[Bug target/58067] ICE in GFortran recog.c:2158

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58067 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak --- You can add -mtls-dialect=gnu2 to -fpic and -mcmodel=large.

[Bug c++/58047] parse error with typedef introduced from base class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58047 fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|un

[Bug testsuite/58070] New: gcc.c-torture: useless check "-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58070 Bug ID: 58070 Summary: gcc.c-torture: useless check "-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer" Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priorit

[Bug target/53976] [SH] Unnecessary clrt after bt

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53976 --- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #2) > Interestingly, the following function shows some improved behavior (notice > the removed volatile mem store): > > int test_2_1 (int* a, int b, int c) > { > a[1] = b !=

[Bug middle-end/58041] Unaligned access to arrays in packed structure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58041 --- Comment #27 from Bernd Edlinger --- (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #24) > Created attachment 30594 [details] > Proposed patch I think it would be safe to put my initial test case under gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr58041.c It passe

[Bug testsuite/58070] gcc.c-torture: useless check "-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58070 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- This is target dependent.

[Bug lto/45375] [meta-bug] Issues with building Mozilla with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 --- Comment #187 from Jan Hubicka --- WPA time report Execution times (seconds) phase setup : 0.01 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.01 ( 0%) wall 1398 kB ( 0%) ggc phase opt and generate : 80.79 (13%) usr 1.01 ( 3%) sys 81.96

[Bug testsuite/58070] gcc.c-torture: useless check "-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58070 --- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #1) > This is target dependent. OK, my target is --target=arm-eabi What exactly is target dependent?

[Bug testsuite/58070] gcc.c-torture: useless check "-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58070 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab --- The default state of -fomit-frame-pointer.

[Bug c++/58059] gcc-4.7.2-r1 - g++: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58059 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson --- The non-preprocessed test case crashes g++ 4.7, 4.8, and 4.9 for me on x86_64-linux.

[Bug libgcc/58061] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58061 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson --- This is clearly a duplicate of PR57848. Then there is PR57897 which crashes with a different error message but still on #pragma target and mingw, I believe that one is at least closely related.

[Bug fortran/58064] Cannot compile gcc-4.8.1 by gcc-3.4.6

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58064 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson --- init2.c:37: MPFR assertion failed: (64 - 0) == ((64 - 0)/8) * 8 && sizeof(mp_limb_t) == ((64 - 0)/8) seems your mpfr library is broken

[Bug c++/58071] New: Premature instantiation of default argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58071 Bug ID: 58071 Summary: Premature instantiation of default argument Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/58071] Premature instantiation of default argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58071 --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini --- We may have a Dup of this. I'll check later today if nobody beats me.

[Bug testsuite/58070] gcc.c-torture: useless check "-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58070 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/58047] parse error with typedef introduced from base class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58047 --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini --- You should ;) Seriously, when committing a patch I think that it's a good practice to double check it on the duplicates, even if everything goes well consider adding sufficiently different testcases coming fro

[Bug rtl-optimization/57708] [4.8 regression] function clobbers callee saved register on ARM

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57708 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/51784] PIC register not correctly preserved in nested funcs / with non-local goto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51784 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug target/51784] PIC register not correctly preserved in nested funcs / with non-local goto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51784 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/57993] [4.9 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (definition in block n does not dominate use in block m)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57993 --- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt --- I missed a couple of candidate replacements in the previous fix; these are fixed in r201466.

[Bug c++/58072] New: [C++11] Error messages involving user-defined literals are poor (refer to tokens)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58072 Bug ID: 58072 Summary: [C++11] Error messages involving user-defined literals are poor (refer to tokens) Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug c++/58072] [C++11] Error messages involving user-defined literals are poor (refer to tokens)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58072 --- Comment #1 from Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net> --- Created attachment 30604 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30604&action=edit Patch c_parse_error to catch and describe user-defined literal tokens explicitly.

