[Bug c++/78045] Parsing error when creating temporary object with space in type name (unsigned int)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78045 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/78044] -Wmaybe-uninitialized and -O2: false positive with boost::optional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78044 Andrzej Krzemienski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akrzemi1 at gmail dot com --- Comm

[Bug c++/78047] [7 Regression] Chromium apparently gets miscompiled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78047 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm: static const GrUniqueKey& gQuadIndexBufferKey = *reinterpret_cast(gQuadIndexBufferKey_storage.get()); ; fQuadIndexBufferKey = gQuadIndexBufferKey;

[Bug c++/78048] New: noexcept operator does not work properly when substitution required

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78048 Bug ID: 78048 Summary: noexcept operator does not work properly when substitution required Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/78047] [7 Regression] Chromium apparently gets miscompiled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78047 --- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- Created attachment 39846 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39846&action=edit unreduced testcase

[Bug c++/78047] New: [7 Regression] Chromium apparently gets miscompiled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78047 Bug ID: 78047 Summary: [7 Regression] Chromium apparently gets miscompiled Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug rtl-optimization/78041] Wrong code on ARMv7 with -mthumb -mfpu=neon-fp16 -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78041 --- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #4) > However dealing with partial overlaps is complex so maybe the best option > would be to add alternatives to di3_neon to either allow full overlap > "r 0 X X X" or no ove

[Bug c++/78046] Unnecessary setne/testb instructions with temporary int brace-initialized in if statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78046 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/78046] New: Unnecessary setne/testb instructions with temporary int brace-initialized in if statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78046 Bug ID: 78046 Summary: Unnecessary setne/testb instructions with temporary int brace-initialized in if statement Product: gcc Version: 6.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/78045] New: Parsing error when creating temporary object with space in type name (unsigned int)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78045 Bug ID: 78045 Summary: Parsing error when creating temporary object with space in type name (unsigned int) Product: gcc Version: 6.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sever

[Bug c/61939] warn when __attribute__((aligned(x))) is ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61939 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Santos --- (In reply to Vedran Miletic from comment #1) > #include > #include > float f(std::vector& A, std::vector& B) > { > __builtin_assume_aligned(A.data(), 64); > __builtin_assume_aligned(B.data(), 64); > r

[Bug tree-optimization/33784] Disabled -fipa-type-escape

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33784 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/78040] Missed mangled names of class methods in the translation unit dump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78040 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- -fdump-translation-unit is only useful for debugging GCC and that is it. It is not designed for some random person to use for their own purpose.

[Bug c++/78042] g++ does not select the corresponding overloads of abs() for long and long long

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78042 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/55918] Stack partially unwound when noexcept causes call to std::terminate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55918 Sergey Barannikov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||barannikov88 at gmail dot com --- Co

[Bug c++/11407] [DR 115] Function cannot be resolved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11407 Robert Haberlach changed: What|Removed |Added CC||colu...@gmx-topmail.de --- Comment #1

[Bug fortran/78043] ICE in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:23533

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78043 --- Comment #2 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Code from comment 0 only ICEs in combination with option -g*. Adding an output routine : $ cat z3.f90 module m common /xc/ a end module m2 use m end subroutine s(x) use m print *, a print

[Bug other/70945] Offloading: compatibility of target and offloading toolchains

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70945 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Schwinge --- Author: tschwinge Date: Wed Oct 19 21:24:37 2016 New Revision: 241355 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241355&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [PR other/70945] Handle function_glibc_finite_math in offloading

[Bug fortran/78021] [5/6/7 Regression] Wrong result with optimization on character constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78021 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig --- This looks promising, modulo some line breaks: Index: dependency.c === --- dependency.c(Revision 240928) +++ dependency.c(Arbei

[Bug libstdc++/56383] error with multiple enable_shared_from_this base classes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56383 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- On trunk it's now also possible to mix std::enable_shared_from_this and std::__enable_shared_from_this bases without a hard error: struct A : std::enable_shared_from_this { void* a() { return shared_fr

[Bug target/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 --- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak --- Created attachment 39845 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39845&action=edit Patch that introduces new builtins with UNSPEC_LZCNT and UNSPEC_TZCNT RTX patterns This patch introduces new buil

[Bug rtl-optimization/78038] [5/6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/78044] -Wmaybe-uninitialized and -O2: false positive with boost::optional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78044 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Component|c++

