[Bug fortran/85364] -fopenmp should not put array in program on the stack

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85364 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug target/85296] [nvptx] pr85244-1.c execution failure

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85296 --- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu Apr 12 07:17:29 2018 New Revision: 259337 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259337&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [nvptx] Fix handling of extern var with flexible array member 2018-04-12

[Bug c/85362] unnecessary checks with -fsanitize=object-size and non-int indices

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85362 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug rtl-optimization/85354] [8 regression] ICE with gcc.dg/graphite/pr84872.c starting with r259313

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85354 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc64*-*-* |powerpc64*-*-*, x86_64-*-* Pr

[Bug sanitizer/83356] [7 Regression] excessive stack usage compiling with -O2 -fsanitize=bounds -fsanitize=object-size

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||breiten at lexmark dot com --- Comment #

[Bug c/85362] unnecessary checks with -fsanitize=object-size and non-int indices

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85362 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/85361] Variable length array allowed in c89/90

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85361 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/85296] [nvptx] pr85244-1.c execution failure

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85296 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85367] New: [GCOV] A call to the _subborrow_u64 builtin-function is wrongly marked as executed twice

2018-04-12 Thread yangyibiao at nju dot edu.cn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85367 Bug ID: 85367 Summary: [GCOV] A call to the _subborrow_u64 builtin-function is wrongly marked as executed twice Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Se

[Bug target/85296] [nvptx] pr85244-1.c execution failure

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85296 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0

[Bug tree-optimization/85368] New: [8 regression] phi-opt-11 test fails on IBM Z

2018-04-12 Thread krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85368 Bug ID: 85368 Summary: [8 regression] phi-opt-11 test fails on IBM Z Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tre

[Bug tree-optimization/81184] [8 regression] gcc.dg/pr21643.c and gcc.dg/tree-ssa/phi-opt-11.c fail starting with r249450

2018-04-12 Thread krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81184 --- Comment #10 from Andreas Krebbel --- I've verified that the problem is fixed on Power. So I've opened a separate BZ for this #85368

[Bug tree-optimization/85368] [8 regression] phi-opt-11 test fails on IBM Z

2018-04-12 Thread krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85368 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Krebbel --- For e.g. Power this has been fixed as part of PR81184

[Bug tree-optimization/85366] Failure to use both div and mod results of one IDIV in a prime-factor loop while(n%i==0) { n/=i; }

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85366 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/85360] FAIL: gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (ICE)

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85360 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Can't reproduce with a cross from x86_64-linux on r259337. Any special configury required?

[Bug testsuite/85368] [8 regression] phi-opt-11 test fails on IBM Z

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85368 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |testsuite Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/85369] New: no -Wstringop-overflow for a strcpy / stpcpy call with a nonstring pointer when providing movstr pattern

2018-04-12 Thread krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85369 Bug ID: 85369 Summary: no -Wstringop-overflow for a strcpy / stpcpy call with a nonstring pointer when providing movstr pattern Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONF

[Bug gcov-profile/85370] New: [GCOV] Wrong coverage with the target_clones attribute

2018-04-12 Thread yangyibiao at nju dot edu.cn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85370 Bug ID: 85370 Summary: [GCOV] Wrong coverage with the target_clones attribute Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug c/85361] Variable length array allowed in c89/90

2018-04-12 Thread whh8b at virginia dot edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85361 Will Hawkins changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|WORKSFORME

[Bug tree-optimization/85315] missed range optimisation opportunity for derefences where index must be 0 or otherwise constrained

2018-04-12 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85315 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85315 > > --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- > I asked Peter about that yesterday. The acc

[Bug lto/85371] New: [8 Regression] Compiling code with -g -flto gives an ICE on darwin after revision r259317

2018-04-12 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85371 Bug ID: 85371 Summary: [8 Regression] Compiling code with -g -flto gives an ICE on darwin after revision r259317 Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug gcov-profile/85372] New: [GCOV] Wrong coverage with setjmp and longjmp function

2018-04-12 Thread yangyibiao at nju dot edu.cn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85372 Bug ID: 85372 Summary: [GCOV] Wrong coverage with setjmp and longjmp function Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug lto/85371] [8 Regression] Compiling code with -g -flto gives an ICE on darwin after revision r259317

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85371 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/51628] __attribute__((packed)) is unsafe in some cases

2018-04-12 Thread dingcurie at icloud dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628 W.H. Ding changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dingcurie at icloud dot com --- Comment #47

[Bug lto/85371] [8 Regression] Compiling code with -g -flto gives an ICE on darwin after revision r259317

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85371 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 43916 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43916&action=edit patch I am testing The attached solved the crash I reproduced with a cross.