[Bug fortran/56666] Suppression flag for " DO loop at (1) will be executed zero times"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug c/58073] New: Suboptimal optimisation of ((x & 0x70) == 0x00 && (x & 0x70) == 0x10 && (x & 0x70) == 0x20) on x86_64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58073 Bug ID: 58073 Summary: Suboptimal optimisation of ((x & 0x70) == 0x00 && (x & 0x70) == 0x10 && (x & 0x70) == 0x20) on x86_64 Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug c/58073] Suboptimal optimisation of ((x & 0x70) == 0x00 && (x & 0x70) == 0x10 && (x & 0x70) == 0x20) on x86_64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58073 --- Comment #1 from dhowells at redhat dot com --- Interestingly, the suboptimality shifts if the 'shift' value in the demo program is changed to 0: Going through the cases individually:: (1) return (mask(d) == (0x0 << shift)); This is rendere

[Bug c++/58057] gcc lexer cannot parse extern "\x43" void blah() with option -std=c++0x;

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58057 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/58072] [C++11] Error messages involving user-defined literals are poor (refer to tokens)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58072 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/58074] New: [C++11] __is_trivial intrinsic fails for deleted members and for non-trivial copy-c'tors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58074 Bug ID: 58074 Summary: [C++11] __is_trivial intrinsic fails for deleted members and for non-trivial copy-c'tors Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug c++/58074] [C++11] __is_trivial intrinsic fails for deleted members and for non-trivial copy-c'tors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58074 --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini --- ... and the issue is one more level deeper, because __is_trivial just uses the internal trivial_type_p. I mean, it should be pretty easy to construct testcases not involving __is_trival at all but handled inco

[Bug c++/58046] template operator= in SFINAE class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58046 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug c++/58062] [C++11] bogus __func__ lookup in lambda body

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58062 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug fortran/58027] "Arithmetic overflow converting ..." in PARAMETER triggers an ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58027 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/57138] [4.8 Regression][DR 1430] ICE with pack expansion and alias template

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57138 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug c++/51239] [DR 1430] ICE with variadic template alias

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51239 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Patch applied as r201469. Leaving suspended until the DR resolution is final.

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini --- The standard streams are indeed special, being constructed once and never destroyed, see libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/ios_init.cc. I suppose a minimal reproducer could involve a file scope static of some sort...

[Bug c++/53756] [C++1y] ICE: in gen_type_die_with_usage, at dwarf2out.c:18774 with -g and operator auto ()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53756 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler --- (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #2) > I suppose a minimal reproducer could involve a file scope static of some > sort... I'm a bit confused by your reply, Paolo: Isn't my_cout also a "file scope sta

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini --- Sorry, I didn't study it in sufficient detail. Anyway, no mysteries, this is free software: libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/ios_init.cc etc.

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini --- Ah, in case isn't obvious already: it only happens when the "I/O expression" has the ! operator in front.

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #6 from Daniel Krügler --- (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #5) > Ah, in case isn't obvious already: it only happens when the "I/O expression" > has the ! operator in front. I suspected that and ensured that I added a similar o

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini --- I'm not at all sure! But it happens with -O0 too, right?, thus at this point the front-end seems more likely than the back-end, I would not change the Component from c++ to something else. In any case we badly

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #8 from Daniel Krügler --- (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #7) > But it happens with -O0 too, right? Yes. > In any case we badly need a reduced testcase ;) I agree. Unfortunately I'm on vacations from tomorrow on (1 week), s

[Bug c++/58063] default arguments evaluated twice per call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063 --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini --- Your help is always very appreciated, Daniel. Here we have plenty of work to do anyway, if when you will back the bug will be unchanged, consider helping more.

[Bug target/56979] ICE in output_operand: invalid operand for code 'P'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56979 --- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw --- The problem here is that float2 has alignment 8, although this is not it's natural alignment (which would be 4). This argument is passed by value to the routine operator-(float, float2), and the compiler t

[Bug middle-end/57748] [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE when expanding assignment to unaligned zero-sized array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748 David Abdurachmanov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||david.abdurachmanov at gmail dot c

[Bug target/58065] ARM MALLOC_ABI_ALIGNMENT is wrong

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58065 David Abdurachmanov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||david.abdurachmanov at gmail dot c

[Bug go/58075] New: Unable to build go on ia64-hp-hpux11.31

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58075 Bug ID: 58075 Summary: Unable to build go on ia64-hp-hpux11.31 Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: go

[Bug libgcc/58061] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58061 --- Comment #2 from Whitequill Riclo --- This is the first bug I have reported, so I didn't know where to look to see if it has been reported before. Also I can reproduce it over, and over again without fail. I was a little unnerved when I saw the