[Bug middle-end/90191] [9/10 regression] incorrect -Wformat-overflow with --param max-jump-thread-duplication-stmts=17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90191 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/90204] [8/9/10 Regression] C code is optimized worse than C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204 --- Comment #13 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #10) > On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204 > > > > --- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu ---

[Bug other/90257] 8% degradation on cpu2006 403.gcc starting with r270484

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90257 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu --- We didn't see any performance changes in 502.gcc_r from SPEC CPU 2017 on x86-64.

[Bug libstdc++/90239] [C++20] scoped_allocator_adaptor should support nested pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90239 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.0 Target Milestone|---

[Bug libstdc++/90239] [C++20] scoped_allocator_adaptor should support nested pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90239 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu Apr 25 22:43:15 2019 New Revision: 270588 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270588&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90239 use uses_allocator_construction_args in PR l

[Bug libstdc++/90239] [C++20] scoped_allocator_adaptor should support nested pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90239 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu Apr 25 21:49:54 2019 New Revision: 270587 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270587&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90239 Fix status of P0591R4 in C++2a support table

[Bug c++/61414] enum class bitfield size-checking needs a separate warning flag controlling it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61414 Barry Revzin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug lto/90229] Interaction among -Wl,--as-needed and LTO results in an undefined symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90229 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED See Also|

[Bug c++/90243] diagnostic notes that belong to a suppressed error about an uninitialized variable in a constexpr function are still shown

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90243 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Patch posted to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-04/msg01009.html

[Bug target/89929] __attribute__((target("avx512bw"))) doesn't work on non avx512bw systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929 --- Comment #27 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #26) > Are you planning H.J. to backport that? Please feel free to backport it. I have no plan to do it myself.

[Bug target/89929] __attribute__((target("avx512bw"))) doesn't work on non avx512bw systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||9.0 Target Milestone|10.0

[Bug c++/90254] [8/9 Regression] ice on aggregate initialization of unmovable base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90254 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Priority|P3

[Bug c++/90254] ice on aggregate initialization of unmovable base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90254 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/90236] bogus error with auto non-type template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90236 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/90246] std::bad_variant_access messages are not useful

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90246 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug other/90257] 8% degradation on cpu2006 403.gcc starting with r270484

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90257 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug other/90257] 8% degradation on cpu2006 403.gcc starting with r270484

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90257 --- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool --- This patch from a few days ago craters our specint scores by a few percent. I'm marking this P1.

[Bug other/90257] New: 8% degradation on cpu2006 403.gcc starting with revision 270484

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90257 Bug ID: 90257 Summary: 8% degradation on cpu2006 403.gcc starting with revision 270484 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/90239] [C++20] scoped_allocator_adaptor should support nested pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90239 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- It appears that I am mistaken, the paper mentions the recursive handling of std::pair in the abstract. That change in semantics wasn't obvious from the proposed wording. So I just need to use the new funct

[Bug libstdc++/90239] [C++20] scoped_allocator_adaptor should support nested pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90239 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/90252] PSTL test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90252 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/90243] diagnostic notes that belong to a suppressed error about an uninitialized variable in a constexpr function are still shown

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90243 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Up to GCC 7.2 there's an error for the example, with notes. The error was fixed by r251429 for PR 80935 (and with r252943 on gcc-7-branch) so from 7.3 the error isn't given, but the notes remain.

[Bug libstdc++/90246] std::bad_variant_access messages are not useful

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90246 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.2 Severity|normal

[Bug libstdc++/90246] std::bad_variant_access messages are not useful

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90246 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes. We can do that at some point in the future, not now.

[Bug libobjc/89586] warning: cast between incompatible function types when building libobjc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89586 --- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Let me see what I can do this weekend. The weekend came and went... Is it still possible to fix these annoying new warnings before the release?

