[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #19 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to npl from comment #17) > I got interrupted by a colleague at work, part 2 of the ramblings... > > Everything you could argue against memcpy beeing replaced by simpler > instructions, doesnt cha

[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #20 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 38879 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38879&action=edit patch to remove memcpy inline expansion misalign limit This patch lifts the restrictions on memcpy to assignm

[Bug libgomp/71844] Data mapping of an array section in the target construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71844 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- The testcase has been changed on the GCC side after lengthy discussion on it back in 2014, the result has been that the testcase is invalid, but there is a desire to make it work somehow in the future. Nothi

[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #21 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #18) > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12) > > On Fri, 8 Jul 2016, olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > > > void test (const int *a, int *b) > >

[Bug c/7652] -Wswitch-break : Warn if a switch case falls through

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7652 --- Comment #45 from Marek Polacek --- Patches posted .

[Bug tree-optimization/54200] copyrename generates wrong debuginfo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200 --- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Sun, 10 Jul 2016, nightstrike at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200 > > nightstrike changed: > >What|Removed |Adde

[Bug debug/54519] [4.6/4.7 Regression] Debug info quality regression due to (pointless) partial inlining

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54519 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Sun, 10 Jul 2016, nightstrike at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54519 > > nightstrike changed: > >What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/62125] Nested select type not accepted (rejects valid)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62125 --- Comment #7 from mrestelli --- (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #6) > I tested the patch. No regressions. Works as advertised. > > I will submit the patch for approval and see if we can commit it. > > Thanks! :-) (first time I try t

[Bug tree-optimization/71752] [7 Regression] ICE in compute_live_loop_exits, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:229 w/ -O1 -ftree-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71752 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/71652] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE in in ix86_target_macros_internal, at config/i386/i386-c.c:187

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71652 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/71652] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE in in ix86_target_macros_internal, at config/i386/i386-c.c:187

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71652 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > Started with r202741. Thanks, I'm going to take a look.

[Bug tree-optimization/70586] [7 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit and 64-bit modes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70586 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|jakub at gcc dot

[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #22 from npl at chello dot at --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #21) > (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #18) > > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12) > > > On Fri, 8 Jul 2016, olegendo at gcc dot gnu.or

[Bug tree-optimization/70600] Missed tree optimization with multiple additions in different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70600 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 11 Jul 2016, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70600 > > Andrew Pinski changed: > >What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/71652] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE in in ix86_target_macros_internal, at config/i386/i386-c.c:187

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71652 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug c++/71841] variadic template can't cast to base class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71841 --- Comment #3 from johan.leroy at openehs dot co.uk --- clang version I've used: $ clang --version clang version 3.8.0 (branches/release_38) Target: x86_64-pc-windows-msvc Thread model: posix InstalledDir: C:\LLVM\bin file compiles without a pr

[Bug tree-optimization/60172] [4.9/5 Regression] ARM performance regression from trunk@207239

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60172 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/68961] [6 regression] Test case gcc.target/powerpc/pr60203.c fails since r231674

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68961 --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Jul 12 08:56:14 2016 New Revision: 238238 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238238&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-07-12 Richard Biener PR rtl-optimization/68961

[Bug middle-end/71716] [7 Regression] gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-4.c is miscompiled with -march=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71716 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/71716] [7 Regression] gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-4.c is miscompiled with -march=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71716 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, npl at chello dot at wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 > > --- Comment #22 from npl at chello dot at --- > > > 0014 : > > > 14: e3a03000

[Bug fortran/71795] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] Two Bugs in array constructors (optimization)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71795 Vladimir Fuka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vladimir.fuka at gmail dot com --- Comme

[Bug tree-optimization/71752] [7 Regression] ICE in compute_live_loop_exits, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:229 w/ -O1 -ftree-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71752 alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee

[Bug target/71847] powerpc64le: Potential rlwinm optimisation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71847 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot gnu.org -

[Bug fortran/71839] undefined reference to `_gfortran_caf_stop_str'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71839 --- Comment #5 from Anton Shterenlikht --- The puzzling thing is that symbol _gfortran_caf_stop_str is in the OpenCoarrays library: $ nm ~/OpenCoarrays-1.6.0/opencoarrays-build/lib/libcaf_mpi.a | grep _gfortran_caf_stop_str 4870 T _g

[Bug libstdc++/58265] [lwg/2063] std::string move assignment should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58265 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Tue Jul 12 10:56:11 2016 New Revision: 238241 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238241&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Implement N4258 noexcept for std::basic_string. Backport from m

[Bug libstdc++/58265] [lwg/2063] std::string move assignment should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58265 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|6.0 |5.5

