[Bug c/41809] escaping address of packed field should trigger warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41809 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug c/41809] escaping address of packed field should trigger warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41809 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.1.0, 9.2.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/68160] Can bind packed field if it's packed with #pragma pack(push, 1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68160 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||10.1.0, 11.0, 5.5.0, 6.4.0,

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- I think the thing is that we have a CALL_EXPR, something like OBJ_TYPE_REF (...) (.UBSAN_VPTR ()) and now we first evaluate the OBJ_TYPE_REF. In this case this is what seems to happen here: 1) we evalua

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- And for completeness, the asm for the -fstrong-eval-order=all case: movq%rbx, %rdi call*%r12 movq-24(%rbp), %rax movq(%rax), %rax addq$16, %rax

[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 --- Comment #12 from Rafael Avila de Espindola --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6) > Thank you, can you please attach a pre-processed file (-E) so that one > doesn't need to clone seastar repository? The testcase that is attached does

[Bug middle-end/44300] Spurious array subscript warning, &b[0] == &a[1] is not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44300 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Resolut

[Bug c++/46513] Request: Warning for use of unsafe string handling functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46513 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Sta

[Bug c/48091] No warning when given function arguments mismatch earlier function definition which GCC assumes to be K&R, even with --std=c99 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48091 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2017-01-23 00:00:00 |2020-5-19 CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/49657] array subscript warnings when building gcc with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49657 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 --- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha --- Uh-oh… int s6; void ml (long int *ha, int dz) { int iy[dz]; int *tp; int cm; for (cm = 0; cm < 3; ++cm) tp[cm] = ha[cm] + 1.0f; if (s6 == 0) return; }

[Bug c++/95222] New: GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95222 Bug ID: 95222 Summary: GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONF

[Bug c/50584] No warning for passing small array to C99 static array declarator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50584 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2015-07-03 00

[Bug c++/95222] GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95222 --- Comment #1 from raptorfactor at raptorfactor dot com --- $ g++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=C:\Redacted\msys2-x86_64-rolling\mingw32\bin\g++.exe COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=C:/Redacted/msys2-x86_64-rolling/mingw32/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-w64-mingw

[Bug libstdc++/95223] New: [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Bug ID: 95223 Summary: [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value Product: gcc Versi

[Bug sanitizer/94910] detect_stack_use_after_return=1 is much slower than clang's

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94910 --- Comment #8 from Rafael Avila de Espindola --- I can confirm that the proposed patch fixes the issue for me. Thank you so much!

[Bug middle-end/53890] bogus array bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53890 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||4.8.5 Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 53890, which changed state. Bug 53890 Summary: bogus array bounds warning https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53890 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/24786] Missing warning on questionable use of parameter to initialize static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #6 from Martin Sebo

[Bug c++/69433] missing -Wreturn-local-addr assigning address of a local to a static

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69433 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dank at kegel dot com --- Comment #5 from

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Component|libstdc++ |c++ --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakel

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b commit r11-505-g453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue May 19 14:4

[Bug target/95212] enum processor_features is out of sync

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95212 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b commit r11-505-g453954451be68d22462442268a29f54809182d2b Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue May 19 14:4

[Bug lto/95224] New: -flto -save-temps uses very unusual name for resolution file, looks arbitrary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95224 Bug ID: 95224 Summary: -flto -save-temps uses very unusual name for resolution file, looks arbitrary Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- Is this code even defined? We call a method after calling the deconstructor on the object? If we do: c->~MyClass (); new(c) MyClass(); c->Doit (); Then it is defined. Or am I wrong about that?

[Bug target/95211] [11 Regression] ICE in emit_unop_insn, at optabs.c:3622

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95211 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC|

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- You're not wrong, but here we're dealing with the undefined behavior sanitizer whose point is to detect broken code like the above.

