[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #19 from Tristan Gingold --- On 10/05/2017 18:04, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 > In the commit r247301 I see in gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Make-lang.in > > --- trunk/gcc/ada/gcc-int

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > So peephole2 does here: > - fstpl 24(%esp) > - movq24(%esp), %xmm0 > - movq%xmm0, 32(%esp) > + fstpl 32(%esp) > movl$0, 32(%es

[Bug c++/80683] Exceptions don't propagate through default member initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80683 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #20 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Tristan Gingold from comment #19) > On 10/05/2017 18:04, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 > > > In the commit r247301 I see in gcc/ada/gcc-i

[Bug c++/80682] __is_trivially_constructible(void, int) returns true.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80682 --- Comment #3 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ville Date: Thu May 11 07:44:29 2017 New Revision: 247880 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247880&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/80682 cp/ PR c++/80682 * method.c (is_trivially_xible):

[Bug c++/80682] __is_trivially_constructible(void, int) returns true.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80682 --- Comment #4 from Ville Voutilainen --- Fixed on trunk thus far. Backporting in a couple of days.

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #21 from Tristan Gingold --- On 11/05/2017 09:44, iains at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 > > --- Comment #20 from Iain Sandoe --- > (In reply to Tristan Gingold from comment #19) >> On 10

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak --- --cut here-- diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sync.md b/gcc/config/i386/sync.md index 20d46fe..d509be5 100644 --- a/gcc/config/i386/sync.md +++ b/gcc/config/i386/sync.md @@ -222,7 +222,8 @@ "!TARGET_64BIT &&

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Simplified testcase: /* PR target/80706 */ /* { dg-do run { target sse2_runtime } } */ /* { dg-options "-O2 -msse2" } */ union U { double value; struct S { int lsw; int msw; } parts; }; __attribute__((noinl

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #5) --cut here-- diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sync.md b/gcc/config/i386/sync.md index 20d46fe..895a1ea 100644 --- a/gcc/config/i386/sync.md +++ b/gcc/config/i386/sync.md @

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #22 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Tristan Gingold from comment #21) > On 11/05/2017 09:44, iains at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 > > > > --- Comment #20 from Iain Sandoe --- > > (I

[Bug middle-end/80707] [8 Regression] r247844 causes error: extra outgoing edge

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80707 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Priority|P3

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- The #c5 patch obviously doesn't help here, because the testcase triggers the last of these 4 peephole2s. But #c7 works.

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-* Priority

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #23 from Tristan Gingold --- On 11/05/2017 10:11, iains at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 > > --- Comment #22 from Iain Sandoe --- > (In reply to Tristan Gingold from comment #21) >> On 11

[Bug tree-optimization/80705] Incorrect code generated for profile counter updates due to SLP+LIM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80705 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/80683] Exceptions don't propagate through default member initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80683 --- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao --- The issue is in cp/method.c: /* If that user-written default constructor would satisfy the requirements of a constexpr constructor (7.1.5), the implicitly-defined default constructor is constexpr.

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > The #c5 patch obviously doesn't help here, because the testcase triggers the > last of these 4 peephole2s. But #c7 works. Thanks! It looks like we'll have to live

[Bug c++/46476] Missing Warning about unreachable code after return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476 --- Comment #11 from Jon Grant --- Perhaps some new static analysis tools could be added to GCC. I'd be happy to contribute to costs.

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #9) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > > The #c5 patch obviously doesn't help here, because the testcase triggers the > > last of these 4 peephole2s. But #

[Bug tree-optimization/80705] Incorrect code generated for profile counter updates due to SLP+LIM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80705 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Ok, SLP seems fine here, on x86_64 needs -fno-vect-cost-model to vectorize it. LIM also looks fine on x86 (does nothing) so it must be IVOPTs messing up the refs on ppc64le. Ah, on ppc64le: vect_cst__43

[Bug fortran/80708] New: [f08] ALLOCATE with MOLD error if source-expr is a derived type with null-init pointer component

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80708 Bug ID: 80708 Summary: [f08] ALLOCATE with MOLD error if source-expr is a derived type with null-init pointer component Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/53090] suboptimal ivopt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090 --- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: amker Date: Thu May 11 09:50:15 2017 New Revision: 247893 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247893&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/53090 * tree-ssa-loop-ivopt

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > Perhaps if we had such a pattern that we'd split into a normal DFmode load > (perhaps with unspec before reload to guarantee it is atomic load), we > wouldn't n

[Bug sanitizer/80536] [6/7/8 Regression] UBSAN: compile time segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80536 --- Comment #15 from Marek Polacek --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14) > (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #13) > > This is true, but it happens very rarely. It can happen e.g. when the > > fold() call in save_expr() folds awa