[Bug libstdc++/66145] [5/6/7 Regression] std::ios_base::failure objects thrown from libstdc++.so use old ABI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145 --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Boris Kolpackov from comment #15) > I am interested to hear what is your recommendation to do instead, call > good() > after every IO operation? The normal way that iostreams are designed to

[Bug libstdc++/60621] std::vector::emplace_back generates massively more code than push_back

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60621 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- Using the code in comment 6, with 4.9.3, 5.3.0, 6.1.0 and recent 7.0 trunk: textdata bss dec hex filename 5606 696 40634218c6 493.eb 4943 696 405679

[Bug tree-optimization/71842] Optimize FMA when some arguments are simple constants

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71842 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/71836] Missing constant prop from const variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71836 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/71831] __builtin_object_size poor results with no optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #24 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to npl from comment #22) > > Its also generally quite hard to force the compiler to do less-aligned > accesses, and I haven`t seen this "solution" anywhere. (Probably because it > doesn`t work on any

[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #25 from npl at chello dot at --- Yes, that works fine. I just meant to say it needs more work than casting to a type with less alignment, and unless explicitly marked with this pragma you can expect a compiler to access like the (dedu

[Bug tree-optimization/50417] regression: memcpy with known alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 --- Comment #26 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, npl at chello dot at wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417 > > --- Comment #25 from npl at chello dot at --- > Yes, that works fine. I just meant to sa

[Bug fortran/71783] [5/6/7 Regression ] ICE on valid code in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl at gimplify.c:1801

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71783 --- Comment #13 from Toon Moene --- On 07/11/2016 10:26 PM, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71783 > > Thomas Koenig changed: > >What|Removed |Added > -

[Bug fortran/71839] undefined reference to `_gfortran_caf_stop_str'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71839 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Maybe I should ask the OpenCoarrays people. Indeed!

[Bug fortran/62125] Nested select type not accepted (rejects valid)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62125 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres --- I confirm that the patch in comment 5 allows the test to be compiled without regression. A test case showing that the code executes as expected is needed to avoid to replace reject-valid with wrong-co

[Bug tree-optimization/23286] Missed code hoisting optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 --- Comment #41 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Jul 12 13:32:04 2016 New Revision: 238242 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238242&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-07-12 Steven Bosscher Richard Biener PR tre

[Bug middle-end/70159] missed CSE optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159 --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Jul 12 13:32:04 2016 New Revision: 238242 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238242&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-07-12 Steven Bosscher Richard Biener PR tre

[Bug rtl-optimization/29144] Missing if-conversion. If-conversion dependent on operand order. Inconsistent if-conversion.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29144 Bug 29144 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/21485] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] missed load PRE, PRE makes i?86/7 suck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21485 Bug 21485 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] [meta-bug] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568 Bug 24568 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/33315] If condition not getting eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33315 Bug 33315 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/67879] unnecessary jump in ternary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67879 Bug 67879 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/23286] Missed code hoisting optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/11832] Optimization of common code in switch statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11832 Bug 11832 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/70159] missed CSE optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159 Bug 70159 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/21676] [4.3 Regression] Optimizer regression: SciMark sparse matrix benchmark

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21676 Bug 21676 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug rtl-optimization/33828] Issues with code hoisting implementation in gcse.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33828 Bug 33828 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/24001] Simple redundancy not eliminated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24001 Bug 24001 depends on bug 23286, which changed state. Bug 23286 Summary: Missed code hoisting optimization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/71848] New: [7 Regression] libstdc++ testsuite error on AIX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71848 Bug ID: 71848 Summary: [7 Regression] libstdc++ testsuite error on AIX Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rejects-valid Severity: normal Pr

[Bug c++/71848] [7 Regression] libstdc++ testsuite error on AIX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71848 --- Comment #1 from David Edelsohn --- Created attachment 38880 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38880&action=edit insert4_neg.ii pre-processed source code

[Bug c++/71848] [7 Regression] libstdc++ testsuite error on AIX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71848 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/71849] New: bitfield placement of overly aligned type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71849 Bug ID: 71849 Summary: bitfield placement of overly aligned type Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug middle-end/70159] missed CSE optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/67879] unnecessary jump in ternary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67879 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/33315] stores not commoned by sinking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33315 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Com

[Bug rtl-optimization/29144] Missing if-conversion. If-conversion dependent on operand order. Inconsistent if-conversion.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29144 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- b and d are fixed on trunk (GCC 7) but we're just lucky with the association.

