[Bug lto/64374] [5 Regression] LTO ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2327

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64374 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- I see another issue. When we stream in OPTIMIZATION_NODE/TARGET_OPTIONS_NODE, we don't use build_optimization_node/build_target_option_node and thus we don't merge identical nodes

[Bug bootstrap/63888] [5 Regression] bootstrap failed when configured with -with-build-config=bootstrap-asan --disable-werror

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63888 --- Comment #31 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Any progress on this? If not, I'm considering doing: --- libsanitizer/asan/asan_globals.cc.jj2014-11-14 00:10:34.0 +0100 +++ libsanitizer/asan/asan_globals.cc

[Bug rtl-optimization/64081] [5 Regression] r217827 prevents RTL loop unroll

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot

[Bug bootstrap/63888] [5 Regression] bootstrap failed when configured with -with-build-config=bootstrap-asan --disable-werror

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63888 --- Comment #32 from Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com --- Or (probably less intrusive) add detect_odr_violation=0 to ASAN_OPTIONS config/bootstrap-asan.mk.

[Bug target/64452] [4.8/4.9/5.0 Regression] ICE in avr-gcc when passing struct member to varargs function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64452 --- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: gjl Date: Fri Feb 20 11:15:56 2015 New Revision: 220849 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220849root=gccview=rev Log: gcc/ Backport from 2015-02-20 trunk r220847.

[Bug c++/64969] generic functions do not work with placeholder return types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64969 Harald van Dijk harald at gigawatt dot nl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||harald at

[Bug middle-end/64491] [5 Regression] incorrect warning: loop exit may only be reached after undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64491 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Stubbs ams at gcc dot gnu.org --- I'm trying to look at this problem, but so far all my builds are failing. Probably I have some local cruft. In the meantime, the workaround is to use

[Bug target/64347] constructor priorities are not supported in avr-gcc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64347 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/60588] AVR target does not support init_priority attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60588 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug target/60588] AVR target does not support init_priority attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60588 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cameron at

[Bug rtl-optimization/64081] [5 Regression] r217827 prevents RTL loop unroll

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081 --- Comment #15 from Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Got an access to AIX machine, planning to look at it next week

[Bug target/64452] [4.8/4.9/5.0 Regression] ICE in avr-gcc when passing struct member to varargs function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64452 --- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: gjl Date: Fri Feb 20 10:30:24 2015 New Revision: 220847 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220847root=gccview=rev Log: gcc/ PR target/64452 * config/avr/avr.md

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 --- Comment #7 from Francois Fayard fayard at insideloop dot io --- I agree. Thanks for your comments.

[Bug target/63892] [5 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-3.c fails on darwin with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63892 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 34815 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34815action=edit gcc5-pr63892.patch This untested patch fixes the issue too, though if the #c4 patch

[Bug target/64452] [4.8/4.9/5.0 Regression] ICE in avr-gcc when passing struct member to varargs function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64452 --- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: gjl Date: Fri Feb 20 10:46:05 2015 New Revision: 220848 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220848root=gccview=rev Log: gcc/ Backport from 2015-02-20 trunk r220847.

[Bug target/64452] [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE in avr-gcc when passing struct member to varargs function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64452 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug bootstrap/63888] [5 Regression] bootstrap failed when configured with -with-build-config=bootstrap-asan --disable-werror

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63888 --- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- That is not sufficient. The bug affects all programs, not just gcc when bootstrapping it.

[Bug rtl-optimization/64158] [5 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr44194-1.c scan-rtl-dump dse1 global deletions = (2|3)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64158 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||macro at gcc dot

[Bug c/65088] Does GCC has load/store widening phase?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65088 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- See bug 23684.

[Bug target/63892] [5 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-3.c fails on darwin with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63892 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc

[Bug libstdc++/64135] Allocator base classes should use reserved names

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64135 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c++/62116] Allowing redeclaration of global variable x using ::x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62116 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-08/msg00221.html

[Bug c++/65132] New: diagnostics: missing: bitfield member cannot have an in-class initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65132 Bug ID: 65132 Summary: diagnostics: missing: bitfield member cannot have an in-class initializer Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug go/65134] New: gccgo ignores the attribute constructor in a subdirectory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65134 Bug ID: 65134 Summary: gccgo ignores the attribute constructor in a subdirectory Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|major |normal ---

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug debug/58315] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] Excessive memory use with -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-*

[Bug c/45779] pointer difference error/ptrdiff_t representability

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45779 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 --- Comment #3 from Francois Fayard fayard at insideloop dot io --- Thanks for the info. It would be nice to reflect that in max_size().

