[Bug fortran/85547] Run-time error: character array constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85547 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/85547] Run-time error: character array constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85547 --- Comment #2 from Walter Spector --- Third variant. This one messes up NAG and PGI too: wws@w6ws-4:/tmp$ cat testch3.f90 program testch implicit none character(:), allocatable :: path(:) path = 'xyz/' path = (/ character(16) :: &

[Bug fortran/85547] Run-time error: character array constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85547 --- Comment #1 from Walter Spector --- Slightly different test case - using allocatable string length instead of the trims. However the same problems are evident: program testch implicit none character(:), allocatable :: path path =

[Bug fortran/85547] New: Run-time error: character array constructor

// "forty two" /) ) contains subroutine print_strings (s) character(*), intent(in) :: s(:) integer :: i do, i=1, size(s) print *, i, '>', s(i), '<' end do end subroutine end program wws@w6ws-4:/tmp$ /usr/local/gcc-trunk/bin/gfortran --version GNU Fortran (GC

[Bug fortran/85526] [6/7/8/9 regression] ICE when calling a (pure) function from inside another pure function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 12:54:05AM +, sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 > > --- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl --- > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at

[Bug inline-asm/85546] GCC assumes volatile asm block returns same value in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85546 --- Comment #1 from be11f157cd19c4a2ba1e9c70a38b1a74 at protonmail dot com --- The code sample is compiled with gcc -ffreestanding -nostdlib -nostartfiles main.c

[Bug c/85546] New: GCC assumes volatile asm block returns same value in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85546 Bug ID: 85546 Summary: GCC assumes volatile asm block returns same value in loop Product: gcc Version: 7.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/69560] x86_64: alignof(uint64_t) produces incorrect results with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69560 Peter Cordes changed: What|Removed |Added CC||peter at cordes dot ca --- Comment #23

[Bug target/85492] riscv64: endless loop when throwing an exception from a constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85492 palmer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||palmer at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/85545] [8/9 Regression] ICE with static_cast of pointer-to-member-function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85545 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Thu Apr 26 20:32:32 2018 New Revision: 259689 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259689=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/85545 - ICE with noexcept PMF conversion. * cvt.c

[Bug c++/85545] [8/9 Regression] ICE with static_cast of pointer-to-member-function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85545 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug fortran/85542] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in check_inquiry, at fortran/expr.c:2426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85542 --- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 06:47:34PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85542 > > --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to G. Steinmetz

[Bug fortran/85544] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3385

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85544 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/85543] ICE in update_current_proc_array_outer_dependency, at fortran/resolve.c:3060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85543 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/85542] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in check_inquiry, at fortran/expr.c:2426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85542 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to G. Steinmetz from comment #0) > gfortran-8 changed between 20180304 and 20180311. > gfortran-7 changed between 20180215 and 20180308. > gfortran-6 changed between 20180307 and

[Bug fortran/85542] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in check_inquiry, at fortran/expr.c:2426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85542 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug c++/85545] [8/9 Regression] ICE with static_cast of pointer-to-member-function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85545 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek

[Bug c++/85545] [8/9 Regression] ICE with static_cast of pointer-to-member-function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85545 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/55976] -Werror=return-type should error on returning a value from a void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55976 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Dave Pagan from comment #6) > Helpful update, Jonathan - did you want to follow up on this bug then? Or > should I go ahead based on your new information? I missed this reply, sorry. I

[Bug c++/85545] New: [8/9 Regression] ICE with static_cast of pointer-to-member-function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85545 Bug ID: 85545 Summary: [8/9 Regression] ICE with static_cast of pointer-to-member-function Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug c/55976] -Werror=return-type should error on returning a value from a void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55976 Dave Pagan changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #9 from Dave Pagan ---

[Bug target/85525] Alignment Issue in AVX compiler intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 --- Comment #9 from Tom Ritter --- This may be related to: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53485 https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/bugs/304/

[Bug fortran/85544] ICE in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3385

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85544 --- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz --- Whereas this variant (plain b) works for all tested versions : $ cat z4.f90 program p integer, parameter :: na = -3, ne = 10 integer :: i, a(na:ne), b(na:ne), c(na:ne) a = [(i,

[Bug fortran/85544] New: ICE in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3385

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85544 Bug ID: 85544 Summary: ICE in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3385 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/85543] New: ICE in update_current_proc_array_outer_dependency, at fortran/resolve.c:3060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85543 Bug ID: 85543 Summary: ICE in update_current_proc_array_outer_dependency, at fortran/resolve.c:3060 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug fortran/85542] New: [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in check_inquiry, at fortran/expr.c:2426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85542 Bug ID: 85542 Summary: [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in check_inquiry, at fortran/expr.c:2426 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/85541] ICE with parameterized derived type (PDT) and allocate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85541 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/85541] New: ICE with parameterized derived type (PDT) and allocate

est use char_kinds implicit none type (charptr(clen=:)), allocatable :: mychars allocate (mychars) ! ICEes with this, compiles without it end program wws@w6ws-4:/rootsda5/home/wws/fortran/pdt$ /usr/local/gcc-trunk/bin/gfortran --version GNU Fortran (GCC) 9.0.0 20180426 (experimental) Copyri