[Bug libstdc++/80658] Memory leak reported in libstdc++ (zerotier)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80658 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely --- Like most ghost stories, this one is based on superstition and fantasy, not facts or science: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/69g8il/the_horror_in_the_standard_library/dhb2las/ No libstdc++

[Bug rtl-optimization/80693] [6/7/8 Regression] wrong code with -O -fno-tree-coalesce-vars

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80693 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/80536] [6/7/8 Regression] UBSAN: compile time segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80536 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #15) > In C I don't think so, because we mostly call c_save_expr and c_fully_fold > therein would fold that expression to 0. And when we call save_expr, it's Yeah, I

[Bug sanitizer/80536] [6/7/8 Regression] UBSAN: compile time segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80536 --- Comment #17 from Marek Polacek --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16) > (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #15) > > In C I don't think so, because we mostly call c_save_expr and c_fully_fold > > therein would fold that expressi

[Bug sanitizer/80536] [6/7/8 Regression] UBSAN: compile time segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80536 --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #17) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16) > > (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #15) > > > In C I don't think so, because we mostly call c_save_expr an

[Bug testsuite/80580] GIMPLEFE ICE on invalid code (fuzz testing)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80580 --- Comment #2 from Mikhail Maltsev --- Author: miyuki Date: Thu May 11 10:48:54 2017 New Revision: 247899 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247899&root=gcc&view=rev Log: GIMPLEFE: Handle invalid unary "*" operand type gcc/c/ PR tes

[Bug ipa/79787] ICE in remove_unreachable_nodes, at ipa.c:469

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79787 Alexander Ivchenko changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aivchenk at gmail dot com --- Comme

[Bug go/64238] ICE in get_partitioning_class, at symtab.c:1775

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64238 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #6) > I'm sorry, I still can't recreate it. I'm now at SVN revision 247848. > > Note that I just committed a number of changes to the Go frontend, and I was > using

[Bug testsuite/80580] GIMPLEFE ICE on invalid code (fuzz testing)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80580 --- Comment #3 from Mikhail Maltsev --- Author: miyuki Date: Thu May 11 10:55:52 2017 New Revision: 247900 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247900&root=gcc&view=rev Log: GIMPLEFE: handle invalid __MEM gcc/c/ PR testsuite/80580

[Bug c/69960] "initializer element is not constant"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #14

[Bug c/69960] "initializer element is not constant"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14) > C++ FE's constexpr.c has bool lval argument to many recursive functions, so > it can differentiate between cases where you don't want to fold "str"[0] to > 's'

[Bug go/64238] ICE in get_partitioning_class, at symtab.c:1775

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64238 --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --- There's link to docker image that illustrates that for 7.1: https://hub.docker.com/r/marxin/docker-gcc-pr64238/builds/buqt3slnzjlvm858fg6j78t/

[Bug rtl-optimization/80709] New: ICE in setup_preferred_alternate_classes_for_new_pseudos, at ira.c:2772

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80709 Bug ID: 80709 Summary: ICE in setup_preferred_alternate_classes_for_new_pseudos, at ira.c:2772 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/80707] [8 Regression] r247844 causes error: extra outgoing edge

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80707 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug fortran/80708] [f08] ALLOCATE with MOLD error if source-expr is a derived type with null-init pointer component

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80708 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/80580] GIMPLEFE ICE on invalid code (fuzz testing)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80580 --- Comment #4 from Mikhail Maltsev --- Author: miyuki Date: Thu May 11 12:27:37 2017 New Revision: 247903 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247903&root=gcc&view=rev Log: GIMPLEFE: Handle invalid SSA names gcc/testsuite/ PR testsuit

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 41340 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41340&action=edit gcc8-pr80706.patch I came up with this (in addition to #c7). This removes one of the two useless stores in th

[Bug c/80710] New: Stack smashing detected in correct code depending on optimization flag

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80710 Bug ID: 80710 Summary: Stack smashing detected in correct code depending on optimization flag Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/80658] Memory leak reported in libstdc++ (zerotier)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80658 Bernd Paysan changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unknown |5.0 --- Comment #14 from Bernd Paysan --

[Bug libstdc++/80658] Memory leak reported in libstdc++ (zerotier)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80658 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Version|5.0 |unknown --- Comment #15 from Jonathan

[Bug libstdc++/80658] Memory leak reported in libstdc++ (zerotier)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80658 --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes, mt allocator has problems, that's why we stopped using it in 2005, but the zerotier code isn't even using mt allocator. Their problem is probably something different. That's the problem with writing

[Bug libstdc++/80285] `std::make_shared` performs two separate allocations with `-fno-rtti`