[Bug rtl-optimization/78038] [5/6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 --- Comment #6 from Steffen Schmidt --- (In reply to ktkachov) > > By the way, the optimisation in which the ICE occurs is ree (redundant > extension elimination). You can turn it off by adding -fno-ree to the flags. Thanks a lot for the quick

[Bug c++/78044] -Wmaybe-uninitialized and -O2: false positive with boost::optional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78044 --- Comment #1 from Romain Geissler --- Created attachment 39844 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39844&action=edit test.i

[Bug c++/78044] New: -Wmaybe-uninitialized and -O2: false positive with boost::optional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78044 Bug ID: 78044 Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized and -O2: false positive with boost::optional Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/77474] sizeof and function template don't work properly together

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77474 --- Comment #3 from Michele Caini --- The same applies using member function template.

[Bug fortran/78033] Internal Compiler Error in enforce_single_undo_checkpoint

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78033 --- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 04:17:34AM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78033 > > --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to kargl from com

[Bug fortran/78043] ICE in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:23533

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78043 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/67685] ICE on invalid requires expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67685 Andrew Sutton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot com --- Co

[Bug tree-optimization/71915] A missed opportunity for SLSR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71915 --- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt --- This is an example of a known limitation in SLSR. The explanation is in analyze_increments: /* FORNOW: If we need to add an initializer, give up if a cast from the candidate's type to i

[Bug fortran/78043] New: ICE in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:23533

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78043 Bug ID: 78043 Summary: ICE in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:23533 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug rtl-optimization/78041] Wrong code on ARMv7 with -mthumb -mfpu=neon-fp16 -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78041 --- Comment #4 from Wilco --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #3) > (In reply to Wilco from comment #2) > > (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #1) > > > some background about this bug can be found here: > > > > > > https://gcc.gnu

[Bug tree-optimization/72785] [7 Regression] kernel build error since r236831

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So this is a very interesting little issue that highlights a deficiency in the semantics of __builtin_constant_p. So prior to threading we have: ;; basic block 4, loop depth 0, count 0, freq 1, mayb

[Bug rtl-optimization/78041] Wrong code on ARMv7 with -mthumb -mfpu=neon-fp16 -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78041 --- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #2) > (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #1) > > some background about this bug can be found here: > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg01561.html > >

[Bug tree-optimization/71915] A missed opportunity for SLSR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71915 --- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt --- Something is causing us to hate the second case now, assigning "infinite" cost to it: Processing dependency tree rooted at 5. Using existing initializer: _3 = -_2; Increment vector: 0 increment: -8

[Bug c/61939] warn when __attribute__((aligned(x))) is ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61939 Vedran Miletic changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rivanvx at gmail dot com --- Comment #1

[Bug rtl-optimization/78041] Wrong code on ARMv7 with -mthumb -mfpu=neon-fp16 -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78041 Wilco changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wdijkstr at arm dot com --- Comment #2 from Wilc

[Bug tree-optimization/71915] A missed opportunity for SLSR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71915 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/78041] Wrong code on ARMv7 with -mthumb -mfpu=neon-fp16 -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78041 --- Comment #1 from Bernd Edlinger --- some background about this bug can be found here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg01561.html

[Bug c++/78042] New: g++ does not select the corresponding overloads of abs() for long and long long

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78042 Bug ID: 78042 Summary: g++ does not select the corresponding overloads of abs() for long and long long Product: gcc Version: 6.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug rtl-optimization/78041] New: Wrong code on ARMv7 with -mthumb -mfpu=neon-fp16 -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78041 Bug ID: 78041 Summary: Wrong code on ARMv7 with -mthumb -mfpu=neon-fp16 -O0 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug rtl-optimization/78029] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2285

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78029 --- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool --- Kyrill: Anything inconsistent in the CFI will trigger the assert there, it is most probably not the same bug.