[Bug bootstrap/66319] [6 Regression] gcov-tool.c:84:65: error: invalid conversion from 'int (*)(const c har*, const stat*, int, FTW*)' to 'int (*)(const char*, const stat*, int, FTW)'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319 The Written Word changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzilla-gcc@thewrittenword

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] [meta-bug] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --- : milliDiff_6 = -milliDiff_5(D); minutesDiff_15 = milliDiff_6 / 6; minutesDiff_8 = -minutesDiff_15; so we still fail to notice that this is equal to minutesDiff_3 = milliDiff_5(D) / 6; w

[Bug tree-optimization/24574] a!=0?a/10:0 is not reduced to a/10

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24574 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug bootstrap/66319] [6 Regression] gcov-tool.c:84:65: error: invalid conversion from 'int (*)(const c har*, const stat*, int, FTW*)' to 'int (*)(const char*, const stat*, int, FTW)'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319 --- Comment #14 from The Written Word --- We backported this patch to gcc-4.7.4 which we used to bootstrap gcc-5.4.0 on HP-UX/IA. We seem to get farther than before in building gcc-5.4.0 though the build still fails for what appears are reasons

[Bug tree-optimization/21485] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] missed load PRE, PRE makes i?86/7 suck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21485 --- Comment #60 from Richard Biener --- With code hoisting we now end up with the following for the testcase in comment#6. Over-the-weekend testing on bytemark (nbench?) didn't show any effect though. Thus requires re-evaluation. NumSift (long

[Bug rtl-optimization/11832] Optimization of common stores in switch statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11832 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||33315 Summary|Optimization o

[Bug bootstrap/66319] [6 Regression] gcov-tool.c:84:65: error: invalid conversion from 'int (*)(const c har*, const stat*, int, FTW*)' to 'int (*)(const char*, const stat*, int, FTW)'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319 --- Comment #15 from John David Anglin --- Steve Ellcey used to support HP-UX/IA64 but he moved on to MIPS. Don't know Jim Wilson's status. I don't have any ia64 hardware and I also don't have an 11.31 box. So, there's a support issue for ia64

[Bug tree-optimization/71831] __builtin_object_size poor results with no optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug tree-optimization/71831] __builtin_object_size poor results with no optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- One of the reasons is that -O0 should mean short compile time. If you schedule the objsz pass at -O0, you might slow down the compilation, especially on larger functions. The glibc headers won't use it at -O

[Bug rtl-optimization/71634] Invalid write with in mark_loops_for_removal (ira-build.c:2256) with --param ira-max-loops-num=0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71634 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 12 14:54:52 2016 New Revision: 238247 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238247&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix PR rtl-optimization/71634 * ira-build.c (mark_loops_for_remov

[Bug middle-end/71700] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] wrong code with struct assignment with sub-word signed bitfields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71700 --- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Tue Jul 12 15:00:28 2016 New Revision: 238248 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238248&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [expr.c] PR middle-end/71700: zero-extend sub-word value w

[Bug middle-end/71700] [4.9/5/6 Regression] wrong code with struct assignment with sub-word signed bitfields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71700 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||7.0 Summary|[4.9

[Bug rtl-optimization/71634] [4.9//5/6 Regression] Invalid write with in mark_loops_for_removal (ira-build.c:2256) with --param ira-max-loops-num=0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71634 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/71763] powerpc64: ICE due to need for output reload on jump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763 --- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Tue Jul 12 15:10:08 2016 New Revision: 238250 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238250&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko

[Bug target/70098] PowerPC64: eigen hits ICE following invalid register assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70098 --- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Tue Jul 12 15:10:08 2016 New Revision: 238250 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238250&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko

[Bug target/71763] powerpc64: ICE due to need for output reload on jump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763 --- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Tue Jul 12 15:13:47 2016 New Revision: 238251 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238251&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko

[Bug target/70098] PowerPC64: eigen hits ICE following invalid register assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70098 --- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Tue Jul 12 15:13:47 2016 New Revision: 238251 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238251&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko

[Bug c/57853] pointer arithmetic on arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853 --- Comment #16 from this is me --- Andrew Pinski: Will you delete this Bug 57853 web page for me? https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853 I can't hired! Howard > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853 > > Andrew Pin

[Bug tree-optimization/71831] __builtin_object_size poor results with no optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- Yes, I understand and agree with that. What I envision is handling just the basic cases like the ones in comment #2 (and similar) that don't involve the objsz machinery. My -Wformat-length patch (bug 49905)

[Bug driver/71850] New: CreateProcess argumend lpCommandLine exceeds limit 32k limit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71850 Bug ID: 71850 Summary: CreateProcess argumend lpCommandLine exceeds limit 32k limit Product: gcc Version: 6.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug tree-optimization/71831] __builtin_object_size poor results with no optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831 --- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor --- I meant comment #0.

[Bug tree-optimization/71831] __builtin_object_size poor results with no optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- To elaborate on the use case: my immediate need for it is to detect at compile time possible buffer overflow in calls to sprintf (the -Wformat-length patch) without _FORTIFY_SOURCE that not all projects use an

[Bug driver/71850] @file should be used to cc1/cc1plus when @file is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71850 --- Comment #2 from christian wilmes --- Which component performs the CreateProcess call then?

