[Bug target/87928] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in ix86_compute_frame_layout, at config/i386/i386.c:11161 since r228607

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87928 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64 Status|NEW

[Bug c++/87269] [9 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15475 starting from r261802

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87269 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- I can still see it iceing: https://godbolt.org/z/tvHnzW Can you please also try the duplicate?

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2018-11-9 CC|

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- One more comment here. I do cooperate with our openSUSE maintainer of Chromium package and they have quite some of these warnings when building with GCC. I told him he can strengthen behavior with -fstrict-enu

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 --- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8) > Thank you Andrew for clarification of the behavior. Apparently it's quite > common question. One note that I have about C behavior is that we can maybe > also add

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 --- Comment #10 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8) > > Thank you Andrew for clarification of the behavior. Apparently it's quite > > common question. One note that I have

[Bug c/87953] New: asan: stack-buffer-overflow in vectorizable_reduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87953 Bug ID: 87953 Summary: asan: stack-buffer-overflow in vectorizable_reduction Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug tree-optimization/87931] [9 Regression] ICE in vectorizable_reduction, at tree-vect-loop.c:6193 since r265876

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87931 --- Comment #3 from David Binderman --- My asan error looks different to me. See new bug report 87953.

[Bug c/87953] asan: stack-buffer-overflow in vectorizable_reduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87953 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/87954] New: VRP can transform a * b where a,b are [0,1] to a & b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87954 Bug ID: 87954 Summary: VRP can transform a * b where a,b are [0,1] to a & b Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/87892] [9 Regression]: libsanitizer fails to build on CentOS 5.11 (glibc 2.5)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Fri Nov 9 09:14:36 2018 New Revision: 265950 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265950&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fallback in libsanitizer for scudo sanitizer (PR sanitizer/87892). 2018-1

[Bug rtl-optimization/86438] [8/9 Regression] wrong code at -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438 --- Comment #8 from Alexandre Oliva --- Author: aoliva Date: Fri Nov 9 10:16:09 2018 New Revision: 265957 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265957&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [PR86438] compare-elim: cope with set of in_b When in_a resolves to a

[Bug target/87793] [8/9 Regression] GCC reports error when compiling with "-fpic -Os -g"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87793 --- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva --- Author: aoliva Date: Fri Nov 9 10:15:46 2018 New Revision: 265956 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265956&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [PR87793] reject non-toplevel unspecs in debug loc exprs on x86 Before

[Bug rtl-optimization/87902] [9 Regression] Shrink-wrapping multiple conditions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87902 --- Comment #5 from Ilya Leoshkevich --- By the time shrink-wrapping is performed, which is after LRA (pass_thread_prologue_and_epilogue, to be precise), aren't all spilling decisions already made? Because if that's true, we have to be conservat

[Bug ipa/87955] [9 Regression] ICE in cl_target_option_print_diff at gcc/options-save.c:3803 since r265920

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87955 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Known to fail|

[Bug ipa/87955] New: [9 Regression] ICE in cl_target_option_print_diff at gcc/options-save.c:3803 since r265920

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87955 Bug ID: 87955 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in cl_target_option_print_diff at gcc/options-save.c:3803 since r265920 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/87956] New: Gcc should emit deprecation warnings when using throw() in C++ >= 17

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87956 Bug ID: 87956 Summary: Gcc should emit deprecation warnings when using throw() in C++ >= 17 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/87954] VRP can transform a * b where a,b are [0,1] to a & b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87954 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/87940] [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/warn-strlen-no-nul.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87940 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug rtl-optimization/87941] by_pieces infra does not use movmisalign optab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87941 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/87942] every int seems to be unaligned in packed structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87942 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/87943] [6.5 regression] severe regression on iso_varying_string (?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87943 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/87946] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_walk_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:10506

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87946 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/87945] [9 Regression] ICE in var_element, at fortran/decl.c:281

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87945 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug tree-optimization/87952] Missed optimization for std::get_if on std::variant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87952 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- I belive I've seen dups for this. We merely isolate those paths but do not remove them (removing them might end up as a security issue).