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80285 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu May 11 13:21:07 2017 New Revision: 247905 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247905&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/80285 optimize std::make_shared for -fno-rtti PR li

[Bug libstdc++/79433] __has_include() is true but #include gives #error when -std=old

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79433 --- Comment #22 from Marc Mutz --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #18) > I've started a discussion about changing the SD-6 recommendations. > > One idea that came out of the discussion so far would be to make a > GCC-specific extensio

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #24 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Le 11 mai 2017 à 09:06, gingold at adacore dot com > a écrit : > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 > > --- Comment #19 from Tristan Gingold --- > On 10/05/2017 18:04, dominiq

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #25 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #24) > > Le 11 mai 2017 à 09:06, gingold at adacore dot com > > a écrit : > > Note that > > --with-stage1-ldflags=-static-libstdc++ > --with-boot-ldflags=-

[Bug middle-end/71509] Bitfield causes load hit store with larger store than load

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71509 --- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool --- Doing an 8 byte load of something that was stored as 4 byte immediately before will cause flushes and stalls... Yeah it could use a 4-byte load here afaics.

[Bug tree-optimization/80705] Incorrect code generated for profile counter updates due to SLP+LIM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80705 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 11 14:08:07 2017 New Revision: 247906 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247906&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-05-11 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/80705

[Bug tree-optimization/80705] Incorrect code generated for profile counter updates due to SLP+LIM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80705 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||8.0 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener

[Bug libstdc++/79433] __has_include() is true but #include gives #error when -std=old

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79433 --- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely --- No, because after discussion with the feature-test study group I don't want to rely on GCC-specific magic. Instead I think it would be better for headers to do: #if __cplusplus >= 201402L #define __cpp_li

[Bug sanitizer/80386] UBSAN: false positive - constant folding and reassosiation before instrumentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80386 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- Patch posted: .

[Bug libstdc++/80285] `std::make_shared` performs two separate allocations with `-fno-rtti`

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80285 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/80709] [8 Regression] ICE in setup_preferred_alternate_classes_for_new_pseudos, at ira.c:2772

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80709 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/80710] Stack smashing detected in correct code depending on optimization flag

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80710 --- Comment #1 from dr.markus.hoffmann at gmx dot de --- This example wants to show, that the optimizer destroys compatibility to the ABI, either with optimizing something in the calling procedure (likely) or in the called function. The same erro

[Bug c++/80711] warn on non-const accessor member functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug c++/80711] New: warn on non-const accessor member functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711 Bug ID: 80711 Summary: warn on non-const accessor member functions Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/80710] Stack smashing detected in correct code depending on optimization flag

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80710 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/79634] ICE in expand_builtin_with_bounds, at builtins.c:7490

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79634 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Ivchenko --- The problem here is that when CHKP is instrumenting call statement "i();" it doesn't know that it's a builtin call. When optimizations come into play, namely ccp pass, it becomes known that the call is t

[Bug c++/80682] __is_trivially_constructible(void, int) returns true.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80682 --- Comment #5 from Ville Voutilainen --- This patch doesn't fully provide the means for a library implementation to just call the intrinsic from the library trait. I have a patch that does, which I'm testing.

[Bug c++/80711] warn on non-const accessor member functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/57952] AVX/AVX2 no ymm registers used in a trivial reduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57952 mmokrejs at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mmokrejs at gmail dot com ---

[Bug target/57952] AVX/AVX2 no ymm registers used in a trivial reduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57952 --- Comment #3 from mmokrejs at gmail dot com --- Weird, why g++ can do the task although probably less efficiently than icc? $ g++ -O3 -march=core-avx-i -mtune=core-avx-i -mavx2 stream.c ; objdump -d a.out | grep ymm stream.c:106:48: warning: d

[Bug c++/80712] New: mention the name of the attribute being ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80712 Bug ID: 80712 Summary: mention the name of the attribute being ignored Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/70538] ICE on a deprecated access declaration in instantiate_template_1, at cp/pt.c:17310

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70538 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini --- This is fixed in 7.1.0: I'm adding a testcase and closing the bug.

