 backend claims V4SI multiplication support, preventing more optimal pattern Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Costing has 19010 /* Without sse4.1, we don't have PMULLD; it's emulated with 7 19011insns, including two PMULUDQ. */ 19012 else if (mode == V4SImode && !(TARGET_SSE4_1 || TARGET_AVX)) 19013 return ix86_vec_cost (mode, cost->mulss * 2 + cost->sse_op * 5); but for a testcase doing just x * 2 that is excessive. The vectorizer would change that to x << 1 via vect_recog_mult_pattern (yeah, oddly not to x + x ...). This causes SSE vectorization to be disregarded easily, falling back to MMX "emulation" mode which doesn't claim V4SImode multiplication support producing essentially SSE code but with only half of the lanes doing useful work. I'm not sure if pattern recog should try costing here. Certainly the vectorizer won't try the PMULUDQ variant if the backend would claim to not support V4SImode mult. Noticed for the testcase in PR92173.
[Bug c++/90938] [9/10 Regression] Initializing array with {1} works, but not {0}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90938 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Martin, any progress here?
[Bug target/92175] x86 backend claims V4SI multiplication support, preventing more optimal pattern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92175 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Jakub, you did the mult pattern recog - any opinions? (also why do I see a << 1 instead of a + a?)
[Bug ipa/92109] [10 Regression] ICE in modify_call_stmt, at ipa-param-manipulation.c:1586
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92109 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-reduction Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Let me work on test-case isolation.
[Bug inline-asm/91111] [7/8 Regression] arm64 Linux kernel panics at boot due to unexpected register assignment in inline asm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug c++/90320] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Explicit constructor called implicitly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90320 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug c++/86465] [7/8/9/10 Regression] C++17 triggers: ‘’ may be used uninitialized in this function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86465 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug middle-end/91021] [7/8 Regression] ICE in tm_memopt_compute_antic at gcc/trans-mem.c:3867
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91021 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug c++/91891] [7 Regression] std::function with lambda default initializer in aggregate construction causes ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91891 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug fortran/90133] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Linker error from accessing event_type via use association outside associate/block scope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90133 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug target/91816] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Arm generates out of range conditional branches in Thumb2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91816 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug c++/89357] [7/8/9/10 regression][C++11] alignas for automatic variables with alignment greater than 16 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89357 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug middle-end/90354] [7 regression] Skip the not first insn when traversing the insn node
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90354 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|[7.3 regression] Skip the |[7 regression] Skip the not |not first insn when |first insn when traversing |traversing the insn node|the insn node Known to fail||7.3.0 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Which target? Which GCC version did work for you? Which target are you working on? Since you mark this as regression what version of GCC is working OK previous to GCC 7.3?
[Bug target/90928] [9/10 Regression] [nvptx] internal compiler error: in instantiate_virtual_regs_in_insn, at function.c:1737
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90928 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug tree-optimization/91825] [10 regression] Bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized with r275744 breaks bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91825 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0
[Bug rtl-optimization/91860] [10 Regression] ICE: in decompose, at rtl.h:2279 with -Og -fipa-cp -g --param=max-combine-insns=3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91860 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |10.0 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/91885] [9 Regression] ICE when compiling SPEC 2017 blender benchmark with -O3 -fprofile-generate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91885 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug c++/81866] [7/8 Regression] ICE with a default template parameter which is a template class nested in a template class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81866 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug middle-end/82364] [7 Regression] Enormous memory usage when building for 32bit i386 with >= -O1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82364 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug sanitizer/83356] [7 Regression] excessive stack usage compiling with -O2 -fsanitize=bounds -fsanitize=object-size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Priority|P3 |P2 Known to fail||7.4.0
[Bug target/83712] [7 Regression] "Unable to find a register to spill" when compiling for thumb1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83712 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Known to work||8.0 Known to fail|8.0 |
[Bug rtl-optimization/83972] [7 Regression] ICE in code_motion_process_successors, at sel-sched.c:6398
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83972 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug c++/84536] [7/8 Regression] ICE with non-type template parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84536 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Known to work||9.0
[Bug ipa/92133] Support multi versioning on self recursive function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92133 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Let me take a look.
