[Bug driver/88024] New: At -O0 and -Og, GCC should warn if you explicitly try to enable an option that is ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88024 Bug ID: 88024 Summary: At -O0 and -Og, GCC should warn if you explicitly try to enable an option that is ignored Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug c++/87521] [C++][ABI] Tail padding not reused for non POD struct with defaulted/deleted special member function as per Itanium ABI on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87521 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- What really matters here is triviality of the destructor, and that isn't affected by the user-declared defaulted dtor. Clang fails this test, because memcpy overwrites the tail padding: #include #include

[Bug c++/87521] [C++][ABI] Tail padding not reused for non POD struct with defaulted/deleted special member function as per Itanium ABI on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87521 Bruno Bugs changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/88011] [9 regression] r266028 causes a bunch of go failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011 --- Comment #2 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > C testcase anyone? ;) I never succeeded extracting anything meaningful from > the Go testsuite logs to be able to reproduce sth (no cut&paste possible

[Bug fortran/79440] internal compiler error: in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2373

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79440 --- Comment #4 from G. Steinmetz --- Reduced test case from comment 0 : $ cat z3.f90 module m type t end type type t2 class(t), pointer :: a end type type, extends(t2) :: t3 end type type t4 class(t2), pointer

[Bug fortran/79426] [7/8/9 Regression] fortran - internal compiler error: in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2251

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79426 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gs...@t-online.de --- Comment #5 from G.

[Bug fortran/79426] [7/8/9 Regression] fortran - internal compiler error: in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2251

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79426 --- Comment #6 from G. Steinmetz --- In all za* examples above reduce the type by an integer variable. Now type "t" contains one integer and one class(*) : $ cat zb2.f90 program p type t integer :: a class(*), pointer :: u(:)

[Bug fortran/79426] [7/8/9 Regression] fortran - internal compiler error: in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2251

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79426 --- Comment #7 from G. Steinmetz --- And with type "t" stripped down to a class only, respectively. Case analogous to the one in comment 3. $ cat zc2.f90 program p type t class(*), pointer :: u(:) end type type(t) :: z select

[Bug sanitizer/88022] Support dynamic shadow offset in ASan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88022 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/79426] [7/8/9 Regression] fortran - internal compiler error: in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2251

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79426 --- Comment #8 from G. Steinmetz --- And to make the picture complete, if you _add_ another integer (regarding comment 5), it compiles silently (but breaks at run time). $ cat z2.f90 program p type t integer :: a integer :: b

[Bug fortran/88025] New: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_apply_init, at fortran/expr.c:4468

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88025 Bug ID: 88025 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_apply_init, at fortran/expr.c:4468 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/88015] [9 Regression] ICE in dump_printf_loc, at dumpfile.c:1287

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88015 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #2) > Actually, I'm still not able to reproduce this, but the fix seems obvious; > am working on it. I see it on multiple examples: $ g++ /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/

[Bug tree-optimization/88011] [9 regression] r266028 causes a bunch of go failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011 --- Comment #3 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 45003 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45003&action=edit Reproducer testcase for gccgo testresults failures in GCD You should be able to build this using gccg

[Bug tree-optimization/88023] [9 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 39 does not dominate use in block 34)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88023 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/87156] [9 Regression] ICE building libstdc++ for mips64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87156 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz --- Comment #9 f

[Bug target/87285] [9 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in tree_class_check (tree.h:3235) with -O2 -std=gnu++11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87285 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/55227] designated initializer for char array by string constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55227 J.R. Heisey changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jr at heisey dot org --- Comment #3 from J

[Bug middle-end/59658] Document -f* flags enabled by -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59658 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/87468] [9 Regression] ice "wrong amount of branch edges after conditional jump in bb"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87468 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug libgomp/87995] [9 regression] libgomp.c/../libgomp.c-c++-common/cancel-taskgroup-3.c fails consistently after r265930

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87995 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Can't reproduce on x86_64-linux, tried 2048 invocations of the testcase in a row, times various OMP_NUM_THREADS settings (32, 64, 1, 2, 4, 8). All on 16c32t machine. So, can you build it with additional -g

