[Bug middle-end/64182] [5 Regression] wide-int rounding division is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64182 --- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Kenneth Zadeck from comment #7) > I do believe that it is possible to test the double int code if you wrote a > program that used fixed point math.I have never used fixed point

[Bug libstdc++/64276] would be better to use __cpp_exceptions rather than __EXCEPTIONS to determine whether exceptions are available

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64276 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug fortran/20585] [meta-bug] Fortran 2003 support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585 Bug 20585 depends on bug 38220, which changed state. Bug 38220 Summary: C_LOC intrinsic non-pure and without explicit interface https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38220 What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/32630] [meta-bug] ISO C binding

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32630 Bug 32630 depends on bug 38220, which changed state. Bug 38220 Summary: C_LOC intrinsic non-pure and without explicit interface https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38220 What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/38220] C_LOC intrinsic non-pure and without explicit interface

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38220 Joost VandeVondele changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC|

[Bug target/64240] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] SMS-3.c causes runtime exception(segfault).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64240 --- Comment #4 from Fei Yang --- (In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #2) > Please assign this to yourself Felix. Yes, but I don't know how to change the "Assigned to" field after I logged in as "fei.yang0...@gmail.com". Can anyone he

[Bug rtl-optimization/63917] [5 Regression] r217646 caused many failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63917 --- Comment #10 from zqchen at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: zqchen Date: Fri Dec 12 05:51:19 2014 New Revision: 218658 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218658&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-12-12 Zhenqiang Chen PR rtl-optimization/63917

[Bug c++/59498] [DR 1430][4.9/5 Regression] Pack expansion error in template alias

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59498 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Known to fail|4.10.0

[Bug target/64217] LRA: generate wrong liveness info after r217947 for clobber in jump_insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64217 Chung-Ju Wu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/57510] initializer_list memory leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57510 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/64248] [5 Regression] Error: declarator-id missing; using reserved word ‘__FUNCTION__’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64248 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/64276] would be better to use __cpp_exceptions rather than __EXCEPTIONS to determine whether exceptions are available

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64276 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I don't think it matters as libstdc++ is only designed to be compiled with gcc. In fact if used with another compiler, the runtime exception no longer applies.

[Bug c++/57510] initializer_list memory leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57510 --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Fri Dec 12 03:48:55 2014 New Revision: 218653 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218653&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/57510 * typeck2.c (split_nonconstant_init_1): Handle arrays

[Bug c++/64248] [5 Regression] Error: declarator-id missing; using reserved word ‘__FUNCTION__’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64248 --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Fri Dec 12 03:49:03 2014 New Revision: 218654 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218654&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/64248 Revert: * parser.c (cp_parser_unqualified_id): Ha

[Bug target/64240] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] SMS-3.c causes runtime exception(segfault).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64240 --- Comment #3 from Fei Yang --- (In reply to Tejas Belagod from comment #1) > Also, reproducable without fPIC. Tejas, I can only reproduce this with -fPIC using trunk r218582. No issue without this option.

[Bug target/58623] lack of ldp/stp optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58623 amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug middle-end/64182] [5 Regression] wide-int rounding division is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64182 Kenneth Zadeck changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com --- Com

[Bug target/61296] Excessive alignment in ix86_data_alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61296 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- See discussions when I've added DATA_ABI_ALIGNMENT.

[Bug target/63975] some of the builtin-arith-overflow* fail on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63975 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Tejas Belagod from comment #4) > aarch64-none-elf-gcc -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fdiagnostics-color=never > -O2 -fdump-tree-optimized -g -specs=aem-ve.specs -lm -mcmodel=small > /work/dev/arm/s

[Bug ipa/61324] [5 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV at ipa-comdats.c:321 with -fno-use-cxa-atexit -fkeep-inline-functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61324 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka --- Author: hubicka Date: Thu Dec 11 21:48:48 2014 New Revision: 218640 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218640&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR ipa/61324 * testsuite/g++.dg/pr61324.C: New testcase by Trevor

[Bug c++/61414] enum class bitfield size-checking failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61414 Pavel Revak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pavel.revak at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/64247] malloc alignment and -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64247 --- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele --- A variation on the testcase, to indicate how this behavior leads to conflicts with the Fortran language standard. A routine declared 'PURE' and called with all intent(in) arguments having the same value

