[Bug c++/90587] New: asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 Bug ID: 90587 Summary: asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #23 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #21) > OK, if the callee is a C function... what is its declaration > on the Fortran side? Is there any interface, bind(c) or otherwise? > > I suppose there must be s

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #24 from Martin Liška --- One another note is that the problematic code lives in src/netcdf/* and the same code contain: benchspec/CPU/521.wrf_r/src/netcdf/ and benchspec/CPU/628.pop2_s/src/netcdf/ So that would explain also the segf

[Bug target/90588] New: [AArch64] SVE2 flag patch omits aarch64-protos.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90588 Bug ID: 90588 Summary: [AArch64] SVE2 flag patch omits aarch64-protos.h Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: t

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #25 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #22) > I've been trying out some things, and I cannot construct a failing > test case. > > A sane way to build such an interface would be > > cat tst.f90 > module x

[Bug sanitizer/90570] [9/10 Regression] AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90570 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- Patch candidate: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-05/msg01559.html

[Bug c++/90587] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/90576] [10 regression] SPEC CPU2006 450.soplex miscompiled with -Os -flto after r271413

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90576 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/90415] [10 Regression] std::is_copy_constructible> is incomplete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90415 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Known to work|

[Bug debug/90584] [gdb] gdb is not stopped at a breakpoint in an executed line of code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90584 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/90569] __STDCPP_DEFAULT_NEW_ALIGNMENT__ is wrong for i386-pc-solaris2.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90569 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- The glibc change was https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21120 and is present from version 2.26

[Bug debug/90584] [gdb] gdb is not stopped at a breakpoint in an executed line of code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90584 --- Comment #2 from Yibiao Yang --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > GDB is a separate project with its own bugzilla, see > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla Thanks. I am not quite sure whether this is a bug of gdb or gcc. I am wo

[Bug c++/90587] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 --- Comment #2 from David Binderman --- Here is the reduced C++ code: typedef unsigned a; typedef char b; typedef struct { a *c; } d; int e(d *f) { if (f) return *f->c; } a g(d *f) { return e(f); } typedef struct { b channel; } h; b *j

[Bug libgomp/90585] libgomp hsa plugin ftbfs in the x32 multilib variant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90585 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 46400 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46400&action=edit gcc10-pr90585.patch Untested fix. Note, the rest of libgomp uses PRIu64 only conditionally on HAVE_INTTYPES_H,

[Bug tree-optimization/90510] [10 Regression] Unnecessary permutation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90510 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Schwinge --- Author: tschwinge Date: Thu May 23 08:22:56 2019 New Revision: 271540 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271540&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [PR90510] Adjust 'brig.dg/test/gimple/packed.hsail' ... for r271463

[Bug debug/90584] [gdb] gdb is not stopped at a breakpoint in an executed line of code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90584 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|MOVED |INVALID --- Comment #3 from Jonathan W

[Bug sanitizer/90589] New: In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 Bug ID: 90589 Summary: In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer Product: gcc Version: 9.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: san

[Bug tree-optimization/90576] [10 regression] SPEC CPU2006 450.soplex miscompiled with -Os -flto after r271413

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90576 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- So the problem can be reproduced when only factor.cc is compiled with -flto -Os. Problematic comparison is: for (pivot = temp.pivots.next; pivot != &temp.pivots; pivot = pivot->next)

[Bug c++/90587] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #2) > Here is the reduced C++ code: > > typedef unsigned a; > typedef char b; > typedef struct { > a *c; > } d; > int e(d *f) { > if (f) > return *f->c; > } >

[Bug c++/90587] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED Blocks|

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 --- Comment #2 from mccannd at uk dot ibm.com --- No, I've just installed the procps and libasan packages within my Fedora 30 container.

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Do you have the same problem not in a container? How useful is to use the LD_PRELOAD for the ps?

[Bug libstdc++/90590] New: enumeration value not handled in switch warning for std::ios_base::seek_dir

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90590 Bug ID: 90590 Summary: enumeration value not handled in switch warning for std::ios_base::seek_dir Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug c++/90587] [10 Regression] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vlad at ispras dot ru Known to work|

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 --- Comment #4 from mccannd at uk dot ibm.com --- I've not yet tried outside of a container. I have a script that sets LD_PRELOAD so that I can detect problems in code I do care about. It just so happens that this code calls ps, which then hung.

[Bug libstdc++/90590] enumeration value not handled in switch warning for std::ios_base::seek_dir

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90590 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- This is not a libstdc++ bug, we're allowed to define whatever enumerators we want as long as they use reserved names.