[Bug target/92175] x86 backend claims V4SI multiplication support, preventing more optimal pattern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92175 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Something should compare the costs. Either vect_recog_mult_pattern should move the mul_optab != unknown_optab etc. check after vect_synth_mult_by_constant, compare the costs of the pattern recognized sequence vs. of the multiplication and if vector multiplication is beneficial, undo whatever vect_synth_mult_by_constant added. Or the cost function for vector multiplication should special case multiplication by constant and also expansion of vector multiplication should do the same plus compare costs. I bet the first option would be easier. As for v << 1 vs. v + v, there is already synth_lshift_by_additions, so we could force using it for LSHIFT_EXPR by 1 even for !synth_shift_p (would that be unconditionally a win?). OT, the indentation introduced in r238340 has quite a lot of issues, many functions calls have misindented arguments.
[Bug c++/83534] C++17: typeinfo for noexcept function lacks noexcept information
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83534 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- There's a wrong a ChangeLog reference which belongs here: Author: jason Date: Mon Oct 21 20:19:28 2019 New Revision: 277270 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277270&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/83434 - typeinfo for noexcept function lacks noexcept information 2019-10-21 Kamlesh Kumar * rtti.c (get_tinfo_decl_dynamic): Do not call TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT for function. (get_typeid): Likewise. * g++.dg/rtti/pr83534.C: New Test. Reviewed-by: Jason Merrill Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/rtti/pr83534.C Modified: trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/cp/rtti.c I'll update the ChangeLog file.
[Bug ipa/92074] [10 regression] 26% performance regression on Spec2017 548.exchange2_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92074 --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #4) > Same regression on skylake. Confirmed and same happens for znver1: https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=32.407.0 https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=33.407.0
[Bug tree-optimization/85887] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Missing DW_TAG_lexical_block PC range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85887 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Component|debug |tree-optimization Known to work|8.1.1 |4.8.5 Summary|[7 Regression] Missing |[7/8/9/10 Regression] |DW_TAG_lexical_block PC |Missing |range |DW_TAG_lexical_block PC ||range Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- The difference in debug info between GCC 7 (failing) and GCC 8 (passing) is that GCC 8 has the test UNSUPPORTED because: pr55665.gdb:3: Error in sourced command file:^M No symbol "p" in current context.^M UNSUPPORTED: g++.dg/guality/pr55665.C -O2 line 23 p == 40 while with GCC 7 setting the break-point works. The above error happens with trunk as well. The lexical block range is present but what seems to be missing is the fact that 'p' is not yet updated in memory at the point of the breakpoint but the store was delayed and the updated value is only available in a register. Now - that's wrong-code since concurrent execution from a different thread doesn't see the initialization then. The issue is that 'p' doesn't have its address taken and thus we do not consider it aliased by the __cxa_guard_acquire/__cxa_guard_release functions - which is correct - but we rely on aliasing to implement storage barriers... :/ The fact that gdb looks at memory instead of a register is probably both an artifact of <3>: Abbrev Number: 11 (DW_TAG_variable) DW_AT_name: p DW_AT_decl_file : 1 DW_AT_decl_line : 22 DW_AT_decl_column : 14 DW_AT_type: <0x68> DW_AT_location: 9 byte block: 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (DW_OP_addr: 8) as well as us not tracking memory in var-tracking. That it worked with GCC 4.8 is because didn't optimize this to a register.
[Bug tree-optimization/85887] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Missing DW_TAG_lexical_block PC range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85887 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug libstdc++/89022] Implement P0202R3 - C++20 Constexpr Modifiers to Functions in and Headers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89022 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |emsr at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- How much of this is left to do? Are you waiting for me to review any patches? I noticed we have this in the header, but it's not defined by any other headers: #define __cpp_lib_constexpr 201711L Should that also be defined in ? The current C++20 draft says it has value 201811L.
[Bug libstdc++/88305] Implement P0019R8, C++20 std::atomic_ref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88305 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |10.0 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- This was added to trunk a while ago.
