[Bug c++/95226] Faulty aggregate initialization of vector with struct with float

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95226 --- Comment #1 from Frantisek Boranek --- Luckily, the behaviour is the same on old stable Stretch as on Buster. So this version is also affected, but it is probably not serious as was my first impression. gcc (Debian 6.3.0-18+deb9u1) 6.3.0 2017

[Bug lto/95224] -flto -save-temps uses very unusual name for resolution file, looks arbitrary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95224 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug c++/95222] [10/11 Regression] GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95222 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|GCC 10.1 x86 issue with |[10/11 Regression] GCC 10.1

[Bug target/95219] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Coalesce list: (4)ivtmp.15_4 & (22)ivtmp.15_22 [map: 2, 9] : Success -> 2 Coalesce list: (1)vect_vec_iv_.7_1 & (19)_19 [map: 0, 7] : Success -> 0 Coalesce list: (17)_17 & (18)vect_vec_iv_.8_18 [map: 5, 6] :

[Bug target/95219] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-05-20 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/95218] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-05-20 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 --- Comment #10 from Roland Illig --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #9) > That could work. I'm still trying to understand how an > option names -Werror=char-subscripts could trigger an > error. There are no subscripts. The C standard a

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/92658] x86 lacks vector extend / truncate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658 --- Comment #16 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #15) > I will leave truncations (Down Converts in Intel speak) which are AVX512F > instructions to someone else. It should be easy to add missing patterns and > tests foll

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 --- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 04:10:50AM +, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 > > Thomas Koenig changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 --- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka --- Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-May/546106.html

[Bug tree-optimization/95199] Remove extra variable created for memory reference in loop vectorization.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95199 --- Comment #2 from Kaipeng Zhou --- It seems that IVOPTs has no ability to handle the case where TREE_CODE(iv_step) is SSA_NAME.

[Bug target/95228] New: Failure to optimize register allocation around atomic loads/stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95228 Bug ID: 95228 Summary: Failure to optimize register allocation around atomic loads/stores Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/95227] New: vec_extract doesn't mark input as used in C++ mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95227 Bug ID: 95227 Summary: vec_extract doesn't mark input as used in C++ mode Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 --- Comment #4 from Bill Seurer --- It was definitely r11-477. I see this causing an ICE when building gcc albeit only on power 9.

[Bug c++/95226] New: Faulty aggregate initialization of vector with struct with float

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95226 Bug ID: 95226 Summary: Faulty aggregate initialization of vector with struct with float Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/95212] enum processor_features is out of sync

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95212 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2 Resolution|---

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 commit r10-8158-ge54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue M

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c7b747995a687d513dddfeafa54c6af4d10dc17 commit r9-8606-g2c7b747995a687d513dddfeafa54c6af4d10dc17 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue May

[Bug target/95212] enum processor_features is out of sync

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95212 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 commit r10-8158-ge54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue M

[Bug c++/86142] hard error for bad delete-expression in SFINAE context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86142 ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Known to work

[Bug target/94087] std::random_device often fails when used from multiple threads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94087 --- Comment #24 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a2d196e75cef95c2b70734ad02e94f9da0e769fe commit r11-506-ga2d196e75cef95c2b70734ad02e94f9da0e769fe Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug c++/95225] [11 regression] build failure (ICE) starting with r11-477

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95225 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/95225] New: [11 regression] build failure (ICE) starting with r11-477

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95225 Bug ID: 95225 Summary: [11 regression] build failure (ICE) starting with r11-477 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- You're not wrong, but here we're dealing with the undefined behavior sanitizer whose point is to detect broken code like the above.

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC|

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Is this code even defined? We call a method after calling the deconstructor on the object? If we do: c->~MyClass (); new(c) MyClass(); c->Doit (); Then it is defined. Or am I wrong about that?