[Bug rtl-optimization/90249] [9 Regression] Code size regression on thumb2 due to sub-optimal register allocation starting with r265398

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90249 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9/10 Regression] Code size |[9 Regression] Code size

[Bug tree-optimization/90240] [10 Regression] ICE in try_improve_iv_set, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:6694

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90240 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|9.0 |10.0 Summary|[9/10 Regression

[Bug tree-optimization/90240] [9 Regression] ICE in try_improve_iv_set, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:6694

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90240 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Apr 25 18:08:14 2019 New Revision: 270583 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270583&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/90240 Revert: 2019-04-23 Bin

[Bug tree-optimization/90078] [7/8 Regression] ICE with deep templates caused by overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90078 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Apr 25 18:08:14 2019 New Revision: 270583 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270583&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/90240 Revert: 2019-04-23 Bi

[Bug target/90256] Optimizer with interrupt routines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90256 --- Comment #1 from nulano at nulano dot eu --- Created attachment 46249 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46249&action=edit code to reproduce

[Bug middle-end/89765] [9 Regression] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Apr 25 17:58:56 2019 New Revision: 270579 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270579&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR middle-end/89765 * gimplify.c (gimplify_expr): Avoid tu

[Bug rtl-optimization/90255] [9 regression] r266385 caused code size regressions on Arm, thumb and thumb2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90255 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization, ra --- Comment #

[Bug libstdc++/90246] std::bad_variant_access messages are not useful

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90246 Tavian Barnes changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tavianator at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/90256] New: Optimizer with interrupt routines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90256 Bug ID: 90256 Summary: Optimizer with interrupt routines Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ A

[Bug bootstrap/87338] gcc 8.2 fails to bootstrap on ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87338 --- Comment #9 from James Clarke --- (In reply to James Clarke from comment #6) > Created attachment 46245 [details] > Proposed patch > > Currently performing a test build with this patch, but applying > `s/^.LBI[0-9]*:$/[&]/g` to the stage2 (th

[Bug rtl-optimization/90255] [9 regression] r266385 caused code size regressions on Arm, thumb and thumb2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90255 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/90255] [9 regression] r266385 caused code size regressions on Arm, thumb and thumb2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90255 --- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw --- Command to reproduce cc1 -fpreprocessed bow.i -quiet -dumpbase bow.i -marm -mcpu=arm7tdmi -march=armv4t -auxbase-strip test/bow.o -Os -w -version -fno-short-enums -fgnu89-inline -o bow.s

[Bug rtl-optimization/90255] [9 regression] r266385 caused code size regressions on Arm, thumb and thumb2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90255 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ramana.radhakrishnan at arm dot co

[Bug rtl-optimization/90255] New: [9 regression] r266385 caused code size regressions on Arm, thumb and thumb2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90255 Bug ID: 90255 Summary: [9 regression] r266385 caused code size regressions on Arm, thumb and thumb2 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/90254] New: ice on aggregate initialization of unmovable base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90254 Bug ID: 90254 Summary: ice on aggregate initialization of unmovable base Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c/90253] New: no warning for cv-qualified selectors in _Generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90253 Bug ID: 90253 Summary: no warning for cv-qualified selectors in _Generic Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic Severity: normal Pri

[Bug middle-end/90248] [8/9 Regression] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- Yes it does look like I messed up. I copied an optimization from LLVM so I think they also mess up a similar way (though differently).

[Bug target/89929] __attribute__((target("avx512bw"))) doesn't work on non avx512bw systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929 --- Comment #25 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: hjl Date: Thu Apr 25 17:00:28 2019 New Revision: 270578 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270578&root=gcc&view=rev Log: x86: Update message for target_clones and unsupported ISAs Before

[Bug libstdc++/90252] New: PSTL test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90252 Bug ID: 90252 Summary: PSTL test failures Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: un

[Bug other/90251] missing spaces in string literals

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90251 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- > From parser.h: } GTY((desc ("(%1.type == CPP_TEMPLATE_ID)" "|| (%1.type == CPP_NESTED_NAME_SPECIFIER)" "|| (%1.type == CPP_DECLTYPE)"))) u; > If there's a space after the |

[Bug translation/90149] diagnostics containing BIT_FIELD_REF don't conform to diagnostics guideline

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90149 --- Comment #7 from Roland Illig --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6) > IMNSHO the IL checker "errors" should continue to use GCC terms since they > check the GIMPLE intermediate language. They also shouldn't necessarily be > transla

[Bug other/90251] New: missing spaces in string literals

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90251 Bug ID: 90251 Summary: missing spaces in string literals Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other A

[Bug tree-optimization/89689] [7/8/9 regression] false warning -Wstringop-overflow=

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89689 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com Target Mileston

