[Bug tree-optimization/81607] Conditional operator: "type mismatch in shift expression" error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-checking Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/25967] Add attribute naked for x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967 --- Comment #12 from Daniel Santos --- For those interested in a work-around, you can define an __attribute__((used)) function and then within that function use inline assembly to declare your real function. This can get messy depending upon how

[Bug c++/81609] incompatible extern C declarations of the same extern function at local scope accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81609 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- related to PR 32042,

[Bug c++/81610] bogus fix-it hint for a call to an undeclared function: for

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81610 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic See Also|

[Bug c++/81610] New: bogus fix-it hint for a call to an undeclared function: for

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81610 Bug ID: 81610 Summary: bogus fix-it hint for a call to an undeclared function: for Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug c++/81609] New: incompatible extern C declarations of the same extern function at local scope accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81609 Bug ID: 81609 Summary: incompatible extern C declarations of the same extern function at local scope accepted Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Seve

[Bug c++/81608] incompatible declarations of the same extern function at different scopes accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81608 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I think there might be a duplicate of this bug already. It was noticed when Zack (or was it joseph) implemented the correct behavior for the c front-end. This was during the 3.4 time frame.

[Bug c++/81608] New: incompatible declarations of the same extern function at different scopes accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81608 Bug ID: 81608 Summary: incompatible declarations of the same extern function at different scopes accepted Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug c/54006] __atomic_always_lock_free inconsistent with __GCC_ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE et al.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54006 --- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, egallager at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Testcase compiles, runs, and exits with 0 for me on i386-apple-darwin9.8.0. I'm not sure how that target is relevant? (I forgot to set a targe

[Bug c/67629] bogus -Wreturn-type in a function with tautological if-else

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67629 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yyc1992 at gmail dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug c/67629] bogus -Wreturn-type in a function with tautological if-else

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67629 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/68336] False positive Wreturn-type warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68336 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/68121] __builtin_constant_p should not warn about integer overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68121 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/81606] A small program works as expected with -O0 but fails with -O1 on all tested gcc versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81606 --- Comment #2 from jerome.pioux at atos dot net --- Agreed, sorry, we should have been using single quotes. Thank you. -Original Message- From: glisse at gcc dot gnu.org [mailto:gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org] Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 1:39

[Bug tree-optimization/81607] New: Conditional operator: "type mismatch in shift expression" error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607 Bug ID: 81607 Summary: Conditional operator: "type mismatch in shift expression" error Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/81606] A small program works as expected with -O0 but fails with -O1 on all tested gcc versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81606 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/81606] New: A small program works as expected with -O0 but fails with -O1 on all tested gcc versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81606 Bug ID: 81606 Summary: A small program works as expected with -O0 but fails with -O1 on all tested gcc versions Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/54006] __atomic_always_lock_free inconsistent with __GCC_ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE et al.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54006 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/59616] OpenMP standard conflict in parallel default clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59616 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||openmp Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/64609] No -Wbool-compare warning on "(a = 0 && 0) <= 4"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64609 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic CC|

[Bug c++/81605] -Wignored-attributes emitted when decltype(function) used in template for function with __nonnull__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81605 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic, documentation Sta

[Bug target/81590] AVX512 run-time test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81590 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #0) > On Skylake server running Fedora 25/x86-64, r250630 gave: > This is on a 80-core machine with "make check -j80". > FAIL: libgomp.c/for-3.c execution test > FAIL: libgomp.c

[Bug c++/81605] New: -Wignored-attributes emitted when decltype(function) used in template for function with __nonnull__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81605 Bug ID: 81605 Summary: -Wignored-attributes emitted when decltype(function) used in template for function with __nonnull__ Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug sanitizer/81604] Ubsan type reporting can be bogus in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 41858 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41858&action=edit gcc8-pr81604.patch Untested fix.

[Bug c/64825] -Wcast-qual does not warn about struct members which are arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64825 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/81590] AVX512 run-time test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81590 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- Created attachment 41857 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41857&action=edit A patch to properly check AVX512 features

[Bug sanitizer/81604] New: Ubsan type reporting can be bogus in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604 Bug ID: 81604 Summary: Ubsan type reporting can be bogus in some cases Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: san

[Bug sanitizer/81604] Ubsan type reporting can be bogus in some cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug inline-asm/65640] multiple alternative constraints and earlyclobbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65640 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug inline-asm/55681] Qualifiers on asm statements are order-dependent

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55681 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/81597] returns link to temporary value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81597 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/81603] New: Various compiler UB on very large constant offsets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81603 Bug ID: 81603 Summary: Various compiler UB on very large constant offsets Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/50077] large model (-mcmodel=large) is broken on *86*-apple-darwin*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50077 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/63893] gcc.dg/pr61599-1.c fails on darwin, due to -mcmodel=medium

