[Bug target/87767] Missing AVX512 memory broadcast for constant vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87767 --- Comment #7 from Hongtao.liu --- a patch is posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549713.html

[Bug c++/96162] [11 Regression] ICE in discriminator_for_local_entity, at cp/mangle.c:1910

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96162 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug tree-optimization/96163] another ice in pass slp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96163 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Version|unknown

[Bug target/96166] [10/11 Regression] -O3/-ftree-slp-vectorize turns ROL into a mess

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96166 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2 Blocks|

[Bug tree-optimization/96167] fails to detect ROL pattern in simple case, but succeeds when operand goes through memcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96167 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|target |tree-optimization Target|

[Bug target/96175] Failure to optimize memory stores of double literals properly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96175 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-07-13 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/93372] cris performance regressions due to de-cc0 work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93372 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ef07c7a5884c130b48e653993bfaaf1ae9e6dedd commit r11-2048-gef07c7a5884c130b48e653993bfaaf1ae9e6dedd Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson

[Bug target/93372] cris performance regressions due to de-cc0 work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93372 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9a2ae08b02d185a11e3e525e100ba637ce81c7ff commit r11-2050-g9a2ae08b02d185a11e3e525e100ba637ce81c7ff Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson

[Bug tree-optimization/96163] another ice in pass slp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96163 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- OK, so the issue is that the representation for pre-existing vectors leaves us with vector defs outside of the region (and not immediately before the region begin) which then confuses the logic in vect_stmt_

[Bug c++/96179] New: g++-10.1 silently doesn't push_back the return of a void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96179 Bug ID: 96179 Summary: g++-10.1 silently doesn't push_back the return of a void function Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/89417] helgrind detects a lock order violation inside std::scoped_lock

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89417 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Federico Kircheis from comment #0) > In case helgrind is correct, it seems that there are some issues behind > std::scoped_lock, since it was explicitly designed for solving issues with > lock

[Bug c++/96179] [10/11 Regression] g++-10.1 silently doesn't push_back the return of a void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96179 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2 CC|

[Bug c++/96063] [10/11 Regression] mismatched-tags warnings in stdlib headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96063 --- Comment #15 from Ian McInerney --- Martin, can you backport you compiler patch to the GCC10 branch so it is fixed there as well? As I said, this makes the warning essentially useless to use on large codebases with the current release.

[Bug tree-optimization/96180] New: gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96180 Bug ID: 96180 Summary: gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/96180] gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96180 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug c++/96179] [10/11 Regression] g++-10.1 silently doesn't push_back the return of a void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96179 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Prior

[Bug testsuite/96180] gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96180 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |testsuite --- Comment #1 from Richard B

[Bug testsuite/96180] gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96180 --- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- > Hmm, yeah - the testcase assumes the target upps alignment of 'a' a bit from > its requirement of 'int' ... guess changing a to require bigger

[Bug jit/95498] unhandled conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95498 --- Comment #5 from Alex Coplan --- Created attachment 48867 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48867&action=edit Minimal reproducer I've done some exhaustive testing of which combinations of casts are allowed. It seems that an

[Bug testsuite/96180] gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96180 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a4770f0394751860ee54520b23007938907ac33 commit r11-2052-g7a4770f0394751860ee54520b23007938907ac33 Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug testsuite/96180] gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96180 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:60a26b155642a58e9033c650d5c38b28ab471d34 commit r10-8469-g60a26b155642a58e9033c650d5c38b28ab471d34 Author: Richard Biener

[Bug testsuite/96180] gcc.dg/torture/pr96133.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96180 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|11.0

[Bug c++/96063] [10/11 Regression] mismatched-tags warnings in stdlib headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96063 --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely --- One or both of r11-1853 and r11-1899 should be backported.

[Bug jit/95498] unhandled conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95498 --- Comment #6 from Antoni --- (In reply to Alex Coplan from comment #5) > Created attachment 48867 [details] > Minimal reproducer > > I've done some exhaustive testing of which combinations of casts are > allowed. It seems that any program of t

[Bug c++/96181] New: Missing return statement now leads to crashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96181 Bug ID: 96181 Summary: Missing return statement now leads to crashes Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug target/96176] Failure to omit extraneous movzx in atomic compare exchange with unsigned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96176 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/96176] Failure to omit extraneous movzx in atomic compare exchange with unsigned char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96176 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/96181] Missing return statement now leads to crashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96181 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/96181] Missing return statement now leads to crashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96181 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- This is also mentioned on https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-8/porting_to.html .