[Bug c++/65133] New: [C++11] Result type deduction proceeds even though argument deduction fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65133 Bug ID: 65133 Summary: [C++11] Result type deduction proceeds even though argument deduction fails Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- It seems like a waste of time. The internals of the standard library are not the right place to dissuade people from their mistaken beliefs. Simply trying to allocate such an array

[Bug sanitizer/63958] [5 Regression] bootstrap failure in the sanitizer libs on sparc-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63958 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- The r216224 change apparently applies cleanly to the current sources, does it fix all the sparc*-linux build issues? My SPARC box is long time dead...

[Bug testsuite/65126] [5 Regresion] additional_sources not defined anymore during dg-final

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65126 --- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Maxim Kuvyrkov from comment #3) Hi Tom, I can't reproduce this. I'm trying make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=vect.exp on a native x86_64 bootstrap. What is required to trigger this?

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 --- Comment #5 from Francois Fayard fayard at insideloop dot io --- They are so many people out there who claim that using an unsigned integer (std::size_t) as an array index was a good choice because you can allocate larger arrays than with the

[Bug c++/65127] [5 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl minimal' structure, have 'addr_expr' in parsing_nsdmi, at cp/parser.c:18311

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65127 Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug rtl-optimization/65135] New: Performance regression in pic mode after r220674.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65135 Bug ID: 65135 Summary: Performance regression in pic mode after r220674. Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug testsuite/65126] [5 Regresion] additional_sources not defined anymore during dg-final

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65126 Maxim Kuvyrkov mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mkuvyrkov

[Bug tree-optimization/65136] New: VRP inserts unnecessary constant copy in the loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65136 Bug ID: 65136 Summary: VRP inserts unnecessary constant copy in the loop Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/65135] Performance regression in pic mode after r220674.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65135 --- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 34814 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34814action=edit test-case to reproduce Need to compile with -O2 -m32 -fPIE -pie options.

[Bug ipa/65028] [5 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028 --- Comment #58 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- The Firefox issue from comment #49 is fixed.

[Bug target/63892] [5 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-3.c fails on darwin with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63892 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 34817 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34817action=edit Fixed IPA ICF hooks Hello Jakub. Your patch in #c4 is correct, assert is caused due to

[Bug target/63483] Scheduler performs Invalid move of aliased memory reference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483 --- Comment #23 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Fri Feb 20 12:04:21 2015 New Revision: 220854 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220854root=gccview=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2015-01-22 Wei Mi w...@google.com

[Bug rtl-optimization/64557] get_addr in true_dependence_1 cannot handle VALUE inside an expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64557 --- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Fri Feb 20 12:04:21 2015 New Revision: 220854 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220854root=gccview=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2015-01-22 Wei Mi w...@google.com

[Bug rtl-optimization/65135] [5 Regression] Performance regression in pic mode after r220674.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65135 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/65136] [5 Regression] VRP inserts unnecessary constant copy in the loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65136 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.9.2

[Bug go/65134] gccgo ignores the attribute constructor in a subdirectory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65134 --- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com --- It's pretty ugly, but a workaround is to drop something like this into sub.go: var AlwaysFalse bool func init() { if AlwaysFalse { C.init() } } The idea is to force in

[Bug tree-optimization/65136] VRP inserts unnecessary constant copy in the loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65136 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug target/63892] [5 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-3.c fails on darwin with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63892 --- Comment #9 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Thanks for cooperation, I'm going to bootstrap and run regression tests on x86_64-linux-pc and I'm going to clone these tests too. Martin

[Bug rtl-optimization/64557] get_addr in true_dependence_1 cannot handle VALUE inside an expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64557 Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/63892] [5 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-3.c fails on darwin with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63892 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Thanks, looks reasonable. That will hopefully render my #c5 patch undeeded. Can you please bootstrap/regtest it on x86_64-linux (well, I can do that too now). Don't have access to

[Bug tree-optimization/65136] [5 Regression] VRP inserts unnecessary constant copy in the loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65136 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uros at gcc

[Bug target/63892] [5 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-3.c fails on darwin with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63892 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 34818 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34818action=edit V499 And let's copy and adjust the sibcall-{3,4}.c testcases so that they aren't ICF