[Bug target/56676] unnecesary splitted load when using avx2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56676 Vedran Miletic changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rivanvx at gmail dot com --- Comment #5

[Bug tree-optimization/72785] [7 Regression] kernel build error since r236831

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-October/461597.html

[Bug tree-optimization/72785] [7 Regression] kernel build error since r236831

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785 --- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #3) > If someone has a .i file for this issue, it'd be awful handy. Well, see comment0: markus@x4 linux % cat timekeeping.i int a, b; extern int ilog2_NaN(

[Bug tree-optimization/72785] [7 Regression] kernel build error since r236831

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 fr

[Bug c++/61491] An explicit specialization of a member enumeration of a class template is rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61491 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini --- Resolving this requires some additional work beyond what I did back in 2015. See: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg00781.html

[Bug bootstrap/77993] [7 regression] bootstrap failure on PowerPC/Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77993 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou --- > Also, what configure comment, and you seem to have CFLAGS set during > build? Configure with: /work/botcazou/gcc-head/src/configure --build=powerpc-linux-gnu --prefix=/work/botcazou/gcc-head/install_ppc --

[Bug c++/70909] Libiberty Demangler segfaults (4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909 Pedro Alves changed: What|Removed |Added CC||palves at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 fr

[Bug bootstrap/77993] [7 regression] bootstrap failure on PowerPC/Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77993 --- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool --- Build, with what flags?

[Bug bootstrap/77993] [7 regression] bootstrap failure on PowerPC/Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77993 --- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool --- Also, what configure comment, and you seem to have CFLAGS set during build?

[Bug bootstrap/77993] [7 regression] bootstrap failure on PowerPC/Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77993 --- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou --- > What bootstrap stage is failing here? It's a simple build failure, just try to compile the preprocessed testcase.

[Bug target/77991] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on x32 in plus_constant, at explow.c:87

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77991 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/77991] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on x32 in plus_constant, at explow.c:87

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77991 --- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Wed Oct 19 15:00:06 2016 New Revision: 241346 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241346&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/77991 * config/i386/i386.c (legitimize_t

[Bug target/77991] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on x32 in plus_constant, at explow.c:87

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77991 --- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Wed Oct 19 14:57:35 2016 New Revision: 241345 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241345&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/77991 * config/i386/i386.c (legitimize_t

[Bug tree-optimization/65752] Too strong optimizations int -> pointer casts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #50 f

[Bug bootstrap/77993] [7 regression] bootstrap failure on PowerPC/Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77993 --- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool --- Hi Eric, What bootstrap stage is failing here?

[Bug target/77897] Compile error with KNL & -O3 for GTC code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77897 --- Comment #4 from Bill Long --- Confirmation from the customer system: GNU assembler (GNU Binutils; SUSE Linux Enterprise 12) 2.25.0 Copyright (C) 2014 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under

[Bug c++/78039] [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #5) > Sorry, that was the wrong link. The correct link to the email thread where > the approval was requested is here: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg0

[Bug sanitizer/78028] ASAN doesn't find memory leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78028 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- That wouldn't be WONTFIX, but FIXED, the support of GCC release branches mean that the bug is just fixed on the release branch and later on will make it into some newer minor release, we can't fix released ve

[Bug tree-optimization/65752] Too strong optimizations int -> pointer casts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||61502, 49330 --- Comment #49 from Richa

[Bug c++/78039] [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- Sorry, that was the wrong link. The correct link to the email thread where the approval was requested is here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg01094.html I don't see Jason's approval in the arch

[Bug sanitizer/78028] ASAN doesn't find memory leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78028 --- Comment #3 from David Barto --- If it is restricted to 5.2, then we can close this as "won't fix"

[Bug rtl-optimization/49330] Integer arithmetic on addresses optimised with pointer arithmetic rules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49330 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||alias Last reconfirmed|2011-06-09 09:

[Bug c++/78040] New: Missed mangled names of class methods in the translation unit dump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78040 Bug ID: 78040 Summary: Missed mangled names of class methods in the translation unit dump Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/61502] == comparison on "one-past" pointer gives wrong result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61502 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|SUSPENDED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/78039] [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|rejects-valid | CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/77937] [7 Regression] ICE: in replace_one_candidate, at gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c:3370

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77937 --- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt --- Author: wschmidt Date: Wed Oct 19 13:35:14 2016 New Revision: 241342 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241342&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-10-19 Bill Schmidt PR tree-optimization/77916

[Bug tree-optimization/77916] [6/7 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_in_cfg: invalid (pointer) operands to plus/minus

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77916 --- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt --- Author: wschmidt Date: Wed Oct 19 13:35:14 2016 New Revision: 241342 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241342&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-10-19 Bill Schmidt PR tree-optimization/77916 P

[Bug rtl-optimization/78038] [5/6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 --- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Steffen Schmidt from comment #0) > Created attachment 39840 [details] > Test source file > > Dear GCC maintainers, > > we found that gcc / g++ crashes with internal compiler error

[Bug rtl-optimization/78038] [5/6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Component

[Bug c++/78039] [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/78039] [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Agreed.