[Bug other/64278] New: [5 Regression] /sreal.c:254:22: error: call of overloaded 'abs(const int64_t&)' is ambiguous

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64278 Bug ID: 64278 Summary: [5 Regression] /sreal.c:254:22: error: call of overloaded 'abs(const int64_t&)' is ambiguous Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/64261] false branch of conditional operator ?: evaluated in a template constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64261 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug middle-end/64247] malloc alignment and -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64247 --- Comment #8 from Joost VandeVondele --- (In reply to Ondrej Bilka from comment #7) > That looks like invalid bug. Fortran allows reassociate a+(b+c) into (a+b)+c > which give different result. You will get same instability if you compile > pr

[Bug middle-end/64247] malloc alignment and -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64247 Ondrej Bilka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||neleai at seznam dot cz --- Comment #7 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/64277] New: [4.9/5.0 Regression] Incorrect warning "array subscript is above array bounds"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64277 Bug ID: 64277 Summary: [4.9/5.0 Regression] Incorrect warning "array subscript is above array bounds" Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug middle-end/64247] malloc alignment and -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64247 --- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele --- some similarity with the problem discussed PR55916, except that this case doesn't require __float128

[Bug libstdc++/64276] New: would be better to use __cpp_exceptions rather than __EXCEPTIONS to determine whether exceptions are available

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64276 Bug ID: 64276 Summary: would be better to use __cpp_exceptions rather than __EXCEPTIONS to determine whether exceptions are available Product: gcc Version: 5.0

[Bug middle-end/64247] malloc alignment and -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64247 --- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele --- The following is a test program that illustrates the issue: > cat test.f90 SUBROUTINE gemm(C,A,B,N) REAL*8 :: A(N,N), B(N,N),C(N,N) C=0 DO i=1,N DO j=1,N DO k=1,N C(i,j)=C(i,j)+A(k,i)

[Bug libstdc++/64275] Warnings when linking GCC go1: "(virtual table of) type 'struct X' violates one definition rule"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64275 Dmitry Gorbachev changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||lto --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Gorbac

[Bug libstdc++/64275] New: Warnings when linking GCC go1: "(virtual table of) type 'struct X' violates one definition rule"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64275 Bug ID: 64275 Summary: Warnings when linking GCC go1: "(virtual table of) type 'struct X' violates one definition rule" Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/61906] failed to build gcc 4.9.1 on debian wheezy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61906 Dmitry Igrishin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmitigr at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #10 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- > And please CC libstd...@gcc.gnu.org for the three libstdc++ patches. Done.

[Bug target/63399] Segmentation Fault on pow() function call when all parameters constant, ARM v61 Processor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63399 --- Comment #2 from Bruce Dale --- On the same hardware (Raspberry Pi) I encountered the problem, I can't reproduce it. The board has been rebooted several times since I entered the bug report. Today, I rebooted it several times and cycled pow

[Bug middle-end/64274] [5.0 Regression][ARM] gcc.target/arm/fixed-point-exec.c ICE in fold_binary_loc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64274 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/64032] [5 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/undefined-loop-2.c (test for warnings, line 18)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64032 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/64274] New: [5.0 Regression][ARM] gcc.target/arm/fixed-point-exec.c ICE in fold_binary_loc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64274 Bug ID: 64274 Summary: [5.0 Regression][ARM] gcc.target/arm/fixed-point-exec.c ICE in fold_binary_loc Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/52347] -Wno-tabs -Wall -Wno-tabs still warns about tabs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52347 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/61296] Excessive alignment in ix86_data_alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61296 --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > I doubt we can do anything about it though, decreasing DATA_ALIGNMENT would > break backwards compatibility with older gcc versions. We need a testcase to verify the c

[Bug target/61296] Excessive alignment in ix86_data_alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61296 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug target/61296] Excessive alignment in ix86_data_alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61296 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/45179] Support UTF-8 (and other encodings) in the source file (.f90) for CHARACTER(kind=4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45179 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||28662 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus

[Bug fortran/54687] Use gcc option machinery for gfortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54687 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|44054 | --- Comment #5 from Manuel López-

[Bug target/63975] some of the builtin-arith-overflow* fail on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63975 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/64268] [5 Regression] bootstrap failure (ICE in wide_int_to_tree, at tree.c:1438) on powerpc in libgcc, stage2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64268 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc-linux-gnu |powerpc-linux-gnu, |

[Bug fortran/64273] Add support for "#pragma warning" or "!GCC$ warning directive"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64273 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/44054] Handle -Werror, -Werror=, -fdiagnostics-show-option, !GCC$ diagnostic (pragmas) and color

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44054 --- Comment #23 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #22) > 2) Support !GCC$ diagnostic (pragmas) That's now PR64273.