[Bug c++/88026] New: Explicit deduction guide fails for move-only type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88026 Bug ID: 88026 Summary: Explicit deduction guide fails for move-only type Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/87977] [9 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 4 follows the use)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87977 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug debug/87462] [7/8/9 Regression] undefined reference error occurs when -g, -fdebug-types-section and -O2 are used at the same time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87462 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug debug/88006] -fdebug-types-section gives undefined reference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88006 --- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell --- Author: nathan Date: Wed Nov 14 19:30:47 2018 New Revision: 266158 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266158&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [debug/88006] -fdebug-types-section gives undefined ref https://gcc.gnu

[Bug debug/88006] -fdebug-types-section gives undefined reference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88006 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug debug/87462] [7/8/9 Regression] undefined reference error occurs when -g, -fdebug-types-section and -O2 are used at the same time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87462 --- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell --- Author: nathan Date: Wed Nov 14 19:30:47 2018 New Revision: 266158 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266158&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [debug/88006] -fdebug-types-section gives undefined ref https://gcc.gnu

[Bug c++/87989] [8/9 Regression] Calling operator T() invokes wrong conversion operator overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87989 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/87898] [8 Regression] ICE in separate_decls_in_region_debug, at tree-parloops.c:961

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87898 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE in |[8 Regression] ICE in

[Bug tree-optimization/87896] [9 Regression] ICE in verify_flow_info failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87896 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/87468] [9 Regression] ice "wrong amount of branch edges after conditional jump in bb"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87468 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- *** Bug 87896 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug fortran/88025] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_apply_init, at fortran/expr.c:4468

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88025 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug c++/80864] Brace-initialization of a constexpr variable of an array in a POD triggers ICE from templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80864 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janniksilvanus at gmail dot com --- Comm

[Bug c++/86931] constexpr variable initialization: internal compiler error: in reshape_init_r, at cp/decl.c:6042

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86931 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/80864] Brace-initialization of a constexpr variable of an array in a POD triggers ICE from templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80864 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/59658] Document -f* flags enabled by -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59658 --- Comment #4 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: sandra Date: Wed Nov 14 20:05:13 2018 New Revision: 266162 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266162&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-14 Sandra Loosemore PR middle-end/59658

[Bug c++/87989] [8/9 Regression] Calling operator T() invokes wrong conversion operator overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87989 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- It might be related to Bug 86246 then.

[Bug c++/59832] [c++11] ICE in reshape_init_class with initializer list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59832 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/59658] Document -f* flags enabled by -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59658 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|-

[Bug debug/82738] [meta-bug] issues with the -Og optimization level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82738 Bug 82738 depends on bug 59658, which changed state. Bug 59658 Summary: Document -f* flags enabled by -Og https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59658 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/64035] [C++11] ICE in reshape_init_r when using initializer list aggregate initialization for default function parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64035 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug debug/82738] [meta-bug] issues with the -Og optimization level

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82738 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/88026] Explicit deduction guide fails for move-only type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88026 --- Comment #1 from toe-ger at web dot de --- Godbolt decided to swap the output from gcc and msvc again. Sorry for that.

[Bug target/88027] New: PowerPC generates slightly weird code for memset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88027 Bug ID: 88027 Summary: PowerPC generates slightly weird code for memset Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ta

[Bug c/61727] #pragma simd is undocumented

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61727 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/80864] [7/8/9/ Regression] Brace-initialization of a constexpr variable of an array in a POD triggers ICE from templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80864 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.9.4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/88027] PowerPC generates slightly weird code for memset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88027 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Target||powerpc64-linux-gnu-*,

[Bug target/88027] PowerPC generates slightly weird code for memset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88027 --- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 45004 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45004&action=edit File that shows the problem I changed the test not to return 0 between showing the test and the code generat

[Bug c++/88028] New: internal compiler error: in reshape_init_r, at cp/decl.c:6159

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88028 Bug ID: 88028 Summary: internal compiler error: in reshape_init_r, at cp/decl.c:6159 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug c++/88028] internal compiler error: in reshape_init_r, at cp/decl.c:6159

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88028 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code --- Comment #1 from Ma