[Bug fortran/92586] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:13479 with nested allocatable derived types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586 --- Comment #9 from epagone --- Bug persists in version 10.1: $ gfortran-10 -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gfortran-10 COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/lto-wrapper OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none:amdgcn-amdhsa:hsa OFFLO

[Bug target/94042] [10 Regression] Bootstrap fails on ppc-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94042 Bug 94042 depends on bug 94148, which changed state. Bug 94148 Summary: The DF framework uses bb->aux, which is for passes only https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94148 What|Removed |Added

[Bug rtl-optimization/94148] The DF framework uses bb->aux, which is for passes only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94148 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/70493] std::setlocale("") throws exception

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70493 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/68737] FAIL: 22_locale/num_put/put/char/14220.cc execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 --- Comment #29 from Jonathan Wake

[Bug c++/96181] Missing return statement now leads to crashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96181 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Arturo Laurenzi from comment #0) > Now, I understand the code snipped is probably broken. However, this change > breaks old code that would work just fine by ignoring the undefined return > val

[Bug libstdc++/96161] istream::ignore sets eofbit too soon

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96161 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba8fe4b4832e30277f2e4a73b5d35b2e55074d07 commit r11-2054-gba8fe4b4832e30277f2e4a73b5d35b2e55074d07 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/94749] std::istream::ignore discards too many characters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94749 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba8fe4b4832e30277f2e4a73b5d35b2e55074d07 commit r11-2054-gba8fe4b4832e30277f2e4a73b5d35b2e55074d07 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/96161] istream::ignore sets eofbit too soon

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96161 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed on trunk so far.

[Bug c++/85714] -Wimplicit-fallthrough and nested exhaustive switch statements with enum classes and return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85714 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5) > The enumeration type can take any value from (Foo)INT_MIN to (Foo)INT_MAX, > and likewise for Bar. Your switches are not exhaustive. > > I think we need a FA

[Bug c++/83280] gcc doesn't realize a returning value from complete switch(enum...) does return a value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83280 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- There is now info about this on the wiki: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/VerboseDiagnostics#enum_switch

[Bug c++/96182] New: GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96182 Bug ID: 96182 Summary: GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: accepts-invalid

[Bug c++/96182] GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96182 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/96121] Uninitialized variable copying not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96121 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||19808 CC|

[Bug c++/96182] GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96182 --- Comment #2 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > The difference is that in C++11 the standard requires that the body of a > constexpr function is return expression, that is not the case of C++14 > anymore. > And, yo

[Bug c/93432] variable is used uninitialized, but gcc shows no warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93432 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||easyhack --- Comment #5 from Manue

[Bug c++/96182] GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96182 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/96182] GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96182 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Or another possible wording would be that a constexpr function which is not a valid constant expression for all possible parameter values is invalid. I believe such wording is there for templates and instead

[Bug fortran/96158] Symbols not emitted for module common variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 --- Comment #4 from AJM --- >> I won't comment on the questionable programming idiom of placing >> a common block in a module, which kind of defeats the niceties of >> a module. > If somebody wants to transition your code from using common blocks

[Bug c++/96183] New: GCC accepts "convert '' from 'void' to 'int'" at compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96183 Bug ID: 96183 Summary: GCC accepts "convert '' from 'void' to 'int'" at compile time Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: accepts-invalid

[Bug c++/96182] GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96182 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/96182] GCC accepts constexpr function with no return-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96182 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- So we could do something like: --- gcc/cp/decl.c.jj2020-07-09 11:27:51.088908783 +0200 +++ gcc/cp/decl.c 2020-07-13 14:34:59.887259561 +0200 @@ -17164,7 +17164,9 @@ finish_function (bool inline_p)

[Bug c++/96184] New: GCC treats "use of local variable with automatic storage from containing function" differently in versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96184 Bug ID: 96184 Summary: GCC treats "use of local variable with automatic storage from containing function" differently in versions Product: gcc Version: 11.0

[Bug middle-end/95114] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in obj_type_ref_class for structural-equality types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95114 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5834e96a08fd8b86a42428f38a95903d2f1de202 commit r11-2055-g5834e96a08fd8b86a42428f38a95903d2f1de202 Author: Richard Sandiford Da

[Bug target/94791] aarch64: -pg profiling is broken with pac-ret

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94791 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:463a54e5d4956143f81c1f23b91cbd2d93855741 commit r11-2056-g463a54e5d4956143f81c1f23b91cbd2d93855741 Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Tu

[Bug target/94891] aarch64: there is no way to strip PAC from a return address in c code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94891 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2bc95be3bb8c8138e2e87c1c11c84bfede989d61 commit r11-2057-g2bc95be3bb8c8138e2e87c1c11c84bfede989d61 Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Th

[Bug target/94891] aarch64: there is no way to strip PAC from a return address in c code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94891 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b097c7a27fb0796b2653a1d003cbf6b7a69d8961 commit r11-2058-gb097c7a27fb0796b2653a1d003cbf6b7a69d8961 Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Th