[Bug fortran/64273] New: Add support for "#pragma warning" etc.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64273 Bug ID: 64273 Summary: Add support for "#pragma warning" etc. Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug middle-end/64247] malloc alignment and -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64247 Joost VandeVondele changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|program result depends on |malloc alignment and -mavx

[Bug fortran/54687] Use gcc option machinery for gfortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54687 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug ipa/64190] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/pr63551.c (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64190 --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou --- > I'm not getting this warning neither on x86_64-linux nor on i686-linux, > otherwise I would not have committed the patch. Any information about > the platform you are getting the warning on would be apprec

[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7) > Please submit them by posting them to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org. And please CC libstd...@gcc.gnu.org for the three libstdc++ patches.

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Kai-Uwe Eckhardt from comment #0) > Created attachment 34253 [details] > libstdc++-patch1 This introduces an ABI change. Also, if _CTYPE_BL represents the "blank" character class, I would exp

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Kai-Uwe Eckhardt from comment #0) > Created attachment 34253 [details] > libstdc++-patch1 > > Bootstrap of 5.0 fails on NetBSD, but with the patches in NetBSD's package > system > pkgsrc it bui

[Bug middle-end/64272] New: useless "called from here" for inline failed error/warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64272 Bug ID: 64272 Summary: useless "called from here" for inline failed error/warning Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug fortran/48244] iso-c-binding support missing on NetBSD (with patch)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48244 --- Comment #9 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- I have submitted the necessary patches and test_result.log as #64271

[Bug tree-optimization/42108] [4.8/4.9 Regression] 50% performance regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||5.0 Summary|[4.8/4.9/5 Regre

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #6 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- Created attachment 34259 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34259&action=edit test_summary All gfortran tests fail to run due to bug #39570

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #4 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- Created attachment 34257 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34257&action=edit libcilkrts-thread cilk uses a non-posix function

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #5 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- Created attachment 34258 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34258&action=edit libgfortran-weak

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #3 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- Created attachment 34256 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34256&action=edit libcilkrts1

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #2 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- Created attachment 34255 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34255&action=edit libstdc++-patch3

[Bug bootstrap/64271] Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 --- Comment #1 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt --- Created attachment 34254 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34254&action=edit libstdc++-patch2

[Bug bootstrap/64271] New: Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271 Bug ID: 64271 Summary: Minimal patches to bootstrap on NetBSD Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: blocker Priority: P3 Component: bootstrap

[Bug fortran/44054] Handle -Werror, -Werror=, -fdiagnostics-show-option, !GCC$ diagnostic (pragmas) and color

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44054 --- Comment #22 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- I think the two remaining issues are: 1) Multiple locations (%C/%L) in diagnostics 2) Support !GCC$ diagnostic (pragmas) For (2), I'm not planning to work on it since it seems all the common support

[Bug target/64268] [5 Regression] bootstrap failure (ICE in wide_int_to_tree, at tree.c:1438) on powerpc in libgcc, stage2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64268 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0

[Bug tree-optimization/64269] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] ICE with -O3 enabled on Ubuntu 14.04

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64269 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Known to

[Bug fortran/44054] Handle -Werror, -Werror=, -fdiagnostics-show-option, !GCC$ diagnostic (pragmas) and color

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44054 --- Comment #21 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- Author: manu Date: Thu Dec 11 15:13:33 2014 New Revision: 218627 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218627&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/ChangeLog: 2014-12-11 Manuel López-Ibáñez PR fortran/44

[Bug jit/63854] Fix memory leaks seen in JIT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63854 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/64099] [5 Regression] ~15% runtime increase for fatigue.f90.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64099 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --- For r217826 vs. r217827 the assembly differences show a larger stack frame while the optimized dump differences are net positive (more memory CSE happens and loads get removed - which might increase register