[Bug rtl-optimization/85342] [8 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in copyprop_hardreg_forward_1 (regcprop.c:995) with -O2 -mavx512vl

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85342 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Apr 12 08:39:50 2018 New Revision: 259338 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259338&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/85342 * regcprop.c (copyprop_hardreg_f

[Bug rtl-optimization/85342] [8 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in copyprop_hardreg_forward_1 (regcprop.c:995) with -O2 -mavx512vl

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85342 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/85352] Incorrect error diagnosed for dummy argument used in specification expression to subprogram with ENTRY

2018-04-12 Thread mecej4 at outlook dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85352 --- Comment #3 from mecej4 --- I found a server that had an older version of GCC, on which the test code compiled without error messages from the compiler: gcc version 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-16) (GCC)

[Bug c/51628] __attribute__((packed)) is unsafe in some cases

2018-04-12 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628 --- Comment #48 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, dingcurie at icloud dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628 > > W.H. Ding changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug target/85238] [8 Regression] lto-wrapper: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument on Cygwin

2018-04-12 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238 --- Comment #23 from Eric Botcazou --- > Huh, no. Never seen that. Well, well, well... ;-) Index: lto-wrapper.c === --- lto-wrapper.c (revision 259205) +++ lto-wrapper.c

[Bug target/85238] [8 Regression] lto-wrapper: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument on Cygwin

2018-04-12 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238 --- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238 > > --- Comment #23 from Eric Botcazou --- > > Huh, no. Never seen that. > > Well,

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

2018-04-12 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #77 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #62 from Richard Biener --- > Waiting for Solaris engineer input... (or a machine to be able to debug this > directly - is there one on the CF?). We're finally getting t

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

2018-04-12 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #78 from Rainer Orth --- Created attachment 43917 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43917&action=edit Proposed patch for gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c failure

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

2018-04-12 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #79 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 > > --- Comment #77 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE>

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #80 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #78) > Created attachment 43917 [details] > Proposed patch for gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c failure OK. Can you add a comment as to why we do that? Thanks.

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

2018-04-12 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #82 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #80 from Richard Biener --- > (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #78) >> Created attachment 43917 [details] >> Proposed patch for gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c failure > > O

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

2018-04-12 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #81 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #79 from rguenther at suse dot de --- > On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote: [...] >> Since trying to fix the initial issue is out of scope for G

[Bug fortran/85352] [6/7/8 Regression] Incorrect error diagnosed for dummy argument used in specification expression to subprogram with ENTRY

2018-04-12 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85352 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Known to work|

[Bug target/71991] Inconsistency for __attribute__ ((__always_inline__)) among LTO and non-LTO compilation

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71991 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #11

[Bug c/51628] __attribute__((packed)) is unsafe in some cases

2018-04-12 Thread sven.koehler at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628 --- Comment #49 from Sven --- (In reply to W.H. Ding from comment #47) > Hi, everyone > > I wonder if this issue has to do with the bug-like problem I encountered > when accessing an unaligned stand-alone global variable (rather than a > member

[Bug c/51628] __attribute__((packed)) is unsafe in some cases

2018-04-12 Thread sven.koehler at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628 --- Comment #50 from Sven --- (In reply to Sven from comment #49) > This doesn't work. The aligned attribute is for providing additional > alignment hints. The GCC documentation clearly states, that aligned can > increase the alignment. So g_d is

[Bug gcov-profile/85367] [GCOV] A call to the _subborrow_u64 builtin-function is wrongly marked as executed twice

2018-04-12 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85367 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug gcov-profile/85372] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with setjmp and longjmp function

2018-04-12 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85372 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug gcov-profile/85370] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with the target_clones attribute

2018-04-12 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85370 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- So (completely untested): --- gcc/asan.c.jj 2018-01-09 21:53:38.821577722 +0100 +++ gcc/asan.c 2018-04-12 12:30:43.360840432 +0200 @@ -554,14 +554,14 @@ get_last_alloca_addr () return last_alloca_ad

[Bug c++/85363] Throwing exception from member constructor (brace initializer vs initializer list)

2018-04-12 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85363 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug demangler/85373] New: Ice in demangler

2018-04-12 Thread fiesh at zefix dot tv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85373 Bug ID: 85373 Summary: Ice in demangler Product: gcc Version: 7.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: demangler Assignee: un

[Bug c++/85363] Throwing exception from member constructor (brace initializer vs initializer list)

2018-04-12 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85363 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- In C++11 mode the compiler emits a constructor for P: ;; Function constexpr P::P() (null) ;; enabled by -tree-original { > 20 ) >; } And the initialization of p{} in main

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Unfortunately that doesn't work, because the second argument to __asan_allocas_unpoison is incorrect then.