[Bug rtl-optimization/65135] [5 Regression] Performance regression in pic mode after r220674.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65135 H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last

[Bug rtl-optimization/65135] [5 Regression] Performance regression in pic mode after r220674.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65135 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- The assembly code generates by r220674 is much shorter: bar: call__x86.get_pc_thunk.ax addl$_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_, %eax movlFPtr@GOTOFF(%eax), %edx movl

[Bug libstdc++/65122] std::vector doesn't honor element alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Benoit Jacob from comment #11) (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) But ::operator new(std::size_t) could always return memory aligned for the most

[Bug testsuite/64158] [5 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr44194-1.c scan-rtl-dump dse1 global deletions = (2|3)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64158 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 34816 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34816action=edit gcc5-pr64158.patch Untested fix. Seem tcl is picky about the {}s, doesn't want cond1

[Bug rtl-optimization/63475] Postreload CSE propagates aliased memory operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63475 --- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Fri Feb 20 12:04:21 2015 New Revision: 220854 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220854root=gccview=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2015-01-22 Wei Mi w...@google.com

[Bug testsuite/64158] [5 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr44194-1.c scan-rtl-dump dse1 global deletions = (2|3)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64158 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org --- It's a restriction of the selector expression parser.

[Bug c++/65132] diagnostics: missing: bitfield member cannot have an in-class initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65132 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c++/65132] diagnostics: missing: bitfield member cannot have an in-class initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65132 --- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1) Probably it is just a matter of calling cp_parser_constant_expression with the right parameters to not emit errors, then

[Bug libstdc++/65122] std::vector doesn't honor element alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122 --- Comment #11 from Benoit Jacob jacob.benoit.1 at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) But ::operator new(std::size_t) could always return memory aligned for the most over-aligned type? Thus our default new

[Bug libstdc++/65131] Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131 --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) The ABI says for all 32bit ABIs you cannot allocate more than half of the address space. X32 can allocate more than 2GB via malloc and ILP32

[Bug c++/65137] New: wrong line for missing semicolon after expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65137 Bug ID: 65137 Summary: wrong line for missing semicolon after expression Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug middle-end/65082] Wasted cycles when using a register based varible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65082 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target|AVR-GCC |avr

[Bug ipa/65028] [5 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028 --- Comment #59 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #36) We end up with algnment unkonwn instead of a. (did not managed to reproduce the wrong alignment here). What about the following: It

[Bug rtl-optimization/65135] [5 Regression] Performance regression in pic mode after r220674.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65135 --- Comment #4 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com --- This patch improves performance of almost all benchmarks in pic-mode for 32-bit target, but we have the only huge degradation on benchmark from eembc1.1 suite. I mentioned that

[Bug sanitizer/65112] [5 Regression] -fsanitized=thread Fortran program crashes at startup

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65112 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Can't reproduce, works just fine here.

[Bug target/65139] New: Improve register allocation for aarch64_*_sisd_or_intmode3 patterns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65139 Bug ID: 65139 Summary: Improve register allocation for aarch64_*_sisd_or_intmode3 patterns Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libstdc++/65122] std::vector doesn't honor element alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122 --- Comment #13 from Benoit Jacob jacob.benoit.1 at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #12) (In reply to Benoit Jacob from comment #11) (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10) But ::operator new(std::size_t)

[Bug libstdc++/65122] std::vector doesn't honor element alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122 --- Comment #14 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Benoit Jacob from comment #13) (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #12) (In reply to Benoit Jacob from comment #11) (In reply to Richard Biener from

[Bug libstdc++/65122] std::vector doesn't honor element alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122 --- Comment #15 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Oh, and I wonder if there is an aligned realloc (though C++ doesn't define sth like realloc and thus std::vector can't optimize the copy when reallocating?!). But for a C program

[Bug c++/65127] [5 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl minimal' structure, have 'addr_expr' in parsing_nsdmi, at cp/parser.c:18311

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65127 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot

[Bug target/65138] New: [5 Regression] testsuite ICEs on powerpc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65138 Bug ID: 65138 Summary: [5 Regression] testsuite ICEs on powerpc64le Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug ipa/65028] [5 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028 Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug target/65139] Improve register allocation for aarch64_*_sisd_or_intmode3 patterns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65139 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/65138] [5 Regression] testsuite ICEs on powerpc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65138 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0 ---

[Bug libstdc++/64695] [5 Regression] FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/cxx11.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64695 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: redi Date: Fri Feb 20 14:40:00 2015 New Revision: 220871 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220871root=gccview=rev Log: PR libstdc++/64695 *

[Bug libstdc++/64695] [5 Regression] FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/cxx11.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64695 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/64467] [5 Regression] 28_regex/traits/char/isctype.cc and wchar_t/isctype.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Is this fixed at r220682 ?