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63893 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Target|x86_64-apple-darwin14 |x86_64-apple-darwin CC|

[Bug inline-asm/55744] Use of ebx as output register in inline asm on x86_64 PIC mcmodel=medium

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55744 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/81601] [7/8 Regression] incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 --- Comment #4 from Arnd Bergmann --- Thanks for the analysis. I have now submitted a local workaround for the kernel, adding a temporary variable to avoid accessing the bitfield twice, see https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9869037/

[Bug c++/81597] returns link to temporary value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81597 --- Comment #4 from Lisp2D --- -Werror=return-local-addr it is all i want thnx

[Bug c/41045] Extended asm with C operands doesn’t work at top level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41045 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jnz at mail dot com --- Comment #10 from

[Bug inline-asm/54450] Extended asm in global scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54450 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/71951] libgcc_s built with -fomit-frame-pointer on aarch64 is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951 Wilco changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug inline-asm/52813] %rsp in clobber list is silently ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52813 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug inline-asm/37195] different variables get the same overlapping memory address in inline assembly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37195 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug sanitizer/81601] [7/8 Regression] incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- The reason this doesn't trigger without -fsanitize= is that without the extra UBSAN_* internal function calls we manage to find out earlier that this is a dead code and optimize it away completely (during cdd

[Bug sanitizer/81601] [7/8 Regression] incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- The -Warray-bounds warning has false positives, so you can run into them and in that case using -Werror isn't really a good idea. The problem is that the same bitfield, tp->chrono_start, is accessed 2 differe

[Bug inline-asm/38925] gcc ignores use of %rbp via assembly, generates bad code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38925 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/81476] severe slow-down with range-v3 library compared to clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81476 --- Comment #19 from Hannes Hauswedell --- One last question: will the fix be backported to GCC7('s libstdc++)? Thanks!

[Bug sanitizer/81601] [7/8 Regression] incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/81597] returns link to temporary value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81597 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- -Werror=return-local-addr (we cannot reject those programs by default, if the caller ignores what the function returns, the program may be valid)

[Bug tree-optimization/80202] Spurious warning "array subscript is below array bounds" with if-statement and char to unsigned int conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80202 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/81597] returns link to temporary value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81597 --- Comment #2 from Lisp2D --- Make an error (don't compile) when returns rvalue from these functions. To forbid or banning.

[Bug c++/81602] New: Unnecessary zero-extension after 16 bit popcnt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81602 Bug ID: 81602 Summary: Unnecessary zero-extension after 16 bit popcnt Product: gcc Version: 7.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/67679] -Wunitialized reports on compiler generated variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67679 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Here is another test case with similar behavior: subroutine s(h, Gmin, r) implicit none real, intent(in) :: Gmin(3), h(3) integer, intent(inout) :: r integer :: x_min(3), x_max(3),

[Bug sanitizer/81601] New: incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 Bug ID: 81601 Summary: incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize Product: gcc Version: 7.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: s

[Bug hsa/81477] HSA offloading regressions: "function cannot be cloned"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81477 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- I have posted the fix to the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01909.html

[Bug tree-optimization/81600] tree-vect-loop.c:6075:22: runtime error: index -1 out of bounds for type 'tree_node *[3]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81600 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- I think the following is the correct fix. Index: gcc/tree-vect-loop.c === --- gcc/tree-vect-loop.c(revision 250659) +++ gcc/tree-vect-

[Bug tree-optimization/81600] New: tree-vect-loop.c:6075:22: runtime error: index -1 out of bounds for type 'tree_node *[3]'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81600 Bug ID: 81600 Summary: tree-vect-loop.c:6075:22: runtime error: index -1 out of bounds for type 'tree_node *[3]' Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug middle-end/50790] ICE in copy_constant on divide by expression that evaluates to zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50790 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/81340] ICE in compute_bb_dataflow, at var-tracking.c:6877

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81340 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/81340] ICE in compute_bb_dataflow, at var-tracking.c:6877

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81340 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Fri Jul 28 11:56:47 2017 New Revision: 250660 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250660&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Set DECL_VALUE_EXPR after a debug stmt is generated (PR sanitizer/81340).