[Bug c++/95225] New: [11 regression] build failure (ICE) starting with r11-477

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95225 Bug ID: 95225 Summary: [11 regression] build failure (ICE) starting with r11-477 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---

[Bug c++/95225] [11 regression] build failure (ICE) starting with r11-477

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95225 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug target/94087] std::random_device often fails when used from multiple threads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94087 --- Comment #24 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a2d196e75cef95c2b70734ad02e94f9da0e769fe commit r11-506-ga2d196e75cef95c2b70734ad02e94f9da0e769fe Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug c++/86142] hard error for bad delete-expression in SFINAE context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86142 ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Known to work

[Bug target/95212] enum processor_features is out of sync

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95212 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 commit r10-8158-ge54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue M

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c7b747995a687d513dddfeafa54c6af4d10dc17 commit r9-8606-g2c7b747995a687d513dddfeafa54c6af4d10dc17 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue May

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 commit r10-8158-ge54fa81e16eb5633ed09c816311135ecc434f105 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue M

[Bug target/95212] enum processor_features is out of sync

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95212 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2 Resolution|---

[Bug libgcc/95220] Incorrect GFNI dectection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95220 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/95226] New: Faulty aggregate initialization of vector with struct with float

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95226 Bug ID: 95226 Summary: Faulty aggregate initialization of vector with struct with float Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 --- Comment #4 from Bill Seurer --- It was definitely r11-477. I see this causing an ICE when building gcc albeit only on power 9.

[Bug target/95227] New: vec_extract doesn't mark input as used in C++ mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95227 Bug ID: 95227 Summary: vec_extract doesn't mark input as used in C++ mode Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/95228] New: Failure to optimize register allocation around atomic loads/stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95228 Bug ID: 95228 Summary: Failure to optimize register allocation around atomic loads/stores Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/95199] Remove extra variable created for memory reference in loop vectorization.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95199 --- Comment #2 from Kaipeng Zhou --- It seems that IVOPTs has no ability to handle the case where TREE_CODE(iv_step) is SSA_NAME.

[Bug c++/95223] [11 regression] hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95223 --- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka --- Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-May/546106.html

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 --- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 04:10:50AM +, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 > > Thomas Koenig changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug target/92658] x86 lacks vector extend / truncate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658 --- Comment #16 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #15) > I will leave truncations (Down Converts in Intel speak) which are AVX512F > instructions to someone else. It should be easy to add missing patterns and > tests foll

[Bug c++/95221] g++.dg/ubsan/vptr-12.C fails with -fstrong-eval-order=all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libfortran/95177] error: array subscript has type char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177 --- Comment #10 from Roland Illig --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #9) > That could work. I'm still trying to understand how an > option names -Werror=char-subscripts could trigger an > error. There are no subscripts. The C standard a

[Bug target/95218] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fma_run_double_1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95218 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-05-20 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/95219] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-05-20 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/95219] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/x86_64/costmodel-pr30843.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95219 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Coalesce list: (4)ivtmp.15_4 & (22)ivtmp.15_22 [map: 2, 9] : Success -> 2 Coalesce list: (1)vect_vec_iv_.7_1 & (19)_19 [map: 0, 7] : Success -> 0 Coalesce list: (17)_17 & (18)vect_vec_iv_.8_18 [map: 5, 6] :

[Bug c++/95222] [10/11 Regression] GCC 10.1 x86 issue with function pointers with calling convention attribute and template specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95222 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|GCC 10.1 x86 issue with |[10/11 Regression] GCC 10.1

[Bug lto/95224] -flto -save-temps uses very unusual name for resolution file, looks arbitrary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95224 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug c++/95226] Faulty aggregate initialization of vector with struct with float

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95226 --- Comment #1 from Frantisek Boranek --- Luckily, the behaviour is the same on old stable Stretch as on Buster. So this version is also affected, but it is probably not serious as was my first impression. gcc (Debian 6.3.0-18+deb9u1) 6.3.0 2017

<    1   2