[Bug target/94891] aarch64: there is no way to strip PAC from a return address in c code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94891 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:463a54e5d4956143f81c1f23b91cbd2d93855741 commit r11-2056-g463a54e5d4956143f81c1f23b91cbd2d93855741 Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Tu

[Bug target/94891] aarch64: there is no way to strip PAC from a return address in c code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94891 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a391e06f953c3390b14020d8cacb6d55f81b2b9 commit r11-2059-g6a391e06f953c3390b14020d8cacb6d55f81b2b9 Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Th

[Bug c++/96063] [10/11 Regression] mismatched-tags warnings in stdlib headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96063 --- Comment #17 from Ian McInerney --- I think that r11-1899 is the more important one to backport, since that will also allow for warnings that are generated by headers inside "-isystem" include directories to not have the notes printed without

[Bug c++/96179] [10/11 Regression] g++-10.1 silently doesn't push_back the return of a void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96179 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/96185] New: Enhancement: Please add a builtin to count bindings in [dcl.struct.bind]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185 Bug ID: 96185 Summary: Enhancement: Please add a builtin to count bindings in [dcl.struct.bind] Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/96185] Enhancement: Please add a builtin to count bindings in [dcl.struct.bind]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185 --- Comment #1 from Will Wray --- Clang ticket https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46704 MSVC ticket https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/idea/203/enhancement-please-add-a-builtin-to-count-bindings.html#

[Bug c++/96170] Enhancement: allow requires-clause checking of statement expression substitution success or failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96170 --- Comment #2 from Will Wray --- A much better idea, submitted here as bug 96185 and simultaneously submitted to Clang and MSVC - a portable builtin to count bindings in [dcl.struct.bind]

[Bug fortran/96158] Symbols not emitted for module common variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 --- Comment #5 from AJM --- Also, in case it wasn't clear, > Breakpoint 2, boo () at a.f90:9 > 9 write(*, '(A, I3)') "moduleVar=", n > (gdb) p n > $2 = 123 > (gdb) p moduleVar > No symbol "moduleVar" in current context. > (gdb) p (integ

[Bug fortran/95981] ICE in gfc_find_array_ref(): No ref found

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95981 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3f069011019c9df670969ea283fd4d139f34a925 commit r11-2061-g3f069011019c9df670969ea283fd4d139f34a925 Author: Mark Eggleston Date:

[Bug fortran/96158] Debug symbols not emitted for module common variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 12:23:58PM +, amelvill at umich dot edu wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 > > --- Comment #4 from AJM --- > >> I won't comment on the questionable program

[Bug target/96186] New: [11 regressoion] ICE: Unrecognizable insn since r11-1970-fab263ab0fc10ea08409b80afa7e8569438b8d28

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96186 Bug ID: 96186 Summary: [11 regressoion] ICE: Unrecognizable insn since r11-1970-fab263ab0fc10ea08409b80afa7e8569438b8d28 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug debug/78288] Compile time hog (with var-tracking) for libsanitizer/asan/asan_interceptors.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78288 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 48869 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48869&action=edit alternate patch OK, I have another patch that reduces the overall number of visited blocks in stage3 gcc/*.o b

[Bug tree-optimization/96163] another ice in pass slp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96163 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c4facd483de2d5b6b4d20e6ad74c85b9f1eba41a commit r11-2062-gc4facd483de2d5b6b4d20e6ad74c85b9f1eba41a Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/96163] another ice in pass slp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96163 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/96158] Debug symbols not emitted for module common variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 --- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 01:42:29PM +, amelvill at umich dot edu wrote: > > As far as workarounds go, if it came to that I'd rather just make a dummy > "debug" function that stored these common variables as

[Bug debug/78288] Compile time hog (with var-tracking) for libsanitizer/asan/asan_interceptors.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78288 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- files with growth: obj/gcc/calls.c.325t.statistics:320 4958 | 5571 obj/gcc/prefix.c.325t.statistics:320 115 | 118 yes, that's all of them.

[Bug tree-optimization/96187] New: GCC at -O2 generates branch for code that should be branch-free

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96187 Bug ID: 96187 Summary: GCC at -O2 generates branch for code that should be branch-free Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/96077] GCC accepts ill-legal local enum definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96077 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4fd124a23664c712f1bb1a7e91fa23fe83d72c0b commit r11-2064-g4fd124a23664c712f1bb1a7e91fa23fe83d72c0b Author: Marek Polacek Date: Th

[Bug c++/96077] GCC accepts ill-legal local enum definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96077 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/96077] GCC accepts ill-legal local enum definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96077 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:30529e2faa482bc749c65a490763dbc2ccaf63ac commit r10-8470-g30529e2faa482bc749c65a490763dbc2ccaf63ac Author: Marek Polacek D

[Bug c++/96077] GCC accepts ill-legal local enum definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96077 --- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek --- Fixed for GCC 10.2 and 11.