[Bug lto/95224] New: -flto -save-temps uses very unusual name for resolution file, looks arbitrary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95224 Bug ID: 95224 Summary: -flto -save-temps uses very unusual name for resolution file, looks arbitrary Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/95212] enum processor_features is out of sync

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95212 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b commit r11-505-g453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue May 19 14:4

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b commit r11-505-g453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue May 19 14:4

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Component|libstdc++ |c++ --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakel

[Bug c++/69433] missing -Wreturn-local-addr assigning address of a local to a static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69433 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dank at kegel dot com --- Comment #5 from

[Bug middle-end/24786] Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #6 from Martin Sebo

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 53890, which changed state. Bug 53890 Summary: bogus array bounds warning https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53890 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/53890] bogus array bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53890 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||4.8.5 Known to work|

[Bug sanitizer/94910] detect_stack_use_after_return=1 is much slower than clang's

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94910 --- Comment #8 from Rafael Avila de Espindola --- I can confirm that the proposed patch fixes the issue for me. Thank you so much!

[Bug libstdc++/95223] New: [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Bug ID: 95223 Summary: [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value Product: gcc Versi

[Bug c++/95222] GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95222 --- Comment #1 from raptorfactor at raptorfactor dot com --- $ g++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=C:\Redacted\msys2-x86_64-rolling\mingw32\bin\g++.exe COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=C:/Redacted/msys2-x86_64-rolling/mingw32/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-w64-mingw

[Bug c/50584] No warning for passing small array to C99 static array declarator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50584 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2015-07-03 00

[Bug c++/95222] New: GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95222 Bug ID: 95222 Summary: GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONF

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 --- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha --- Uh-oh… int s6; void ml (long int *ha, int dz) { int iy[dz]; int *tp; int cm; for (cm = 0; cm < 3; ++cm) tp[cm] = ha[cm] + 1.0f; if (s6 == 0) return; }

[Bug tree-optimization/49657] array subscript warnings when building gcc with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49657 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/48091] No warning when given function arguments mismatch earlier function definition which GCC assumes to be K&R, even with --std=c99 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48091 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2017-01-23 00:00:00 |2020-5-19 CC|

[Bug c++/46513] Request: Warning for use of unsafe string handling functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46513 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Sta

[Bug middle-end/44300] Spurious array subscript warning, &b[0] == &a[1] is not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44300 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Resolut

[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 --- Comment #12 from Rafael Avila de Espindola --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6) > Thank you, can you please attach a pre-processed file (-E) so that one > doesn't need to clone seastar repository? The testcase that is attached does

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- And for completeness, the asm for the -fstrong-eval-order=all case: movq%rbx, %rdi call*%r12 movq-24(%rbp), %rax movq(%rax), %rax addq$16, %rax

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- I think the thing is that we have a CALL_EXPR, something like OBJ_TYPE_REF (...) (.UBSAN_VPTR ()) and now we first evaluate the OBJ_TYPE_REF. In this case this is what seems to happen here: 1) we evalua

[Bug c++/68160] Can bind packed field if it's packed with #pragma pack(push, 1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68160 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||10.1.0, 11.0, 5.5.0, 6.4.0,

[Bug c/41809] escaping address of packed field should trigger warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41809 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.1.0, 9.2.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c/41809] escaping address of packed field should trigger warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41809 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug middle-end/24786] Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 dank at kegel dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug other/90556] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wreturn-local-addr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90556 Bug 90556 depends on bug 24786, which changed state. Bug 24786 Summary: Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 What|Removed |Add

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek --- It is caused by this code: 853 if (flag_strong_eval_order == 2 854 && CALL_EXPR_FN (*expr_p) 855 && cp_get_callee_fndecl_nofold (*expr_p) == NULL_TREE) 856 { 857

[Bug target/94591] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Assembler messages: Error: operand mismatch -- `rev64 v0.2d,v0.2d' (or `rev32 v0.2s,v0.2s')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94591 Alex Coplan changed: What|Removed |Added CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org Resolut

[Bug testsuite/39353] Linker warning causing tests to fail (960218 and 20030913)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39353 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-05-19 CC|

[Bug c++/95221] New: g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 Bug ID: 95221 Summary: g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug middle-end/31279] Uninitialized warning for call-by-reference arguments with known intent(in)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31279 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/24786] Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug libgcc/95220] New: Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 Bug ID: 95220 Summary: Incorrect GFNI dectection Product: gcc Version: 10.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assig