[Bug libstdc++/90590] enumeration value not handled in switch warning for std::ios_base::seek_dir

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90590 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > This is not a libstdc++ bug, we're allowed to define whatever enumerators we > want as long as they use reserved names. Which is almost exactly what I said i

[Bug c++/90590] enumeration value not handled in switch warning for std::ios_base::seek_dir

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90590 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug middle-end/88784] Middle end is missing some optimizations about unsigned

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Qi Feng from comment #9) > And there's another problem. Take `x > y && x != 0 --> x > y' for > example, I would also like to do > >x < y && y != 0 --> x < y >x != 0 && x

[Bug rtl-optimization/64895] RA picks the wrong register for -fipa-ra

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64895 --- Comment #17 from Iain Sandoe --- Author: iains Date: Thu May 23 09:23:47 2019 New Revision: 271544 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271544&root=gcc&view=rev Log: x86, testsuite - update fuse-caller-save tests. These tests had started to

[Bug target/85539] x86_64: loads are not always narrowed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85539 Navya changed: What|Removed |Added CC||navyadeepika.garakapati@gma |

[Bug debug/90584] [gdb] gdb is not stopped at a breakpoint in an executed line of code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90584 --- Comment #4 from Yibiao Yang --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > Putting "[gdb]" in the bug summary suggests you're trying to report a GDB > bug, which doesn't belong here. > > You're trying to put a breakpoint on a line with

[Bug target/85434] Address of stack protector guard spilled to stack on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85434 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug fortran/90329] Incompatibility between gfortran and C lapack calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329 --- Comment #40 from Jakub Jelinek --- I must say I don't like -fbroken-callers option name too much, can we use instead something like -ftail-call-workaround={0,1,2} / -f{,no-}tail-call-workaround where -ftail-call-workaround == -ftail-call-work

[Bug tree-optimization/90591] New: Avoid unnecessary data transfer out of OMP construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90591 Bug ID: 90591 Summary: Avoid unnecessary data transfer out of OMP construct Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: openacc, openmp Severity: enhancement

[Bug middle-end/34678] Optimization generates incorrect code with -frounding-math option (#pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS not implemented)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34678 --- Comment #40 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #39) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #36) > > Created attachment 46396 [details] > > poor mans solution^Whack > How does this work if op is a SSA_NA

[Bug c++/90592] New: Documentation: Missing word (or wrong parenthesization) in "Function Names as Strings"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90592 Bug ID: 90592 Summary: Documentation: Missing word (or wrong parenthesization) in "Function Names as Strings" Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/90552] attribute((optimize(3))) not overriding -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90552 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||easyhack --- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak

[Bug c++/90592] Documentation: Missing word (or wrong parenthesization) in "Function Names as Strings"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90592 --- Comment #1 from Gennaro Prota --- In "Function Names as Strings" (par. 6.50 in ) there's the following text: As an extension, at file (or, in C++, namespace scope), __func__ evalua

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to mccannd from comment #4) > I've not yet tried outside of a container. > > I have a script that sets LD_PRELOAD so that I can detect problems in code I > do care about. It just so happens that thi

[Bug target/90552] attribute((optimize(3))) not overriding -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90552 --- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak --- Patch to fix this particular PR: --cut here-- diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c index 463e78112f0..79fcb5c4e57 100644 --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c @@ -19

[Bug target/90513] asm thunks do not work on PowerPC64/VxWorks (kernel mode)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90513 --- Comment #13 from Umesh Kalappa --- >>There is no point in emitting an asm thunk if you use a long call though. thunk required to adjust the this pointer (in c++ cases)

[Bug c++/90587] [10 Regression] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- I've got a patch for it.

[Bug c++/90587] [10 Regression] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- Full report: ==26783==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope on address 0x7fff19d9ac10 at pc 0x02d5bd6e bp 0x7fff19d9a9f0 sp 0x7fff19d9a9e8 READ of size 8 at 0x7fff19d9ac10 thread T0 #0 0x2d5b

[Bug debug/90574] [gdb] gdb wrongly stopped at a breakpoint in an unexecuted line of code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90574 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code, wrong-debug Sta

[Bug debug/90575] -gsplit-dwarf leaves behind .dwo file in cwd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90575 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/90576] [10 regression] SPEC CPU2006 450.soplex miscompiled with -Os -flto after r271413

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90576 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||alias Priority|P3

[Bug middle-end/90577] [9/10 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/lrshift_1.f90 with -O(2|3) and -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90577 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||lto Component|lto

[Bug sanitizer/90570] [9/10 Regression] AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90570 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Thu May 23 10:12:01 2019 New Revision: 271548 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271548&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Do not instrument static target_expr for use-after-scope (PR sanitizer/905