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #11 from chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > Unfortunately that doesn't work, because the second argument to > __asan_allocas_unpoison is incorrect then. Unfortunately we can't use new_sp as a

[Bug c++/85374] New: Confusing diagnostic for function with missing brace that looks like a function-try-block

2018-04-12 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85374 Bug ID: 85374 Summary: Confusing diagnostic for function with missing brace that looks like a function-try-block Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED K

[Bug c++/85374] Confusing diagnostic for function with missing brace that looks like a function-try-block

2018-04-12 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85374 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- If we see a return statement outside a function block it should be a clue that there's some incorrect brace nesting going on.

[Bug tree-optimization/85375] New: possible missed optimisation / regression from 6.3 with while (__builtin_ffs(x) && x)

2018-04-12 Thread vegard.nossum at oracle dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85375 Bug ID: 85375 Summary: possible missed optimisation / regression from 6.3 with while (__builtin_ffs(x) && x) Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Key

[Bug target/85328] [8 Regression] accessing ymm16 with non-avx512 instruction form

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85328 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Apr 12 11:17:23 2018 New Revision: 259344 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259344&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/85328 * config/i386/sse.md (avx512dq_vex

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] New: [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread zsojka at seznam dot cz
uild=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld --with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch --prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-259340-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64 Thread model: posix gcc version 8.0.1 20180412 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread dvyukov at google dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #12 from Dmitry Vyukov --- When/if you have a patch I can test it on kernel. But seems this is a problem for user-space too. We just need a large alloca + signal handlers, or dirty manual SP manipulations (like we have in tsan to imp

[Bug gcov-profile/85377] New: [GCOV] Wrong coverage with label and if(cond) break in while(1)

2018-04-12 Thread yangyibiao at nju dot edu.cn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85377 Bug ID: 85377 Summary: [GCOV] Wrong coverage with label and if(cond) break in while(1) Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 43919 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43919&action=edit gcc8-pr85230.patch So, if you want to add STACK_DYNAMIC_OFFSET to new_sp for the second argument, then we coul

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #14 from chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13) > or introduce a new virtual pseudo register that vregs pass would map directly > to dynamic_offset. Yeah, that's what I though about (LLVM does pre

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0

[Bug tree-optimization/85375] possible missed optimisation / regression from 6.3 with while (__builtin_ffs(x) && x)

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85375 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to chefmax from comment #14) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13) > > or introduce a new virtual pseudo register that vregs pass would map > > directly to dynamic_offset. > > Yeah, that

[Bug target/85246] [og7, nvptx, openacc] gemm.f90 fails with -mlong-vector-in-workers

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85246 --- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1) > I went through a couple of cycles of minimizing the failure, seeing > something suspicious, modifying by hand or writing a tentative patch, but > every time I went

[Bug lto/85371] [8 Regression] Compiling code with -g -flto gives an ICE on darwin after revision r259317

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85371 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 12 12:27:14 2018 New Revision: 259345 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259345&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-04-12 Richard Biener PR lto/85371 * dwarf2out.

[Bug target/85328] [8 Regression] accessing ymm16 with non-avx512 instruction form

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85328 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/85378] New: -fsplit-stack is incompatible with -fcf-protection -mcet

2018-04-12 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85378 Bug ID: 85378 Summary: -fsplit-stack is incompatible with -fcf-protection -mcet Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug target/85246] [og7, nvptx, openacc] gemm.f90 fails with -mlong-vector-in-workers

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85246 --- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1) > I went through a couple of cycles of minimizing the failure, seeing > something suspicious, modifying by hand or writing a tentative patch, but > every time I went

[Bug lto/85371] [8 Regression] Compiling code with -g -flto gives an ICE on darwin after revision r259317

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85371 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/85246] [og7, nvptx, openacc] gemm.f90 fails with -mlong-vector-in-workers

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85246 --- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries --- Created attachment 43920 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43920&action=edit 0001-nvptx-Simplifly-logic-in-nvptx_single.patch NFC patch to make fix easier

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Started with r257852.

[Bug target/85246] [og7, nvptx, openacc] gemm.f90 fails with -mlong-vector-in-workers

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85246 --- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries --- Created attachment 43921 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43921&action=edit 0002-nvptx-Fix-propagation-of-branch-cond-in-vw-neutered-code.patch Tentative fix.

[Bug tree-optimization/85360] FAIL: gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (ICE)

2018-04-12 Thread dave.anglin at bell dot net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85360 --- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2018-04-12 3:43 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Any special > configury required? No.

[Bug target/85378] -fsplit-stack is incompatible with -fcf-protection -mcet

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85378 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/81652] [meta-bug] -fcf-protection=full -mcet bugs

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652 Bug 81652 depends on bug 85378, which changed state. Bug 85378 Summary: -fsplit-stack is incompatible with -fcf-protection -mcet https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85378 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- -fdisable-rtl-cprop2 -fdisable-rtl-cprop1 fixes it, likewise -fdisable-rtl-cse_local: > diff -u t.c.245r.cprop2 t.c.247r.cse_local ... - 41: r194:SI=0x20 - REG_DEAD r91:HI 42: r108:QI=0 - 43: {

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Thus looks like a cselib issue to me.