[Bug target/78038] [5/6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 --- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to ktkachov from comment #2) > Hmm, so the zero_extend candidate is: > (insn 9 10 11 2 (set (reg/f:DI 1 x1 [orig:74 g.1_2 ] [74]) > (zero_extend:DI (reg/v:SI 28 x28 [ g ]))) "re

[Bug libfortran/74755] libgfortran: build breaks if localtime_r prototype is present, but definition is not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74755 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |SUSPENDED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/78035] Inconsistency between address comparison and alias analysis

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78035 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 19 Oct 2016, amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78035 > > Alexander Monakov changed: > >What|Removed |

[Bug target/78038] [5/6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 --- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Hmm, so the zero_extend candidate is: (insn 9 10 11 2 (set (reg/f:DI 1 x1 [orig:74 g.1_2 ] [74]) (zero_extend:DI (reg/v:SI 28 x28 [ g ]))) "ree.c":16 84 {*zero_extendsidi2_aarch64} (

[Bug target/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Le Scouarnec --- The same problem may be present in lzcnt which is also expanded as __builtin_clz which is also undefined if 0. http://www.felixcloutier.com/x86/LZCNT.html

[Bug sanitizer/77982] deadlock in asan thread initialization/interception.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77982 --- Comment #1 from Pawel Sikora --- Created attachment 39842 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39842&action=edit reduced testcase. % gdb ./m GNU gdb (GDB) Fedora 7.11.1-86.fc24 (gdb) r Starting program: /home/pawels/src/bug

[Bug target/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/78039] [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug middle-end/78016] REG_NOTE order is not kept during insn copy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78016 --- Comment #4 from Jiong Wang --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #3) > > I am wondering whether it's OK to use copy_insn_1 here? that is to replace > > the whole for loop into something simply as "REG_NOTES (new_insn) = > > copy_insn_1

[Bug c++/78039] [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 --- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose --- gcc-6-branch 20161010 (r240906) built the glibc tests ok.

[Bug c++/78039] New: [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78039 Bug ID: 78039 Summary: [6/7 Regression] fails to compile glibc tests Product: gcc Version: 6.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c+

[Bug target/78038] [5/6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/78035] Inconsistency between address comparison and alias analysis

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78035 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug target/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 --- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > That is because _tzcnt_u64 is expanded as __builtin_ctzll, which is > explicitly UB with zero argument. So, either we need to expand it like > x ? __builtin_ctzll

[Bug target/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug tree-optimization/61502] == comparison on "one-past" pointer gives wrong result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61502 --- Comment #22 from Harald van Dijk --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #21) > Invalid as mentioned a few times already but never actually closed until now. I posted a strictly conforming program that with GCC does not behave as require

[Bug target/78038] New: internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78038 Bug ID: 78038 Summary: internal compiler error: in get_sub_rtx, at ree.c:655 Product: gcc Version: 6.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug c/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Le Scouarnec --- Created attachment 39839 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39839&action=edit Incorrect assembly at optimization level O2

[Bug c/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Le Scouarnec --- Created attachment 39838 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39838&action=edit Correct Assembly at optimization level O1

[Bug c/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Le Scouarnec --- Created attachment 39837 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39837&action=edit i file

[Bug c/78037] Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Le Scouarnec --- Created attachment 39836 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39836&action=edit C file

[Bug c/78037] New: Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78037 Bug ID: 78037 Summary: Incorrect code generated at optimization level -O2 for tzcnt and binary and Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug lto/78034] undefined reference during LTO linking.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78034 --- Comment #5 from Pawel Sikora --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Also why are you using inline-asm here? Why can't you use the SSE > intrinsics? it's a 3rd-party crypto library which works for me with gcc-4.9. now with gcc-6.2

[Bug c/64279] Warning missing for "(cond) ? A : A" / if(cond) expr1; else expr1; // same expression in if and else branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64279 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- I just posted , but given the macro issue, I'm not really sanguine.

[Bug tree-optimization/78005] [7 Regression] 172.mgrid and 450.soplex miscompare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78005 --- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: amker Date: Wed Oct 19 11:02:23 2016 New Revision: 241339 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241339&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/78005 * tree-vect-loop-mani

[Bug lto/77458] nvptx offloading ICEs after "Implement C _FloatN, _FloatNx types"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77458 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

  1   2   >