[Bug tree-optimization/81388] [7/8 Regression] Incorrect code generation with -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81388 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/81502] In some cases the data is moved to memory unnecessarily [partial regression]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81502 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug middle-end/81502] In some cases the data is moved to memory unnecessarily [partial regression]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81502 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jul 28 11:27:45 2017 New Revision: 250659 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250659&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-07-28 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/81502

[Bug target/81414] [6/7 Regression] ICE in fma steering on AArch64/cortex-a57

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81414 --- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: amker Date: Fri Jul 28 11:25:08 2017 New Revision: 250658 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250658&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline r250496 2017-07-25 Bin C

[Bug libstdc++/81599] New: Error in documentation of std::stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81599 Bug ID: 81599 Summary: Error in documentation of std::stack Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug target/81414] [6/7 Regression] ICE in fma steering on AArch64/cortex-a57

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81414 --- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: amker Date: Fri Jul 28 11:13:45 2017 New Revision: 250657 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250657&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline r250496 2017-07-25 Bin C

[Bug sanitizer/81598] -fsanitize=enum does not detect range violation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81598 --- Comment #2 from Tim Ruehsen --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > This isn't a load, it is a cast, we sanitize just loads from memory. Hmmm, seems ok if the compiler doesn't warn. But the sanitizer IMO should trigger. What if th

[Bug sanitizer/80998] Implement -fsanitize=pointer-overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80998 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 28 10:37:51 2017 New Revision: 250656 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250656&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR sanitizer/80998 * sanopt.c (pass_sanopt::execute): Hand

[Bug sanitizer/81460] [8 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:684

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81460 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/81460] [8 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:684

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81460 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Fri Jul 28 10:36:36 2017 New Revision: 250655 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250655&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Do not handle VLA in sanitization (PR sanitizer/81460). 2017-07-28 Marti

[Bug sanitizer/81598] -fsanitize=enum does not detect range violation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81598 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- This isn't a load, it is a cast, we sanitize just loads from memory. >From the almost non-existent testsuite coverage in LLVM it is hard to find out what exactly they decided to implement (-fsanitize=enum ha

[Bug libgomp/81591] segmentation fault when using priorities of nested tasks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81591 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Sistek --- With the _LIBGOMP_CHECKING_ enabled, I am getting libgomp: priority_tree_next_task: t1 != t2 Best wishes, Jakub Sistek (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > There's > > static void inline > prio

[Bug sanitizer/81598] New: -fsanitize=enum does not detect range violation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81598 Bug ID: 81598 Summary: -fsanitize=enum does not detect range violation Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: s

[Bug c++/81597] returns link to temporary value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81597 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- Sorry, what change are you asking for? Compiling with current gcc, we get plenty of warnings, and at runtime: int && zsh: segmentation fault ./a.out

[Bug rtl-optimization/81595] [8 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: multiple hot/cold transitions found)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81595 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug libgomp/81591] segmentation fault when using priorities of nested tasks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81591 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- There's static void inline priority_queue_downgrade_task (enum priority_queue_type type, struct priority_queue *head, struct gomp_task *task) {

[Bug target/81590] AVX512 run-time test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81590 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- So partly a testsuite issue but the libgomp cases may be wrong-code?

[Bug tree-optimization/81588] [7/8 Regression] Wrong code at -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81588 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug c++/81597] New: returns link to temporary value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81597 Bug ID: 81597 Summary: returns link to temporary value Product: gcc Version: 4.8.5 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Ass

[Bug middle-end/81596] backwards threader misses simple copy within the same BB

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81596 --- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez --- Well, it looks like we're purposely not handling the aforementioned case in the rest of the threader. So perhaps this is more of a feature request. Jeff, is this worth looking into, or should we close this

[Bug middle-end/81596] New: backwards threader misses simple copy within the same BB

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81596 Bug ID: 81596 Summary: backwards threader misses simple copy within the same BB Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority

[Bug middle-end/50168] __builtin_ctz() and intrinsics __bsr(), __bsf() generate suboptimal code on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50168 Liu Hao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lh_mouse at 126 dot com --- Comment #11 from L

[Bug rtl-optimization/81595] [8 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: multiple hot/cold transitions found)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81595 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/81021] stack-use-after-scope false positive error with exceptions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81021 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work|7.1.0 |7.0 --- Comment #33 from Martin Liška --

[Bug tree-optimization/81555] [5/6/7/8 Regression] Wrong code at -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81555 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/81556] [7/8 Regression] Wrong code at -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81556 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/81578] [8 Regression] ICE in omp_reduction_init_op

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81578 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/81578] [8 Regression] ICE in omp_reduction_init_op

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81578 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 28 07:11:51 2017 New Revision: 250651 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250651&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/81578 * tree-parloops.c (build_new_re

[Bug tree-optimization/81573] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81573 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jul 28 07:08:38 2017 New Revision: 250650 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250650&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-07-28 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/81573