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread dvyukov at google dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #16 from Dmitry Vyukov --- Here is disasm of the function with the patch: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dvyukov/e9dca961ceb436049cf5881b3307b104/raw/05ed3daff60d00eb71ca7a85be707d6d5eca3c47/gistfile1.txt And the epilogue:

[Bug libgcc/85379] New: Missing ENDBR in __stack_split_initialize

2018-04-12 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85379 Bug ID: 85379 Summary: Missing ENDBR in __stack_split_initialize Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc

[Bug middle-end/84955] [7/8 Regression] Incorrect OpenACC tile expansion

2018-04-12 Thread cesar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84955 --- Comment #5 from cesar at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: cesar Date: Thu Apr 12 13:15:45 2018 New Revision: 259346 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259346&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR middle-end/84955 gcc/ * lto-streamer-out.c (

[Bug gcov-profile/85377] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with label and if(cond) break in while(1)

2018-04-12 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85377 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/85258] [7/8 Regression] ICE with invalid range-based for-loop

2018-04-12 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85258 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- There is nothing weird about what cprop1 does, __builtin_ffs (0) is known to be 0, with so many disabled optimizations we just don't optimize it away nor simplify earlier. So the mov eax, 0 # tm

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug ada/85380] New: gnatbind fails with small executable & restricted runtime

2018-04-12 Thread simon at pushface dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85380 Bug ID: 85380 Summary: gnatbind fails with small executable & restricted runtime Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug tree-optimization/81184] [8 regression] gcc.dg/pr21643.c and gcc.dg/tree-ssa/phi-opt-11.c fail starting with r249450

2018-04-12 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81184 --- Comment #11 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- I dug through my logs and the last failures I saw for phi-opt-11.c and pr21643.c on powerpc64 were in mid January immediately before Eric's patch.

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #17 from chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15) > (In reply to chefmax from comment #14) > > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13) > > > or introduce a new virtual pseudo register that vregs

[Bug sanitizer/85230] asan: false positives in kernel on allocas

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230 --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek --- I will, once I bootstrap/regtest it fully on a couple of targets.

[Bug target/85246] [og7, nvptx, openacc] gemm.f90 fails with -mlong-vector-in-workers

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85246 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/85238] [8 Regression] lto-wrapper: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument on Cygwin

2018-04-12 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238 --- Comment #25 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Thu Apr 12 14:18:17 2018 New Revision: 259347 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259347&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/85238 * lto-wrapper.c (debug_objcopy): Open

[Bug target/85238] [8 Regression] lto-wrapper: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument on Cygwin

2018-04-12 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/83064] DO CONCURRENT and auto-parallelization

2018-04-12 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83064 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug target/85381] New: [og7, nvptx, openacc] parallel-loop-1.c fails with default vector length 128

2018-04-12 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85381 Bug ID: 85381 Summary: [og7, nvptx, openacc] parallel-loop-1.c fails with default vector length 128 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/84733] [8 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (check_local_shadow())

2018-04-12 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84733 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com --- Comm

[Bug rtl-optimization/85354] [8 regression] ICE with gcc.dg/graphite/pr84872.c starting with r259313

2018-04-12 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85354 --- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov --- Author: amonakov Date: Thu Apr 12 15:40:44 2018 New Revision: 259348 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259348&root=gcc&view=rev Log: sel-sched: move cleanup_cfg before calculate_dominance_info (PR 853

[Bug rtl-optimization/85354] [8 regression] ICE with gcc.dg/graphite/pr84872.c starting with r259313

2018-04-12 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85354 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Blocks|

[Bug rtl-optimization/84659] [6/7 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (stack overflow in bb_note) w/ selective scheduling

2018-04-12 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84659 Bug 84659 depends on bug 85354, which changed state. Bug 85354 Summary: [8 regression] ICE with gcc.dg/graphite/pr84872.c starting with r259313 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85354 What|Removed |A

[Bug fortran/85357] gfortran versions 7.2.0/8.0.1 reject F03 procedure overriding

2018-04-12 Thread c...@mnet-mail.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85357 c...@mnet-mail.de changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Regression: gfortran|gfortran versions |

[Bug target/85347] New testcase vec-ldl-1.c FAILs on powerpc64-linux

2018-04-12 Thread kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85347 --- Comment #2 from kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kelvin Date: Thu Apr 12 16:16:08 2018 New Revision: 259350 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259350&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2018-04-12 Kelvin Nilsen

[Bug rtl-optimization/85376] [8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

2018-04-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85376 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

  1   2   >