[Bug libstdc++/88322] Implement C++20 library features.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88322 Bug 88322 depends on bug 88305, which changed state. Bug 88305 Summary: Implement P0019R8, C++20 std::atomic_ref https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88305 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug tree-optimization/88760] GCC unrolling is suboptimal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760 --- Comment #41 from Jiu Fu Guo --- for code: subroutine foo (i, i1, block) integer :: i, i1 integer :: block(9, 9, 9) block(i:9,1,i1) = block(i:9,1,i1) - 10 end subroutine foo "-funroll-loops --param max-unroll-times=2 --param max-unrolled-insns=20" could help to improve some run time.(~10% on ppcle) main: do n = 0, N do i = 1, 9 do j = 1, 9 call foo (i, j, block) end do end do end do
[Bug middle-end/92170] Incorrect function names output when using -fstack-usage on C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92170 --- Comment #5 from Austin Morton --- Of course, I only provided it to show how I was generating the "expected" results. I wasn't sure what the purpose of splitting at "." was (in particular since I think of GCC as a C/C++ compiler and the "." would not normally appear in qualified names as a separator). With the context that this is something specific for Ada, I think maybe the correct thing to do would be to make this filtering a language hook that can be customized to do the right thing for each language.
[Bug ipa/92133] Support multi versioning on self recursive function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92133 --- Comment #2 from Feng Xue --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1) > Let me take a look. I've created a patch (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg01260.html), could you take a time to review it?
[Bug middle-end/92170] Incorrect function names output when using -fstack-usage on C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92170 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou --- > I wasn't sure what the purpose of splitting at "." was (in particular since > I think of GCC as a C/C++ compiler and the "." would not normally appear in > qualified names as a separator). Yet there is a comment just above the code. > With the context that this is something specific for Ada, I think maybe the > correct thing to do would be to make this filtering a language hook that can > be customized to do the right thing for each language. This sounds a bit overkill, we can probably print the fully qualified name.
[Bug middle-end/92170] Incorrect function names output when using -fstack-usage on C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92170 --- Comment #7 from Austin Morton --- As I said, the code made no sense to me in the context of C/C++ qualified names - the comment didn't clarify that this bit of code was concerned with Ada qualified names. Printing the fully qualified name is exactly what my patch does (although obviously it doesn't remove the disabled code). For C/C++ this change would be non-breaking since in all cases the output was either correct and fully qualified already, or just outright broken. For Ada this would presumably be a breaking change? Hence why I suggested making a language hook to specify the behavior per-language. Maybe a breaking change here is not something you are concerned with, in which case it would definitely be simpler to just unconditionally print the fully qualified name.
[Bug ipa/92133] Support multi versioning on self recursive function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92133 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org, ||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Feng Xue from comment #2) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1) > > Let me take a look. > > I've created a patch > (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg01260.html), could you take a > time to review it? It's domain of Martin Jambor and Honza. They will provide a review, don't worry.
[Bug rtl-optimization/92176] New: LRA problem with reloads for subreg operands
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92176 Bug ID: 92176 Summary: LRA problem with reloads for subreg operands Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: rtl-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 47083 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47083&action=edit reduced testcase The attached testcase core dumps when compiled with -O3 -march=z13 but executes fine with -O3 -march=zEC12. A QImode subreg on a pseudo gets assigned a floating point register and is simplified to (reg:QI (...)). However, changing the mode of an FPR is disallowed by the S/390 backend in s390_can_change_mode class. The problem appears to be that simplify_operand_subreg in lra-constraints.c does not check can_change_mode_class before assigning a register class. It always picks the preferred register class for an expression as returned by the backend. reload used to invoke can_change_mode_class when reloading a subreg - see push_reload. I tried to return just GENERAL_REGS in the preferred_reload_class whenever being invoked with a subreg for which can_change_mode class would return false. This helps in some cases. However, that function does not always get called with the subreg expression, if there are other uses of that register not having a subreg.