[Bug libstdc++/90246] std::bad_variant_access messages are not useful

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90246 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- It's too late to change this now, but we could still improve the messages: --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/variant +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/variant @@ -1200,10 +1200,12 @@ namespace __variant {

[Bug middle-end/90248] [8/9 Regression] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug rtl-optimization/90249] [9 Regression] Code size regression on thumb2 due to sub-optimal register allocation starting with r265398

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90249 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/90036] [8/9 Regression] false positive: directive argument is null [-Werror=format-overflow=]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90036 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com Target Mileston

[Bug d/90250] libphobos: segfault in runtime caused by unexpected GC of TLS data.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90250 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug d/90250] libphobos: segfault in runtime caused by unexpected GC of TLS data.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90250 --- Comment #1 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ibuclaw Date: Thu Apr 25 15:31:35 2019 New Revision: 270576 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270576&root=gcc&view=rev Log: libphobos: Fix segfault in runtime caused by unexpected GC o

[Bug target/88809] do not use rep-scasb for inline strlen/memchr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88809 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0

[Bug middle-end/89765] [9 Regression] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- Btw, the C notation typedef unsigned __int128 V __attribute__((vector_size (sizeof (__int128; V foo (unsigned __int128 x, V y, int z) { y[0] = x; } on x86_64 prouces { VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<__int128

[Bug middle-end/89765] [9 Regression] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Summary|Multiple problems

[Bug middle-end/89765] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Actually we use is_gimple_val so testing fallback & fb_rvalue.

[Bug tree-optimization/90037] [9 Regression] -Wnull-dereference false positive after r269302

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90037 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/89765] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/86172] [meta-bug] issues with -Wnull-dereference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86172 Bug 86172 depends on bug 90037, which changed state. Bug 90037 Summary: [9 Regression] -Wnull-dereference false positive after r269302 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90037 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/90037] [9 Regression] -Wnull-dereference false positive after r269302

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90037 --- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Thu Apr 25 14:32:16 2019 New Revision: 270574 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270574&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/90037 * Makefile.in (OBJS): Remove tr

[Bug target/89765] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- I think the issue is that we gimplify VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<__int128 unsigned>(<<< Unknown tree: compound_literal_expr V D.2833 = y; >>>) via 12399 case VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR: 12400 if (

[Bug fortran/90237] Bogus warning from -Wdo-subscript

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90237 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/88154] [F18] ICE: Intrinsic function '_gfortran_caf_get_team' (119) not recognized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88154 --- Comment #3 from Zaak --- Some additional test cases from the OC bug tracker. These fail using gfortran -fcoarray=single and when linking against opencoarrays, so it seems there is an issue on the GCC side (possibly the OC side too, but let'

[Bug target/89765] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- That is not the right thing to do. Anyway, as for the wrong-code, do you see any gcc version where it actually passes? Tried various versions, e.g. r205000, r235000, r250907 and r268427 and all of them abort

[Bug target/89765] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 --- Comment #3 from kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org --- I have found that removing the pattern in match.pd resolves this issue with no regressions on various powerpc targets. I have not tested on other platforms. Index: gcc/match.pd

[Bug bootstrap/87338] gcc 8.2 fails to bootstrap on ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87338 --- Comment #8 from James Clarke --- Oh, and the reason it didn't show up with an older binutils is because it didn't support dwarf2 debug_view: > checking assembler for dwarf2 debug_view support... no

[Bug target/89765] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug bootstrap/87338] gcc 8.2 fails to bootstrap on ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87338 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wilson at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug bootstrap/87338] gcc 8.2 fails to bootstrap on ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87338 James Clarke changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jrtc27 at jrtc27 dot com --- Comment #6 f

[Bug fortran/88154] [F18] ICE: Intrinsic function '_gfortran_caf_get_team' (119) not recognized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88154 Zaak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zbeekman at gmail dot com --- Comment #2 from Zaa

[Bug target/90204] [8/9 Regression] C code is optimized worse than C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204 > > --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu --- > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #7) > >

[Bug d/90250] New: libphobos: segfault in runtime caused by unexpected GC of TLS data.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90250 Bug ID: 90250 Summary: libphobos: segfault in runtime caused by unexpected GC of TLS data. Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/90204] [8/9 Regression] C code is optimized worse than C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204 --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #7) > Yes, C++ with NRV optization, so the alignment of (res) is 4. > and the alignment of res is 16 in C. > > g++/test.i.158t.vect: > > ../test.i:8:23: note: recording ne