[Bug c++/96063] [10/11 Regression] mismatched-tags warnings in stdlib headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96063 --- Comment #18 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5e4c9ebbab7bec3b5994f85aebce13bf37cf46e9 commit r10-8471-g5e4c9ebbab7bec3b5994f85aebce13bf37cf46e9 Author: Martin Sebor Da

[Bug c++/96063] [10 Regression] mismatched-tags warnings in stdlib headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96063 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail|11.0| Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/45337] gfortran accepts pointer initialization of DT dummy arguments w/ INTENT(OUT)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45337 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bae66e0f04323ba9d5daf60fcb997de925100e3e commit r11-2065-gbae66e0f04323ba9d5daf60fcb997de925100e3e Author: Mark Eggleston Date:

[Bug fortran/96158] Debug symbols not emitted for module common variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 --- Comment #8 from AJM --- > > >> I won't comment on the questionable programming idiom of placing > > >> a common block in a module, which kind of defeats the niceties of > > >> a module. > > > If somebody wants to transition your code from usi

[Bug target/94393] Powerpc suboptimal 64-bit constant comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94393 --- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #3) > There are two parts to fixing this PR. > 1) We can do better in the sequences generated for some constants. > 2) rs6000_rtx_costs needs to be accurate, so that expen

[Bug middle-end/95189] [10/11 Regression] memcmp being wrongly stripped like strcmp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95189 --- Comment #10 from Jiarui Hong --- Please note that there seems to be two issues here that affect different versions of gcc: (From the comment of g...@pkh.me) https://godbolt.org/z/xc59TM This fails in 9.3.0 but works in 10.1.0. (From the com

[Bug c++/96188] New: -Wstringop-overflow false positive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96188 Bug ID: 96188 Summary: -Wstringop-overflow false positive Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug target/92488] GCC generates calls to __dpd_trunctdsd2 with -mhard-dfp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92488 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #1 from Peter Bergne

[Bug ipa/96130] [10/11 Regression] ICE in analyze_function_body at gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c:2769 since r10-3199-g351e7c3b5fbd45bd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96130 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:776e48e0931db69f158f40e5cb8e15463d879a42 commit r11-2066-g776e48e0931db69f158f40e5cb8e15463d879a42 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: Mo

[Bug fortran/96158] Debug symbols not emitted for module common variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 --- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 03:44:13PM +, amelvill at umich dot edu wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 > > --- Comment #8 from AJM --- > > > >> I won't comment on the questionable pro

[Bug ipa/96130] [10/11 Regression] ICE in analyze_function_body at gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c:2769 since r10-3199-g351e7c3b5fbd45bd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96130 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0d03c0ee5213703ec6d9ffa632fa5298d83adaaa commit r10-8472-g0d03c0ee5213703ec6d9ffa632fa5298d83adaaa Author: Jakub Jelinek

[Bug ipa/96130] [10/11 Regression] ICE in analyze_function_body at gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c:2769 since r10-3199-g351e7c3b5fbd45bd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96130 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|fxue at gcc dot gnu.org|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/96188] -Wstringop-overflow false positive

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96188 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic, |

[Bug c++/95288] Poor error message with function-scope enum definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95288 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #12) > Wow, this works! Mine :-) Hi Segher, did you ever commit anything to help here? Ie, can we mark this as fixed or is it still an open issue?

[Bug fortran/96158] Debug symbols not emitted for module common variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96158 --- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to AJM from comment #8) > If you really need to know, on the C side there is a struct with fields that > match the order and size of the variables in the common statement / module > declaration. I

[Bug c++/95288] Poor error message with function-scope enum definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95288 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a9a3434c7396ea14c8f9c291694faea382c36dc commit r11-2067-g6a9a3434c7396ea14c8f9c291694faea382c36dc Author: Marek Polacek Date: Mo

[Bug c++/95288] Poor error message with function-scope enum definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95288 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/96188] -Wstringop-overflow false positive on std::vector::push_back with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96188 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/95270] OpenACC 'enter data attach' looks up target memory object displaced by pointer size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95270 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Julian Brown : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2974e1eee053496e1d43f7f2e62f5feac2aa0315 commit r10-8475-g2974e1eee053496e1d43f7f2e62f5feac2aa0315 Author: Julian Brown Dat

[Bug c++/96169] Don't provide internal lambda names in diagnostics?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96169 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-07-13 CC|

[Bug target/95443] cmpstrnqi patterns update string length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/95443] cmpstrnqi patterns update string length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9cba898481368ce16c6a2d30ef781a82dce27c55 commit r11-2068-g9cba898481368ce16c6a2d30ef781a82dce27c55 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Mon Jul 13 10:

  1   2   >