[Bug target/85538] kortest for 32 and 64 bit masks incorrectly uses k0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85538 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/85531] Implement some loop fusion in the Fortran front end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85531 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On April 26, 2018 6:09:40 PM GMT+02:00, "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85531 > >--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---

[Bug ada/85540] New: gcc/ada/init.c:1282: suspicious expression ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85540 Bug ID: 85540 Summary: gcc/ada/init.c:1282: suspicious expression ? Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada

[Bug fortran/85531] Implement some loop fusion in the Fortran front end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85531 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig --- What is the best strategy on this? I assume the Fortran front end could do a dependency analysis, the existing code could be extended for this. We could then either do the scalarization in the front end,

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85539 Bug ID: 85539 Summary: x86_64: loads are not always narrowed Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug lto/82229] GCC7's LTO underperforms compared to GCC6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82229 --- Comment #25 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to krzysio.kurek from comment #24) > Created attachment 44025 [details] > Performance logs from perf > > Alright so I've generated 4 profiles with the following flags: > "pure6": -O3 -DNDEBUG

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] [7/8/9 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug lto/82229] GCC7's LTO underperforms compared to GCC6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82229 krzysio.kurek at wp dot pl changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #42199|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/85536] ICE on procedure pointer assignment for subroutine with procedure pointer argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85536 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/85537] [7/8/9 Regression] Invalid memory reference at runtime when calling subroutine through procedure pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85537 --- Comment #3 from Tiziano Müller --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #2) > The test works for me with 4.8.5. The change occurred between revisions > r2370089 (2016-06-04, OK) and r237310 + one patch (2016-06-10, wrong code).

[Bug fortran/85526] [6/7/8/9 regression] ICE when calling a (pure) function from inside another pure function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 --- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 08:03:35AM +, mail at pietrodelugas dot it wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 > > --- Comment #4 from Pietro Delugas --- > a quick and dirty workaround is

[Bug fortran/85537] [7/8/9 Regression] Invalid memory reference at runtime when calling subroutine through procedure pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85537 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Priority|P3

[Bug target/83748] Local variables not aligned to word boundary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83748 --- Comment #10 from Sumit --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #9) Thanks Segher for your comment. I have gone through the changes and seems like they are relevant to "volatile bitfield". Just wanted to confirm (double check) if

[Bug fortran/85534] allocation of array with source give shifted index

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85534 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947 Bug 53947 depends on bug 78151, which changed state. Bug 78151 Summary: Fail to vectorize *min_element https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78151 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/78151] Fail to vectorize *min_element

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78151 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/84025] [nvptx] Don't generate branch-around-nothing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84025 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/83748] Local variables not aligned to word boundary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83748 --- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool --- [ Please remove irrelevant parts of the email when replying to bugzilla mail ]. https://gcc.gnu.org/r205896 tells you this commit resolved four PRs: PR middle-end/23623 PR

[Bug target/84025] [nvptx] Don't generate branch-around-nothing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84025 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 --- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries

[Bug libgomp/84020] [nvptx] Add GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O[0-4] in nvptx libgomp plugin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84020 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/85538] kortest for 32 and 64 bit masks incorrectly uses k0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85538 --- Comment #1 from Matthias Kretz --- Sorry, I was trying to force GCC to use the k1 register and playing with register asm (which didn't have any effect at all). f8 should actually be (cf. https://godbolt.org/g/hSkoJV): bool f8(__m512i x,

[Bug lto/85422] [openacc] ICE at cfgloop.c:468: segfault in flow_loops_find

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85422 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/85519] [nvptx, openacc, openmp, testsuite] Recursive tests may fail due to thread stack limit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85519 --- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries --- Committed to trunk. Approved for 8.2. [ 8.1 release is targeted for Wednesday, May 2nd. ]

[Bug target/85538] New: kortest for 32 and 64 bit masks incorrectly uses k0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85538 Bug ID: 85538 Summary: kortest for 32 and 64 bit masks incorrectly uses k0 Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug libgomp/84020] [nvptx] Add GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O[0-4] in nvptx libgomp plugin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84020 --- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu Apr 26 13:27:04 2018 New Revision: 259678 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259678=gcc=rev Log: [nvptx, libgomp] Add GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O[0-4] in nvptx libgomp plugin 2018-04-26 Tom

[Bug target/84952] [nvptx] bar.sync generated in divergent code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84952 --- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu Apr 26 13:26:48 2018 New Revision: 259677 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259677=gcc=rev Log: [nvptx] Verify bar.sync position 2018-04-26 Tom de Vries

[Bug target/84025] [nvptx] Don't generate branch-around-nothing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84025 --- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu Apr 26 13:26:38 2018 New Revision: 259676 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259676=gcc=rev Log: [nvptx] Fix branch-around-nothing 2018-04-26 Tom de Vries

[Bug lto/85422] [openacc] ICE at cfgloop.c:468: segfault in flow_loops_find

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85422 --- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu Apr 26 13:26:25 2018 New Revision: 259675 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259675=gcc=rev Log: [lto] Fixup loops before lto write-out 2018-04-26 Richard Biener