[Bug c++/87893] [9 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:12557 on arm-linux-gnueabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87893 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/88028] internal compiler error: in reshape_init_r, at cp/decl.c:6159

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88028 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- ICE started with r240802. Before that: 88028.C: In instantiation of ‘constexpr const auto R::h’: 88028.C:16:34: required from ‘struct R’ 88028.C:23:24: required from here 88028.C:16:34: error: invalid u

[Bug target/88027] PowerPC generates slightly weird code for memset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88027 acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug rtl-optimization/87718] [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512dq-concatv2si-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87718 --- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov --- In general moving from propagation of hard regs is good thing for RA. Although there are exception as this PR. The problem starts with IRA. It decides that r91 should be a general regs based on cos

[Bug target/88027] PowerPC generates slightly weird code for memset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88027 --- Comment #3 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org --- This appears to have to do with alignment. In this test case, expand_block_clear() sees alignment of only 8 bits for the pointer p. If you declare a local struct st and pass that to __builtin_mem

[Bug tree-optimization/88011] [9 regression] r266028 causes a bunch of go failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011 --- Comment #4 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 45005 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45005&action=edit Hack workaround to show bad loop Through my debugging I found that if I add the print statement as sh

[Bug fortran/87994] ICE in match_data_constant, at fortran/decl.c:399

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87994 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 --- Comment #4 from kargl a

[Bug fortran/87994] ICE in match_data_constant, at fortran/decl.c:399

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87994 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug c++/88026] Explicit deduction guide fails for move-only type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88026 --- Comment #2 from toe-ger at web dot de --- Workaround that seems to generally work: Change deduction guide to template S(T&&)->S>;

[Bug fortran/88025] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_apply_init, at fortran/expr.c:4468

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88025 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug fortran/87994] ICE in match_data_constant, at fortran/decl.c:399

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87994 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- AFAICT the patch in comment 5 fixes the tests in comments 1 and 5, but not the test in comment 0.

[Bug lto/55102] The options -flto and -On do not behave as described in GCC docs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55102 --- Comment #5 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: sandra Date: Thu Nov 15 00:41:10 2018 New Revision: 266168 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266168&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-14 Sandra Loosemore PR lto/55102 P

[Bug lto/56700] Optimizing at compile and link result in different binary size than only optimizing at link time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56700 --- Comment #5 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: sandra Date: Thu Nov 15 00:41:10 2018 New Revision: 266168 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266168&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-14 Sandra Loosemore PR lto/55102 P

[Bug lto/55102] The options -flto and -On do not behave as described in GCC docs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55102 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug middle-end/31377] wrap_help error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31377 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug fortran/87994] ICE in match_data_constant, at fortran/decl.c:399

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87994 --- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6) > AFAICT the patch in comment 5 fixes the tests in comments 1 and 5, but not > the test in comment 0. % cat a.f90 program p real :: a, b dat

[Bug c++/45225] gcc accepts ill-formed template code combining Variadic Templates and Partial specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45225 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/88029] New: [9 Regression] ICE in execute_todo, at passes.c:1974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88029 Bug ID: 88029 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in execute_todo, at passes.c:1974 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-checking, ice-on-valid-code Severi

[Bug other/56334] __attribute__((aligned)) documentation is misleading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56334 --- Comment #5 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: sandra Date: Thu Nov 15 02:55:26 2018 New Revision: 266170 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266170&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-15 Sandra Loosemore PR other/56334

[Bug other/56334] __attribute__((aligned)) documentation is misleading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56334 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/84648] Missed optimization : loop not removed.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84648 --- Comment #4 from bin cheng --- Author: amker Date: Thu Nov 15 03:44:49 2018 New Revision: 266171 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266171&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/84648 * tree-ssa-loop-niter.c (adjust_co

[Bug c/85562] -Wsuggest-attribute=malloc misleads about "returning normally"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85562 --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #3) > Fix for PR85734 also fixes this bug. That one is fixed on trunk, apparently. So, same for this one?

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87902 --- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool --- Oh sure, if all you want to do is extend the prepare_shrinkwrap function, that just works there and it doesn't need to do a lot of profitability trade-offs. However it isn't very effective there. It's

<    1   2