[Bug rtl-optimization/65135] [5 Regression] Performance regression in pic mode after r220674.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65135 H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW

[Bug c++/65147] alignment of std::atomic object is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65147 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, alexey.lapshin at oracle dot com wrote: According to the documentation - https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Atomic/GCCMM/UnalignedPolicy

[Bug rtl-optimization/64317] [5 Regression] Ineffective allocation of PIC base register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64317 --- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com --- Just trying to help out where I can. It's similar to the round robin use of reload regs we've had in reload for a while. THe idea was to hopefully have reloaded values lying around

[Bug bootstrap/65150] New: bootstrap failure at r220878 on x86_64 darwin

++/.libs -I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/darwin_objdir/prev-x86_64-apple-darwin14.3.0/libstdc++-v3/include/x86_64-apple-darwin14.3.0 -I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/darwin_objdir/prev-x86_64-apple-darwin14.3.0/libstdc++-v3/include -I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/gcc-5-20150220

[Bug c++/65149] unaligned atomic object causes Bus Error on SPARC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65149 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Related to PR 62259 -- maybe even a dup.

[Bug fortran/64432] [5 Regression] SYSTEM_CLOCK(COUNT_RATE=rate) wrong result for integer(4)::rate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64432 --- Comment #27 from Harald Anlauf anlauf at gmx dot de --- (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #26) Created attachment 34819 [details] Updated full patch. Revised to fix error shown in Comment #22 The new patch does indeed fix the

[Bug libstdc++/64467] [5 Regression] 28_regex/traits/char/isctype.cc and wchar_t/isctype.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467 Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug debug/58315] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] Excessive memory use with -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315 Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aoliva at gcc

[Bug c/65145] size of atomic object is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65145 Joseph S. Myers jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/65141] ISO_10646 constant parameters convert kind when used with substring references

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65141 Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug libstdc++/64467] [5 Regression] 28_regex/traits/char/isctype.cc and wchar_t/isctype.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- In the POSIX (i.e. C) locale it should only be space and tab, but implementing that when the target only has 8-bits for the ctype mask and doesn't have a blank class is very

[Bug c/65145] size of atomic object is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65145 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, alexey.lapshin at oracle dot com wrote: The size of atomic object does not match with documentation -

[Bug target/65109] [5 Regression] r220674 causes FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/ppc64-abi-1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109 --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 34821 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34821action=edit Patch to make the test less subject to register clobbering. FWIW, I agree with Richard

[Bug c/65146] alignment of _Atomic structure member is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146 --- Comment #2 from Alexey Lapshin alexey.lapshin at oracle dot com --- if alignment of atomic object less then it`s size then it could not be lock-free on x86 32. If that object would split across cache lines then the operation would not be

[Bug bootstrap/65150] bootstrap failure at r220878 on x86_64 darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65150 --- Comment #1 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu --- Failed for bootstrap using... ../gcc-5-20150220/configure --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw/lib/gcc5.0 --mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/lib/gcc5.0/info --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto

[Bug c/65146] alignment of _Atomic structure member is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, alexey.lapshin at oracle dot com wrote: Alignment of single _Atomic object match with documentation :

[Bug c/65145] size of atomic object is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65145 --- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, alexey.lapshin at oracle dot com wrote: Hi Joseph, Could you help me with a link to the correct description of atomic ABI, which

[Bug target/65109] [5 Regression] r220674 causes FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/ppc64-abi-1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com --- Martin, Looks good to me. Can you write a quick ChangeLog for the patch, then post it to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org Something like

[Bug c/65145] size of atomic object is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65145 --- Comment #2 from Alexey Lapshin alexey.lapshin at oracle dot com --- Hi Joseph, Could you help me with a link to the correct description of atomic ABI, which in fact used by gcc/g++, please ? Thank you, Alexey.

[Bug target/65109] [5 Regression] r220674 causes FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/ppc64-abi-1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109 --- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com --- Martin, Looks good to me. Can you write a quick ChangeLog for the patch, then post it to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org Something like PR target/65109 *

  1   2   >