[Bug driver/71850] CreateProcess argument lpCommandLine exceeds limit 32k limit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71850 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- The driver does handle the case where @file is used for linking and passes a temp @file to the linker.

[Bug driver/71850] @file should be used to cc1/cc1plus when @file is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71850 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug driver/71850] @file should be used to cc1/cc1plus when @file is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71850 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to christian wilmes from comment #2) > Which component performs the CreateProcess call then? I am saying there is code in gcc.c that handles the linking side of things but not calling of cc1. http

[Bug libstdc++/66145] [5/6/7 Regression] std::ios_base::failure objects thrown from libstdc++.so use old ABI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145 --- Comment #17 from Boris Kolpackov --- > if (is >> x >> y >> z) And what should happen in the else part of such statements? if (is >> x >> y >> z) ... else throw something(); Also note that if the 'is >> x' call in the above chain fails,

[Bug bootstrap/66319] [6 Regression] gcov-tool.c:84:65: error: invalid conversion from 'int (*)(const c har*, const stat*, int, FTW*)' to 'int (*)(const char*, const stat*, int, FTW)'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319 --- Comment #16 from The Written Word --- (In reply to John David Anglin from comment #15) > Steve Ellcey used to support HP-UX/IA64 but he moved on to MIPS. Don't > know Jim Wilson's status. I emailed them both. Maybe they can point me to a n

[Bug target/69880] Linking Windows resource + implicit 'default-manifest.o' creates bad .exe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69880 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton --- (In reply to vsz.bugzilla from comment #5) > You may find a self-contained example under the GitHub link included in the > original report. Direct link: Unfortunately I do not have a MYSY2 installation, or ev

[Bug preprocessor/71851] New: Get more time granularity at preprocessing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71851 Bug ID: 71851 Summary: Get more time granularity at preprocessing Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/62125] Nested select type not accepted (rejects valid)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62125 --- Comment #9 from mrestelli --- Here is a test; should compile and run without errors. module m implicit none type, abstract :: t1 logical :: l end type t1 type, extends(t1), abstract :: t2 integer :: i end type t2 type, extends(t2)

[Bug libstdc++/66145] [5/6/7 Regression] std::ios_base::failure objects thrown from libstdc++.so use old ABI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145 --- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Boris Kolpackov from comment #17) > > if (is >> x >> y >> z) > > And what should happen in the else part of such statements? > > if (is >> x >> y >> z) > ... > else > throw something();

[Bug tree-optimization/24574] a!=0?a/10:0 is not reduced to a/10

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24574 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- Makes sense, I don't know why I didn't add divisions in the original patch. *_MOD_EXPR, shifts and rotates should work as well with 0 on the left, max with INT_MAX, etc, I was quite minimalist there. Of course

[Bug c++/71841] variadic template can't cast to base class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71841 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler --- (In reply to johan.leroy from comment #3) > clang version I've used: > > $ clang --version > clang version 3.8.0 (branches/release_38) > Target: x86_64-pc-windows-msvc > Thread model: posix > InstalledDir:

[Bug c++/71841] variadic template can't cast to base class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71841 --- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler --- (In reply to Daniel Krügler from comment #4) > I cannot confirm this: > > http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/Y6tlw5LQ71o1o6ei Sorry, this should be: http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/3L5qgWb4x0gJw6FV >

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Tue Jul 12 17:42:04 2016 New Revision: 238256 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238256&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [gcc] 2016-07-12 Michael Meissner PR target/71805

[Bug target/69880] Linking Windows resource + implicit 'default-manifest.o' creates bad .exe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69880 --- Comment #7 from vsz.bugzilla at emailuser dot net --- Created attachment 38883 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38883&action=edit Test case #1 Attached a test case that includes all referred sources, generated .o binaries,

[Bug target/69880] Linking Windows resource + implicit 'default-manifest.o' creates bad .exe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69880 --- Comment #8 from vsz.bugzilla at emailuser dot net --- And the link command output: ``` Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gcc COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=C:/msys64/mingw32/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-w64-mingw32/5.4.0/lto-wrapper.exe Target: i686-w64-mingw32 C

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Tue Jul 12 18:12:11 2016 New Revision: 238258 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238258&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline [gcc] 2016-07-12 Michael Meissner

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/66145] [5/6/7 Regression] std::ios_base::failure objects thrown from libstdc++.so use old ABI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145 --- Comment #19 from Victor Mataré --- > I'm not suggesting anything radical or novel, just the standard way to use > iostreams. I'd call that "the legacy way" or the "C-like pattern". Call it "predominant" or "established" if you wish. But The

  1   2   >