[Bug middle-end/80707] [8 Regression] r247844 causes error: extra outgoing edge

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80707 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/70538] ICE on a deprecated access declaration in instantiate_template_1, at cp/pt.c:17310

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70538 --- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: paolo Date: Thu May 11 17:13:42 2017 New Revision: 247917 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247917&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-05-11 Paolo Carlini PR c++/70538 * g++

[Bug c++/70538] ICE on a deprecated access declaration in instantiate_template_1, at cp/pt.c:17310

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70538 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/80712] mention the name of the attribute being ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80712 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/80712] mention the name of the attribute being ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80712 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org See A

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #14 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Thu May 11 18:12:25 2017 New Revision: 247921 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247921&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/80706 * config/i386/sync.md (UNSPEC_LDX

[Bug target/80706] [7/8 Regression] peephole2 uses uninitialized stack variables on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80706 --- Comment #15 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13) > Created attachment 41340 [details] > gcc8-pr80706.patch > > I came up with this (in addition to #c7). This removes one of the two > useless stores in the origin

[Bug ipa/79787] ICE in remove_unreachable_nodes, at ipa.c:469

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79787 Ilya Enkovich changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/79634] ICE in expand_builtin_with_bounds, at builtins.c:7490

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79634 --- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich --- We hit function pointer propagation issues before and chkp_redirect_edge with corresponding code in redirect_call_stmt_to_callee appeared to handle them. Why doesn't it work in this case?

[Bug c/80713] New: recent crash in update_dep_bb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80713 Bug ID: 80713 Summary: recent crash in update_dep_bb Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee:

[Bug target/80695] gratuitous use of stxvx to store multiple pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80695 --- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt --- Author: wschmidt Date: Thu May 11 20:16:02 2017 New Revision: 247928 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247928&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [gcc] 2017-05-11 Bill Schmidt PR target/80695 * con

[Bug target/80695] gratuitous use of stxvx to store multiple pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80695 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/80713] recent crash in update_dep_bb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80713 --- Comment #1 from David Binderman --- Reduced code is this: a, b, d, e, f; *c; g() { for (;;) { if (*c) { int h; *c = &h; } else b = 0; if (f) *c = g; else for (; a; a++) for (;;) {

[Bug target/80713] recent crash in update_dep_bb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80713 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/78659] [F03] Spurious "requires DTIO" reported against namelist statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78659 --- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Thu May 11 20:40:49 2017 New Revision: 247930 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247930&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-05-11 Jerry DeLisle PR fortran/78659 * io.c

[Bug bootstrap/80714] New: [8 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80714 Bug ID: 80714 Summary: [8 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed with LTO Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: bo

[Bug middle-end/80715] New: NULL pointer dereferenced in find_costs_and_classes, at ira-costs.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80715 Bug ID: 80715 Summary: NULL pointer dereferenced in find_costs_and_classes, at ira-costs.c Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/79634] ICE in expand_builtin_with_bounds, at builtins.c:7490

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79634 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Ivchenko --- (In reply to Ilya Enkovich from comment #4) > We hit function pointer propagation issues before and chkp_redirect_edge > with corresponding code in redirect_call_stmt_to_callee appeared to handle > them.

[Bug fortran/80666] character length parameter fails if declaration order incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80666 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #3 from

[Bug c++/80716] New: Death by Documentation (SEGFAULT)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80716 Bug ID: 80716 Summary: Death by Documentation (SEGFAULT) Product: gcc Version: 6.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ A

[Bug target/80697] On PowerPC, the spec 2006 benchmark milc had a 5.6% regression under GCC 7.1 compared to GCC 6.3.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80697 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/80716] Death by Documentation (SEGFAULT)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80716 --- Comment #1 from Matt Heck --- Oh, I almost forgot the important part: Substituting commas for those backslashes DOES resolve the problem, but ALL THREE must be replaced. Substituting \\ for \ DOES NOT resolve the problem. Substituting \t f

[Bug target/80697] On PowerPC, the spec 2006 benchmark milc had a 5.6% regression under GCC 7.1 compared to GCC 6.3.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80697 --- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 41342 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41342&action=edit Preprocessed C source for the mult_adj_su3_mat_vec function To reproduce, you need to use the -O3 -ffast-mat

[Bug target/80697] On PowerPC, the spec 2006 benchmark milc had a 5.6% regression under GCC 7.1 compared to GCC 6.3.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80697 --- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 41343 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41343&action=edit Assembler output from gcc 6.3.0

[Bug target/80697] On PowerPC, the spec 2006 benchmark milc had a 5.6% regression under GCC 7.1 compared to GCC 6.3.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80697 --- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 41344 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41344&action=edit Assembler output from gcc 7.1.0

[Bug bootstrap/80714] [8 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80714 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/80707] [8 Regression] r247844 causes error: extra outgoing edge

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80707 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug bootstrap/80714] [8 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80714 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED --- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner

[Bug c++/52763] Warning if compare between enum and non-enum type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52763 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug c/7654] warn if an enum is being assigned a non enum value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7654 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |NEW CC|

[Bug go/64238] ICE in get_partitioning_class, at symtab.c:1775

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64238 --- Comment #9 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ian Date: Thu May 11 23:52:54 2017 New Revision: 247937 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247937&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR go/64238 * go-gcc.cc (Gcc_backend::implicit_vari

  1   2   >