[Bug sanitizer/90570] [9 Regression] AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90570 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.0 Summary|[9/10 Regression]

[Bug debug/90575] -gsplit-dwarf leaves behind .dwo file in cwd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90575 --- Comment #2 from Stephan Bergmann --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > But that's how -gsplit-dwarf is designed. Shouldn't it then be documented where any .dwo files are stored? At least in combination with -o in comment 0, cwd

[Bug middle-end/90577] [9/10 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/lrshift_1.f90 with -O(2|3) and -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90577 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org Known to

[Bug target/90513] asm thunks do not work on PowerPC64/VxWorks (kernel mode)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90513 --- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou --- > thunk required to adjust the this pointer (in c++ cases) Yes, but just use a regular thunk.

[Bug fortran/90578] Wrong code with LSHIFT and optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90578 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libgomp/90593] New: OpenACC 'acc_async_sync' need not imply synchronizing after every intermediate step but rather just once, at the end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90593 Bug ID: 90593 Summary: OpenACC 'acc_async_sync' need not imply synchronizing after every intermediate step but rather just once, at the end Product: gcc Version:

[Bug libgomp/90593] OpenACC 'acc_async_sync' need not imply synchronizing after every intermediate step but rather just once, at the end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90593 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/90591] Avoid unnecessary data transfer out of OMP construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90591 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- We want to add some attribute(s) on the structure types used to pass information in and out (or in the fields), and have some specialized IPA optimization that tries to optimize such cases.

[Bug tree-optimization/90579] Huge store forward stall due to vectorizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90579 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|

[Bug c/90580] error: ‘offsetof’ undeclared when it is declared, but used with the wrong number of arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90580 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 --- Comment #6 from mccannd at uk dot ibm.com --- Yes, I've got it failing in a Fedora 30 virtual image outside of any container. root@localhost ~]# LD_PRELOAD=/lib64/libasan.so.5.0.0 ASAN_OPTIONS=alloc_dealloc_mismatch=0 gdb $(which ps) warning:

[Bug preprocessor/90581] provide an option to adjust the maximum depth of nested #include

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90581 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/85434] Address of stack protector guard spilled to stack on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85434 Thomas Preud'homme changed: What|Removed |Added CC||robotux at celest dot fr --- Commen

[Bug target/90568] stack protector should use cmp or sub, not xor, to allow macro-fusion on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90568 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 46401 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46401&action=edit gcc10-pr90568-2.patch Incremental untested patch for the macro-fusion, on top of https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pat

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- @Jakub: Can you please reproduce it?

[Bug c++/90592] Documentation: Missing word (or wrong parenthesization) in "Function Names as Strings"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90592 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/90586] [gdb] gdb wrongly set the breakpoint as expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90586 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-debug Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug fortran/90578] Wrong code with LSHIFT and optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90578 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Resolution|INVALID

[Bug sanitizer/90589] In Fedora 30 ps hangs using address sanitizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90589 --- Comment #8 from mccannd at uk dot ibm.com --- Or more fully: #0 0x773705f8 in pthread_rwlock_wrlock () from /lib64/libpthread.so.0 #1 0x773c2833 in textdomain () from /lib64/libc.so.6 #2 0x775ee531 in __interceptor_

[Bug target/90513] asm thunks do not work on PowerPC64/VxWorks (kernel mode)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90513 --- Comment #15 from Umesh Kalappa --- >>Yes, but just use a regular thunk. you mean ,the target-independent code in the C++ front end will generate a less efficient heavyweight thunk that calls function instead of jumping to it ?

[Bug fortran/90578] Wrong code with LSHIFT and optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90578 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 23 May 2019, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90578 > > Dominique d'Humieres changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug c++/90587] [10 Regression] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška -

[Bug target/90568] stack protector should use cmp or sub, not xor, to allow macro-fusion on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90568 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu May 23 11:18:41 2019 New Revision: 271552 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271552&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/90568 * config/i386/i386.md (stack_protect_test_

[Bug target/90588] [AArch64] SVE2 flag patch omits aarch64-protos.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90588 Matthew Malcomson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/90594] New: [9/10 regression] Spurious popcount emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90594 Bug ID: 90594 Summary: [9/10 regression] Spurious popcount emitted Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-op

[Bug tree-optimization/88440] size optimization of memcpy-like code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440 --- Comment #23 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 23 11:35:16 2019 New Revision: 271553 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271553&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2019-05-23 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/88440

[Bug rtl-optimization/90595] New: LRA liveness analysis is slow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90595 Bug ID: 90595 Summary: LRA liveness analysis is slow Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: rtl-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/88440] size optimization of memcpy-like code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug debug/90575] -gsplit-dwarf leaves behind .dwo file in cwd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90575 --- Comment #3 from Stephan Bergmann --- Or, to put it differently: It looks odd that while `gcc -gsplit-dwarf -c test.c -o /path/test.o` puts test.dwo next to test.o into /path/, `gcc -gsplit-dwarf test.c -o /path/test` puts it into cwd.