[Bug target/94591] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Assembler messages: Error: operand mismatch -- `rev64 v0.2d,v0.2d' (or `rev32 v0.2s,v0.2s')

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94591 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98452668d362bb9e6358f7eb5cff69f4f5ab1d45 commit r11-502-g98452668d362bb9e6358f7eb5cff69f4f5ab1d45 Author: Alex Coplan Date: Tue May

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confir

[Bug c++/95149] lex.c:1729:8: warning: result of comparison against a string literal is unspecified (use an explicit string comparison function instead) [-Wstring-compare]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95149 --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #4) > Fixed ed63c387aa0 g:ed63c387aa0

[Bug c++/94923] False positive -Wclass-memaccess with trivially copyable std::optional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94923 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c0d8623ce5aa6d92c2e6c62e1bee66272a011f59 commit r11-499-gc0d8623ce5aa6d92c2e6c62e1bee66272a011f59 Author: Martin Sebor Date: Tue M

[Bug fortran/95109] [11 regression] ICE in gfortran.dg/gomp/target1.f90 after r11-349

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95109 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/95149] lex.c:1729:8: warning: result of comparison against a string literal is unspecified (use an explicit string comparison function instead) [-Wstring-compare]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95149 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/95218] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug target/95219] New: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219 Bug ID: 95219 Summary: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/95218] New: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218 Bug ID: 95218 Summary: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinsk

[Bug c/44677] Warn for variables incremented but not used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44677 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2010-06-28 00:34:58 |2020-5-19 --- Comment #10 from Martin Seb

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- This is an internal only builtin which is created only via the vectorizer.

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/89180] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wunused warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89180 Bug 89180 depends on bug 95217, which changed state. Bug 95217 Summary: missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95217 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c/95217] missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95217 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Blocks|

[Bug c/64639] missing warning by -Wunused-value in compound expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64639 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug c++/95202] Assignment to a member is wrongly optimized away by g++ with -fstrict-aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95202 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection --- Comment #1 from Ric

[Bug c/95217] New: missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95217 Bug ID: 95217 Summary: missing -Wunused-but-set-parameter for compound assignment Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug rtl-optimization/95210] internal compiler error: in prepare_copy_insn, at gcse.c:1988

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95210 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- testcase?

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug target/95216] Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/95206] internal compiler error: in sign_mask, at wide-int.h:855

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95206 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/94955] [10 Regression] ICE in to_wide

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94955 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||danny.schneider at posteo dot de --- Co

[Bug target/95216] New: Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95216 Bug ID: 95216 Summary: Extra space in __builtin_ia32_vec_pack_sfix256 definition Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug fortran/95215] New: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14079

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95215 Bug ID: 95215 Summary: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14079 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/94962] Suboptimal AVX2 code for _mm256_zextsi128_si256(_mm_set1_epi8(-1))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94962 --- Comment #7 from Nemo --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #6) > > vmovdqa xmm0, xmm0 is not redundant here, it would clear up 128-256 bit > which is the meaning of `zext`. No, it is redundant because "vpcmpeqd xmm0, xmm0, xmm0" already

[Bug lto/95190] Documentation for -Wstringop-overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 --- Comment #5 from Mario Charest --- On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 2:35 AM rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org < gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 > > --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- > This is new be

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug lto/95190] Documentation for -Wstringop-overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 --- Comment #4 from Mario Charest --- On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 1:09 PM msebor at gcc dot gnu.org < gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95190 > > Martin Sebor changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug libstdc++/71133] msp430-elf -mlarge FTBFS in libstdc++-v3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71133 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0

[Bug libstdc++/95209] std::filesystem::path::lexically_normal mangles "//foo"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95209 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- You didn't provide the requested information when creating a new bug report, please see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ (In reply to M Welinder from comment #0) > lexically_normal transforms "//foo" into "/foo"

[Bug libstdc++/95200] user-defined hash function is not copied correctly if unordered_map is declared using an incomplete type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95200 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- It's undefined behaviour so anything can happen.

[Bug bootstrap/95205] patch commit, and making gcc error.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95205 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

  1   2   >