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947 Bug 53947 depends on bug 87621, which changed state. Bug 87621 Summary: outer loop auto-vectorization fails for exponentiation code https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87621 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/87621] outer loop auto-vectorization fails for exponentiation code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87621 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Nov 9 10:53:31 2018 New Revision: 265959 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265959&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-09 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/87621

[Bug tree-optimization/87621] outer loop auto-vectorization fails for exponentiation code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87621 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/87943] [6 regression] severe regression on iso_varying_string (?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87943 --- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter --- Yep, I know that 6 is no longer supported. Nevertheless I wanted to at least report that bug. It is only in 6.5 , 7/8/9 are ok.

[Bug c/87953] asan: stack-buffer-overflow in vectorizable_reduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87953 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/87942] every int seems to be unaligned in packed structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87942 --- Comment #3 from Johannes Vetter --- Ok, thanks a lot. I haven't expected that an initializer could change the alignment of a variable. "-fno-common" does not work in my case (perhaps because the variable already has a attribute "section").

[Bug tree-optimization/87954] VRP can transform a * b where a,b are [0,1] to a & b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87954 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #1) > Indeed, if you compile imul() with -fdump-tree-all-details-alias -O2 and > look at the vrp1 dump, one can see: > > # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 > is_rec_12 = (

[Bug ipa/87957] New: [9 Regression] ICE tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl minimal’ structure, have ‘identifier_node’ in warn_odr, at ipa-devirt.c:1051 since r265519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87957 Bug ID: 87957 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl minimal’ structure, have ‘identifier_node’ in warn_odr, at ipa-devirt.c:1051

[Bug testsuite/87958] New: scan-tree-dump-times vs. (foo|bar)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87958 Bug ID: 87958 Summary: scan-tree-dump-times vs. (foo|bar) Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: testsuite

[Bug ipa/87957] [9 Regression] ICE tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl minimal’ structure, have ‘identifier_node’ in warn_odr, at ipa-devirt.c:1051 since r265519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87957 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2018-11-9 Known to work|

[Bug ipa/87957] [9 Regression] ICE tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl minimal’ structure, have ‘identifier_node’ in warn_odr, at ipa-devirt.c:1051 since r265519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87957 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/87867] [7/8 regression] ICE on virtual destructor (-mlong-calls -ffunction-sections) on arm-none-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87867 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/86997] error: call of overloaded ‘NoDestructor()’ is ambiguous

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86997 Jan Engelhardt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jengelh at inai dot de --- Comment #4 f

[Bug c/87953] asan: stack-buffer-overflow in vectorizable_reduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87953 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/87958] scan-tree-dump-times vs. (foo|bar)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87958 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug c/87953] asan: stack-buffer-overflow in vectorizable_reduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87953 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Nov 9 12:29:51 2018 New Revision: 265964 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265964&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-09 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/87953

[Bug ipa/87959] New: ICE in tree check: expected enumeral_type, have record_type in free_enum_values, at ipa-devirt.c:2265

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87959 Bug ID: 87959 Summary: ICE in tree check: expected enumeral_type, have record_type in free_enum_values, at ipa-devirt.c:2265 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug testsuite/87958] scan-tree-dump-times vs. (foo|bar)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87958 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Ah, ok, thanks. Perhaps we should just mention it in our scan-tree-dump-times documentation and close then.

[Bug ipa/87959] ICE in tree check: expected enumeral_type, have record_type in free_enum_values, at ipa-devirt.c:2265

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87959 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/87960] New: [9 Regression] Miscompilation of 527.cam4_r benchmark from SPEC2017 w/ -O2 since r265946

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87960 Bug ID: 87960 Summary: [9 Regression] Miscompilation of 527.cam4_r benchmark from SPEC2017 w/ -O2 since r265946 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Ke

[Bug fortran/87960] [9 Regression] Miscompilation of 527.cam4_r benchmark from SPEC2017 w/ -O2 since r265946

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87960 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||8.2.0 Blocks|

[Bug tree-optimization/87954] VRP can transform a * b where a,b are [0,1] to a & b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87954 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Marc, are you planning to implement that in the future?