[Bug c++/86465] [7/8/9/10 Regression] C++17 triggers: ‘’ may be used uninitialized in this function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86465 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug ipa/91969] Compiling testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr85421.C with -fdump-ipa-inline ICEs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91969
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
A reduced test-case:
$ cat ice.C
enum by {};
class A {
public:
class B {
public:
virtual void m_fn2(by) = 0;
};
virtual int m_fn1();
B *cf;
};
by a;
class C : A, A::B {
void m_fn2(by);
};
void C::m_fn2(by) { cf->m_fn2(a); }
[Bug lto/91393] [10 Regression] lto1: internal compiler error: decompressed stream: Destination buffer is too small
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91393 --- Comment #11 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #10) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #9) > > I've got a patch candidate for it. > > Ping Martin. Anything happened with that patch ? There's a discussion going on: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg01559.html
[Bug tree-optimization/92131] [8/9/10 Regression] incorrect assumption that (ao >= 0) is always false
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92131 --- Comment #19 from Eric Botcazou --- Created attachment 47084 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47084&action=edit Tentative fix
[Bug tree-optimization/92173] [10 Regression] ICE in optab_for_tree_code, at optabs-tree.c:81
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92173 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/92173] [10 Regression] ICE in optab_for_tree_code, at optabs-tree.c:81
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92173 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Oct 22 11:51:52 2019 New Revision: 277286 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277286&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2019-10-22 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/92173 * tree-vect-loop.c (vectorizable_reduction): If vect_transform_reduction cannot handle code-generation try without the single-def-use-cycle optimization. Pass optab_vector to optab_for_tree_code to get vector shifts as that's what we'd generate. * gcc.dg/torture/pr92173.c: New testcase. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr92173.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c
[Bug tree-optimization/89280] [7/8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in is_gimple_reg_type)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89280 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug middle-end/90354] [7 regression] Skip the not first insn when traversing the insn node
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90354 --- Comment #6 from vfdff --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > > Which target? Which GCC version did work for you? > > Which target are you working on? Since you mark this as regression what > version of GCC is working OK previous to GCC 7.3? 1、I test the case passed on gcc 4.7, and later I take a look at the dump, find the JUMP insn is issued alone, i.e. it doesn't appear such bug. 2、I work on self-develop DSP chip, and it can issue 8 insns at most in one time.
[Bug middle-end/90354] Skip the not first insn when traversing the insn node
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90354 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||out of tree port Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED Summary|[7 regression] Skip the not |Skip the not first insn |first insn when traversing |when traversing the insn |the insn node |node Ever confirmed|1 |0 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- I see. Thanks for the extra info.
[Bug c/89410] [7/8 Regression] ICE in calculate_line_spans, at diagnostic-show-locus.c:1237 after #line
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89410 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug c++/89357] [7/8/9/10 regression][C++11] alignas for automatic variables with alignment greater than 16 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89357 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug c++/90320] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Explicit constructor called implicitly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90320 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug target/89434] [7/8 Regression] wrong code with -Og and __builtin_mul_overflow()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89434 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug tree-optimization/90758] [7 Regression] spurious -Warray-bounds with -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90758 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug middle-end/90663] [7/8/9 Regression] strcmp (&a[i], a + i) not folded for arrays and constant index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90663 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug middle-end/91021] [7/8 Regression] ICE in tm_memopt_compute_antic at gcc/trans-mem.c:3867
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91021 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug middle-end/90794] [7/8/9/10 Regression] -O3 with "VLA type" in C++ leads to an ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90794 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug c++/91133] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Wrong "partial specialization is not more specialized than" error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91133 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug middle-end/90796] [8/9/10 Regression] GCC: O2 vs O3 output differs on simple test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90796 --- Comment #12 from Michael Matz --- Author: matz Date: Tue Oct 22 12:25:03 2019 New Revision: 277287 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277287&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix PR middle-end/90796 PR middle-end/90796 * gimple-loop-jam.c (any_access_function_variant_p): New function. (adjust_unroll_factor): Use it to constrain safety, new parameter. (tree_loop_unroll_and_jam): Adjust call and profitable unroll factor. testsuite/ * gcc.dg/unroll-and-jam.c: Add three invalid and one valid case. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/gimple-loop-jam.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/unroll-and-jam.c
[Bug middle-end/90796] [8/9 Regression] GCC: O2 vs O3 output differs on simple test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90796 Michael Matz changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] GCC: O2 |[8/9 Regression] GCC: O2 vs |vs O3 output differs on |O3 output differs on simple |simple test |test Known to fail|10.0| --- Comment #13 from Michael Matz --- Fixed in trunk so far. Will be backporting in a few days.