[Bug rtl-optimization/90249] [9 regression] Code size regression on thumb2 due to sub-optimal register allocation.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90249 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target Milestone|

[Bug target/89765] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/90249] New: [9 regression] Code size regression on thumb2 due to sub-optimal register allocation.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90249 Bug ID: 90249 Summary: [9 regression] Code size regression on thumb2 due to sub-optimal register allocation. Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywo

[Bug middle-end/90248] [8/9 Regression] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > Yeah, all those look quite questionable, -fno-signed-zeros doesn't mean 0.0 > or -0.0 won't appear, just that it shouldn't matter if 0.0 or -0.0 appears. Yeah,

[Bug sanitizer/88277] ASAN stack poisoning is using unaligned stores on e.g. x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88277 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|marxin at gcc dot

[Bug sanitizer/89832] confusing error message when there is a problem with ASAN_OPTIONS "ERROR: expected '='"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89832 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|9.0 |10.0

[Bug middle-end/90248] [8/9 Regression] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yeah, all those look quite questionable, -fno-signed-zeros doesn't mean 0.0 or -0.0 won't appear, just that it shouldn't matter if 0.0 or -0.0 appears. So the > 0.0 and <= 0.0 cases look completely bogus and

[Bug target/89929] __attribute__((target("avx512bw"))) doesn't work on non avx512bw systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929 --- Comment #24 from Nikolay Bogoychev --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #23) > (In reply to Nikolay Bogoychev from comment #22) > > Hey, > > > > I was reading through the mailing list discussion ( > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches

[Bug middle-end/90248] [8/9 Regression] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/90248] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- In fact the copysign transform, for the cases where we negate X _relies_ on signed zeros... Only exact /* Transform (X >= 0.0 ? 1.0 : -1.0) into copysign(1, X). */ and /* Transform (X < 0.0 ? -1.0 : 1.

[Bug c++/44648] missing -Wunused warning on a const variable in if statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44648 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Apr 25 12:18:07 2019 New Revision: 270572 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270572&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/44648 * g++.dg/warn/Wunused-var-35.C: Remove xfail.

[Bug middle-end/90248] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC|

[Bug middle-end/90248] larger than 0 compare fails with -ffinite-math-only -funsafe-math-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90248 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug middle-end/90244] [UBSAN]: in get_object_alignment_2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90244 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/90242] [UBSAN]: in vn_reference_compute_hash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90242 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Com

[Bug middle-end/90241] [UBSAN]: in ao_ref_init_from_ptr_and_size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90241 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/89929] __attribute__((target("avx512bw"))) doesn't work on non avx512bw systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929 --- Comment #23 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Nikolay Bogoychev from comment #22) > Hey, > > I was reading through the mailing list discussion ( > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-04/msg00757.html ) and I want to say > that currently

[Bug tree-optimization/90240] [9 Regression] ICE in try_improve_iv_set, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:6694

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90240 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P2 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/90238] Bogus warning from -Warray-bounds, triggered by zero-length character literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90238 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug bootstrap/81963] ICE in stage 2 compiler while configuring libgcc in stage2, during GIMPLE pass: cfg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81963 --- Comment #3 from rick at snowlight dot net --- Comment on attachment 46243 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46243 32-bit libgcc config.log for *86*-sun-solaris2.10 note that this was part of a multi-stage build starting fro

[Bug bootstrap/81963] ICE in stage 2 compiler while configuring libgcc in stage2, during GIMPLE pass: cfg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81963 rick at snowlight dot net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rick at snowlight dot net ---

[Bug target/90204] [8/9 Regression] C code is optimized worse than C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204 > > --- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu --- > Also what's better between aligned load/stor

[Bug target/90235] Unnecessary save and restore frame pointer with AVX/AVX512 pseudo registers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90235 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization, ra Tar

[Bug debug/90232] gcc drops top-level dies with -fdebug-types-section

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90232 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-debug Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug target/89929] __attribute__((target("avx512bw"))) doesn't work on non avx512bw systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929 --- Comment #22 from Nikolay Bogoychev --- Hey, I was reading through the mailing list discussion ( https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-04/msg00757.html ) and I want to say that currently code like void __attribute__ ((target("avx512dq")))

  1   2   >