[Bug rtl-optimization/90595] LRA liveness analysis is slow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90595 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||compile-time-hog, ra CC

[Bug c++/90592] Documentation: Missing word (or wrong parenthesization) in "Function Names as Strings"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90592 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu May 23 11:47:30 2019 New Revision: 271554 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271554&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/90592 add missing word "scope" to __func__ docs PR c++/90

[Bug debug/90575] -gsplit-dwarf leaves behind .dwo file in cwd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90575 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Stephan Bergmann from comment #3) > Or, to put it differently: It looks odd that while `gcc -gsplit-dwarf -c > test.c -o /path/test.o` puts test.dwo next to test.o into /path/, `gcc > -gsplit-d

[Bug c++/90592] Documentation: Missing word (or wrong parenthesization) in "Function Names as Strings"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90592 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Version|unknown

[Bug tree-optimization/90594] [9/10 regression] Spurious popcount emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90594 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target|

[Bug debug/90574] [gdb] gdb wrongly stopped at a breakpoint in an unexecuted line of code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90574 --- Comment #2 from Yibiao Yang --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > We somehow build a broken(?) CFG from the start: > > ;; basic block 2, loop depth 0 > ;;pred: ENTRY > if (argc == 0) > ;;succ: 3 > > ;;

[Bug c++/90587] [10 Regression] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 --- Comment #9 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Thu May 23 12:07:09 2019 New Revision: 271555 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271555&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Do not use tree_to_wide_ref that point to a temporary (PR c++/90587). 201

[Bug tree-optimization/90594] [9/10 regression] Spurious popcount emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90594 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- For example DCE could, when it comes to marking a loop-closed PHI node necessary see if it can replace it by computing the final value and if so do _not_ mark its definition necessary (and record this somewh

[Bug c++/90587] [10 Regression] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/86656] Issues found with -fsanitize=address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86656 Bug 86656 depends on bug 90587, which changed state. Bug 90587 Summary: [10 Regression] asan: stack-use-after-scope with -O3 and -Wall https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90587 What|Removed |Added

[Bug debug/90584] [gdb] gdb is not stopped at a breakpoint in an executed line of code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90584 Yibiao Yang changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug tree-optimization/90571] Missed optimization opportunity when returning function pointers based on run-time boolean

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90571 --- Comment #4 from Vittorio Romeo --- > I wonder how the "original" testcase looked like - the one in this bug is probably simplified from real-world code? This is what the original author of the code (Filipp Gelman) said: > I was reviewing so

[Bug libstdc++/90220] std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu May 23 13:39:06 2019 New Revision: 271556 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271556&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90220 fix experimental::any_cast for non-object types This

[Bug libgomp/90596] New: 'GOACC_parallel_keyed' should use 'GOMP_MAP_VARS_TARGET'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90596 Bug ID: 90596 Summary: 'GOACC_parallel_keyed' should use 'GOMP_MAP_VARS_TARGET' Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: openacc Sever

[Bug middle-end/90597] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-vector_size.c (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90597 Bug ID: 90597 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-vector_size.c (internal compiler error) Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug libstdc++/90220] std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu May 23 14:18:13 2019 New Revision: 271558 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271558&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90220 fix experimental::any_cast for non-object types This

[Bug preprocessor/90581] provide an option to adjust the maximum depth of nested #include

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90581 --- Comment #2 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Confirmed. Just curious - were you able to simply up this limit > successfully? Yes, one of our applications' depth of nested #include is 202

[Bug c++/90569] __STDCPP_DEFAULT_NEW_ALIGNMENT__ is wrong for i386-pc-solaris2.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90569 Florian Weimer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 fr

[Bug c++/90569] __STDCPP_DEFAULT_NEW_ALIGNMENT__ is wrong for i386-pc-solaris2.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90569 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #8) > The problem is that popular mallocs do not care about ABI and return > unaligned pointers for allocations smaller than the max_align_t alignment. > As a resul

[Bug libstdc++/90220] std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu May 23 14:49:15 2019 New Revision: 271561 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271561&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90220 Fix any_cast for non-object types Backport from mainl

[Bug libstdc++/90220] std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu May 23 15:08:58 2019 New Revision: 271565 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271565&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90220 Fix any_cast for non-object types Backport from main

  1   2   >