[Bug tree-optimization/91201] [7/8/9/10 Regression] SIMD not generated for horizontal sum of bytes in array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91201
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener ---
We unroll the loop completely but our basic-block vectorization capabilities do
not include reductions. We see the following there:
[local count: 357878154]:
temp_33 = bytes[0];
_34 = temp_33 >> 32;
temp_35 = temp_33 + _34;
_36 = temp_35 >> 16;
temp_37 = temp_35 + _36;
_38 = temp_37 >> 8;
temp_44 = bytes[1];
_45 = temp_44 >> 32;
temp_46 = temp_44 + _45;
_47 = temp_46 >> 16;
temp_48 = temp_46 + _47;
_40 = temp_37 + temp_48;
_49 = temp_48 >> 8;
_51 = _38 + _40;
result_29 = _49 + _51;
_20 = (unsigned char) result_29;
b ={v} {CLOBBER};
return _20;
[Bug c++/91241] [7/8/9/10 Regression] internal compiler error: symtab_node::verify failed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91241 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-checking Priority|P3 |P2 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Honza?
[Bug lto/91273] [7/8/9/10 Regression] ICE in warn_types_mismatch at ipa-devirt.c:995
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91273 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug tree-optimization/91384] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Compare with negation is not eliminated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91384 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Priority|P3 |P2 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-10-22 Ever confirmed|0 |1
[Bug preprocessor/90476] prepossessor should error if #line 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90476 --- Comment #7 from Jonny Grant --- Could someone confirm this please.
[Bug middle-end/91623] [7/8 Regression] -msse4.1 -O3 segfault in /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.3.0/include/smmintrin.h:270:10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91623 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-* Priority|P3 |P2 Known to work||9.2.1 Known to fail||9.2.0
[Bug tree-optimization/91812] [7/8 Regression] GCC ignores volatile modifier
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91812 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug tree-optimization/92177] New: [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-22.c FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92177 Bug ID: 92177 Summary: [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-22.c FAILs Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: ro at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.11 Created attachment 47085 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47085&action=edit 32-bit sparc-sun-solaris2.11 bb-slp-22.c.168t.slp2 Between 20191016 (r277071) and 20191021 (r277261), gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-22.c began to FAIL on 32 and 64-bit SPARC: +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-22.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-times slp2 "basic block vectorized" 1 +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-22.c scan-tree-dump-times slp2 "basic block vectorized" 1 The message now appears twice, so this is clearly progress, but the guards need to be adapted. Dump attached.
[Bug target/91816] [7/8/9/10 Regression] Arm generates out of range conditional branches in Thumb2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91816 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug tree-optimization/92177] [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-22.c FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92177 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0
[Bug debug/91887] [7/8/9 Regression] -fdebug-types-section ICE building chromium
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91887 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug c++/92105] [7/8/9/10 Regression] decltype(decltype(decltype)) prints exponential number of repeated errors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92105 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug c++/91891] [7 Regression] std::function with lambda default initializer in aggregate construction causes ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91891 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug c++/67960] [8/9/10 Regression] Prefixing a function with [[deprecated]] produces multiple warnings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67960 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.4
[Bug bootstrap/87338] [8/9 Regression] gcc 8.2 fails to bootstrap on ia64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87338 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.4
[Bug c++/90291] [8/9/10 Regression] Inline namespace erroneously extends another namespace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90291 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.4
[Bug c/88660] [8/9/10 Regression] Invalid report of "set but used variable" with -O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88660 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.4
[Bug tree-optimization/90264] [9/10 Regression] -Wnull-dereference QoI issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90264 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug ada/91100] [9,10 Regression] FAIL: gnat.dg/socket1.adb execution test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91100 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug target/87833] [9/10 Regression] -fPIC isn't used to create offload shared library
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87833 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug ipa/91969] Compiling testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr85421.C with -fdump-ipa-inline ICEs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91969 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Patch candidate: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg01563.html
[Bug rtl-optimization/90706] [9 Regression] Useless code generated for stack / register operations on AVR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90706 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug libstdc++/90415] [9/10 Regression] std::is_copy_constructible> is incomplete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90415 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug c++/91607] [9 regression] internal compiler error: in equal, at cp/constexpr.c:1088
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91607 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3
[Bug lto/89075] [9/10 Regression] error: type variant has different TREE_TYPE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89075 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3