[Bug target/87867] [7/8 regression] ICE on virtual destructor (-mlong-calls -ffunction-sections) on arm-none-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87867 --- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan --- Author: ramana Date: Fri Nov 9 12:50:51 2018 New Revision: 265965 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265965&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [PATCH, arm] Backport -- Fix ICE during thunk generation with -mlo

[Bug tree-optimization/87954] VRP can transform a * b where a,b are [0,1] to a & b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87954 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3) > Marc, are you planning to implement that in the future? Not in the near future, no. It is all yours if you want it ;-)

[Bug ipa/87955] [9 Regression] ICE in cl_target_option_print_diff at gcc/options-save.c:3803 since r265920

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87955 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ipa/87957] [9 Regression] ICE tree check: expected tree that contains ‘decl minimal’ structure, have ‘identifier_node’ in warn_odr, at ipa-devirt.c:1051 since r265519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87957 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug c/87942] every int seems to be unaligned in packed structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87942 --- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov --- (In reply to Johannes Vetter from comment #3) > My problem now: in how many other cases is the same behavior? I cannot check > every global variable/struct by hand. I recommend to open a new bugreport fo

[Bug middle-end/35903] false Warray-bounds warning when passing quoted string to function strcmp(arg,"no");

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35903 --- Comment #11 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > This bug has no changed for months, I think it is still active. > > Newer higher priority bugs often make us forget about old

[Bug driver/31351] gcc -v --help has poor documentation for some shared Ada/C options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31351 --- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1) > This is a bug yes, but it won't get fixed unless someone that cares about it > steps up to fix it. I'd do this but I don't know the Ada FE well enough sinc

[Bug c++/79605] attribute [[noreturn]] accepted in explicit instantiation directives

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79605 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug tree-optimization/80512] missing -Wformat-overfow on a numbered directive with width specified by "*m$"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80512 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug tree-optimization/80936] bcmp, bcopy, and bzero not declared nonnull

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80936 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ghazi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug target/81585] fastcall/stdcall attribute conflict not detected on distinct declarations of the same function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81585 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/87961] New: crash at goto label inside sizeof

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87961 Bug ID: 87961 Summary: crash at goto label inside sizeof Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Ass

[Bug sanitizer/87892] [9 Regression]: libsanitizer fails to build on CentOS 5.11 (glibc 2.5)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt --- Seems like a potential opportunity for shrink-wrap separate on the CRs. I'm not sure whether that's implemented yet.

[Bug libstdc++/87787] [9 Regression][UBSAN] runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87787 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org Sum

[Bug libstdc++/87787] [9 Regression][UBSAN] runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87787 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1) > That would be my recent commit. Namely, the commit r265485 of 2018-10-25: "Relocation (= move+destroy)" PR libstdc++/87106

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|RE

[Bug fortran/78351] comma not terminating READ of formatted input field - ok in 4.1.7, not 4.4.7- maybe related to 25419?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351 --- Comment #25 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Nov 9 17:07:39 2018 New Revision: 265976 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265976&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-09 Jerry DeLisle Backport from trunk PR l

[Bug c/87795] Excessive alignment permitted for functions and labels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87795 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Fri Nov 9 17:17:47 2018 New Revision: 265977 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265977&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c/87795 - Excessive alignment permitted for functions and labels gcc/c

[Bug c/87795] Excessive alignment permitted for functions and labels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87795 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug fortran/78351] comma not terminating READ of formatted input field - ok in 4.1.7, not 4.4.7- maybe related to 25419?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351 --- Comment #26 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Nov 9 17:29:33 2018 New Revision: 265979 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265979&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-09 Jerry DeLisle PR libfortran/78351 * io

[Bug c/81824] Warn for missing attributes with function aliases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81824 --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Fri Nov 9 17:32:52 2018 New Revision: 265980 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265980&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR middle-end/81824 - Warn for missing attributes with function aliases

[Bug c/87962] New: ice in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand_1, at tree-vect-stmts.c:1485

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87962 Bug ID: 87962 Summary: ice in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand_1, at tree-vect-stmts.c:1485 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/87962] ice in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand_1, at tree-vect-stmts.c:1485

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87962 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug tree-optimization/18501] [7/8/9 Regression] Missing 'used uninitialized' warning (CCP)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug libstdc++/85930] [8/9 Regression] Misaligned reference created in shared_ptr_base.h with -fno-rtti