[Bug target/64160] msp430 code generation error adding 32-bit integers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64160 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Ulrich, > if (reg_overlap_mentioned_p (operands[3], operands[7]) > || reg_overlap_mentioned_p (operands[3], operands[8])) >FAIL; Thanks - that is indeed a better solution to the bug. > B.t.w. i

[Bug lto/64262] [5 Regression] Several LTO failures after r218609.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64262 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||aarch64*, x86*

[Bug c++/64270] packed fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64270 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/48164] ICE in redirect_jump, at jump.c:1443

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48164 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/52587] using out of bounds of an array with size of one

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52587 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/53293] Internal Compiler Error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53293 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/56212] Does not fold unsigned (b - a) + a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56212 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/64270] packed fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64270 Damien Ruscoe changed: What|Removed |Added CC||damien.ruscoe at imgtec dot com --- Comm

[Bug c++/64270] New: packed fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64270 Bug ID: 64270 Summary: packed fields Product: gcc Version: 4.1.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned a

[Bug target/64263] [5.0 Regression] ICE where adddi3_aarch64 does not satisfy its constraints after r217546

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64263 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/64099] [5 Regression] ~15% runtime increase for fatigue.f90.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64099 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener

[Bug tree-optimization/63288] [5 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/20140326-1.c FAILs with -Og -fgcse -fif-conversion2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63288 --- Comment #4 from Zdenek Sojka --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3) > Started with r210492. In that case the issue might be latent at least in 4_9.

[Bug tree-optimization/61917] [4.9/5 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in vectorizable_reduction, at tree-vect-loop.c:4913

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61917 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Yes, I think that is the same bug.

[Bug tree-optimization/61917] [4.9/5 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in vectorizable_reduction, at tree-vect-loop.c:4913

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61917 Andrey Tarasevich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tarasevich at cs dot uni-saarland.

[Bug tree-optimization/14541] [tree-ssa] built-in math functions are not fully optimized at tree level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14541 --- Comment #23 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #22) > (In reply to ktkachov from comment #21) > > Created attachment 34215 [details] > > Link errors output for aarch64 > > > > > Which one exactly? T

[Bug c/64269] ICE with -O3 enabled on Ubuntu 14.04

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64269 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- But the testcase is invalid: markus@x4 tmp % frama-c -val -val-signed-overflow-alarms -precise-unions -obviously-terminates -no-val-show-progress -machdep x86_64 test_case_7213.c [kernel] preprocessing

[Bug c/64269] ICE with -O3 enabled on Ubuntu 14.04

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64269 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ipa/64190] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/pr63551.c (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64190 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2) > Everywhere I guess. I'm not getting this warning neither on x86_64-linux nor on i686-linux, otherwise I would not have committed the patch. Any information abou

[Bug c/64269] New: ICE with -O3 enabled on Ubuntu 14.04

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64269 Bug ID: 64269 Summary: ICE with -O3 enabled on Ubuntu 14.04 Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug tree-optimization/14541] [tree-ssa] built-in math functions are not fully optimized at tree level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14541 --- Comment #22 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to ktkachov from comment #21) > Created attachment 34215 [details] > Link errors output for aarch64 > > > Which one exactly? That is, what is the failing link output? > > All of them AFAICS. I'

[Bug tree-optimization/61328] valgrind finds problem in find_bswap_or_nop_1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61328 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/64268] New: [5 Regression] bootstrap failure (ICE in wide_int_to_tree, at tree.c:1438) on powerpc in libgcc, stage2

Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: doko at gcc dot gnu.org seen with 20141211, r218620, failing to configure libgcc: configure:3427: /home/doko/gcc/gcc-snapshot

[Bug tree-optimization/55459] Firefox 17: internal compiler error: in scan_tree_for_params_right_scev, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:633

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55459 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/64267] [DR 482] Qualified declarators in redeclarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64267 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- It seems Clang 3.1 used to give a warning, but Clang 3.2 promoted it to an error for GCC and EDG compatibility. They must have changed it again for DR482.

[Bug tree-optimization/53966] procmail build deadloop on _autotst & -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53966 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/55405] ICE with optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55405 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/57523] ICE in merge_assigned_reloads, at reload1.c:6062

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57523 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/64266] Can GCC produce local mergeable symbols for *.__FUNCTION__ and *.__PRETTY_FUNCTION__ functions?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64266 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

  1   2   >