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85930 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED URL|

[Bug c/81824] Warn for missing attributes with function aliases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81824 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/87520] [8/9 Regression] ODR violations in std::make_shared when mixing -fno-rtti and -frtti

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87520 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > @@ -513,7 +512,6 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION >alignas(type_info) static constexpr _Sp_make_shared_tag __tag; This needs to be fixed to have t

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #5 from meissner at linux dot ibm.com --- On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 02:28:28AM +, bergner at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 > > --- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner --- > What do you think

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #6 from meissner at linux dot ibm.com --- On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 02:47:31PM +, wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 > > --- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt --- > Seems like a poten

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc |powerpc-*-* Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Vitali from comment #0) > If a function has a single switch statement that handles all enum values & > returns a value GCC will warn about the function not returning a value > whereas clang doe

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 --- Comment #4 from Vitali --- Is there a way to annotate a specific enum as strict?

[Bug fortran/87960] [9 Regression] Miscompilation of 527.cam4_r benchmark from SPEC2017 w/ -O2 since r265946

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87960 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 --- Comment #5 from Vitali --- Jonathan, I think the defect report here does actually apply to this example. I agree the argument could be made that if there's gaps in the enum values that it's arguable that the current GCC behaviour is standards

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #4) > Seems like a potential opportunity for shrink-wrap separate on the CRs. I'm > not sure whether that's implemented yet. It isn't; there are some technical pr

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to meissner from comment #6) - Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt --- > > Seems like a potential opportunity for shrink-wrap separate on the CRs. I'm > > not sure whether that's implemented yet. >

[Bug c++/87951] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Vitali from comment #5) > Jonathan, I think the defect report here does actually apply to this > example. I didn't say otherwise. > I agree the argument could be made that if there's gaps in

[Bug libstdc++/87787] [9 Regression][UBSAN] runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87787 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Fri Nov 9 20:14:07 2018 New Revision: 265984 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265984&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/87787 fix UBsan error in std::vector PR libstdc++/8

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #7) > This sounds like the general problem of the first RA pass creating > excessively long live ranges. Yeah. > Does GCC know how to re-materialize a comparis

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool --- Trying that out now.

[Bug target/87762] [9 Regression] extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2206 on s390x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87762 --- Comment #4 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: iii Date: Fri Nov 9 20:33:19 2018 New Revision: 265991 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265991&root=gcc&view=rev Log: S/390: Allow relative addressing of literal pool entries r265490 al

[Bug libstdc++/87963] New: libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/memory_resource.cc:515:31: error: static assertion failed for mingw-w64 target since r265853

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87963 Bug ID: 87963 Summary: libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/memory_resource.cc:515:31: error: static assertion failed for mingw-w64 target since r265853 Product: gcc Version: 9

[Bug tree-optimization/87940] [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/warn-strlen-no-nul.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87940 --- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger --- Author: edlinger Date: Fri Nov 9 20:38:07 2018 New Revision: 265992 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265992&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-09 Bernd Edlinger PR tree-optimization/87940

[Bug tree-optimization/87940] [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/warn-strlen-no-nul.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87940 Bernd Edlinger changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug driver/41179] Documentation for "-fno-toplevel-reorder" is confusing (and wrong)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41179 --- Comment #4 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: sandra Date: Fri Nov 9 20:45:06 2018 New Revision: 265993 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265993&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-09 Sandra Loosemore PR driver/41179

[Bug middle-end/65703] -fdefer-pop documentation is confusing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65703 --- Comment #3 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: sandra Date: Fri Nov 9 20:45:06 2018 New Revision: 265993 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265993&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-09 Sandra Loosemore PR driver/41179

[Bug target/87221] cannot build with -pie

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87221 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Nov 9 20:55:39 2018 New Revision: 265994 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265994&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/87221 * config/netbsd-elf.h (NETBSD_STARTFILE_SPE

[Bug target/87221] cannot build with -pie

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87221 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/65703] -fdefer-pop documentation is confusing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65703 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug driver/41179] Documentation for "-fno-toplevel-reorder" is confusing (and wrong)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41179 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

  1   2   >