[Bug target/85519] [nvptx, openacc, openmp, testsuite] Recursive tests may fail due to thread stack limit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85519 --- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu Apr 26 13:26:09 2018 New Revision: 259674 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259674=gcc=rev Log: [nvptx, libgomp, testsuite] Reduce recursion depth in declare_target-{1,2}.f90

[Bug c++/61982] Optimizer does not eliminate stores to destroyed objects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61982 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug middle-end/85450] ICE: invalid types in nop conversion during GIMPLE pass: ompexp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 --- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 44024 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44024=edit vfprintf.i Your patch proposal fixes the ICE with sysopen.i, but I still have a crash with vfprintf.i (with

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] [7/8/9 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- And finally a testcase that is miscompiled on 7.x, starting with r240858: /* PR tree-optimization/85529 */ /* { dg-do run } */ /* { dg-options "-O2 -fno-ssa-phiopt" } */ __attribute__((noinline, noclone))

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] [7/8/9 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Slightly tweaked testcase: struct S { int a; }; int b, c = 1, d, e, f; static int g; volatile struct S s; signed char foo (signed char i, int j) { return i < 0 ? i : i << j; } int main () { signed

[Bug libstdc++/85116] std::min_element does not optimize well with inlined predicate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85116 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- So loop-header copying now DTRT but then PRE is faced with [local count: 955630223]: # __first_20 = PHI <_M_elems(2), __first_21(7)> # __first_21 = PHI <[(void *) + 8B](2), __first_7(7)> #

[Bug libstdc++/85116] std::min_element does not optimize well with inlined predicate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85116 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 26 12:18:58 2018 New Revision: 259672 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259672=gcc=rev Log: 2018-04-26 Richard Biener PR

[Bug middle-end/85450] ICE: invalid types in nop conversion during GIMPLE pass: ompexp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, clyon at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 > > --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- > Created attachment 44023 > -->

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/85537] Invalid memory reference at runtime when calling subroutine through procedure pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85537 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/85450] ICE: invalid types in nop conversion during GIMPLE pass: ompexp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 44023 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44023=edit Newlib's sysopen.i I could reproduce the problem with aarch64-none-elf too, and this requires -mabi=ilp32.

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] [7/8/9 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |7.4 Summary|[8/9

[Bug tree-optimization/85275] copyheader peels off almost the entire iteration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85275 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- So after my fix for the related PR85116 we'll still not identify the loop as do-while-loop because its latch isn't empty (it contains the IV increment). As-is the loop probably should be header-copied but

[Bug fortran/85537] New: Invalid memory reference at runtime when calling subroutine through procedure pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85537 Bug ID: 85537 Summary: Invalid memory reference at runtime when calling subroutine through procedure pointer Product: gcc Version: 4.8.5 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/85450] ICE: invalid types in nop conversion during GIMPLE pass: ompexp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, clyon at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 > > Christophe Lyon changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/85450] ICE: invalid types in nop conversion during GIMPLE pass: ompexp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/84691] [6/7/8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: in poplevel_class, at cp/name-lookup.c:4430

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84691 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug fortran/85536] New: ICE on procedure pointer assignment for subroutine with procedure pointer argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85536 Bug ID: 85536 Summary: ICE on procedure pointer assignment for subroutine with procedure pointer argument Product: gcc Version: 4.8.5 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] [8/9 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Reassoc does [local count: 530374774]: - # b.9_28 = PHI + # b.9_28 = PHI # RANGE [-83, 1] NONZERO 173 - # k_32 = PHI

[Bug target/85530] [X86] _mm512_mullox_epi64 and _mm512_mask_mullox_epi64 not implemented

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85530 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/85535] New: bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 Bug ID: 85535 Summary: bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] [8/9 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/82658] Suboptimal codegen on AVR when right-shifting 8-bit unsigned integers.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82658 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added CC||randy.brecker64 at gmail dot com

[Bug c++/85533] Missing optimization for right-shift of unsigned int (avr-g++)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85533 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/85168] [7 Regression] ICE in tree-ssa-coalesce.c: SSA corruption: Unable to coalesce ssa_names which are marked as MUST COALESCE when -O2 is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85168 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/85284] [7 Regression] Loop miscompilation starting with r238367

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85284 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/85284] [7 Regression] Loop miscompilation starting with r238367

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85284 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 26 10:00:24 2018 New Revision: 259670 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259670=gcc=rev Log: 2018-04-26 Richard Biener Backport from mainline

[Bug c/84873] [6/7 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 3 does not dominate use in block 4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84873 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 26 10:00:24 2018 New Revision: 259670 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259670=gcc=rev Log: 2018-04-26 Richard Biener Backport from mainline

[Bug tree-optimization/85244] [6/7 Regression] Bad optimisation with flexible array member (may be related to -ftree-dominator-opts)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 26 10:00:24 2018 New Revision: 259670 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259670=gcc=rev Log: 2018-04-26 Richard Biener Backport from mainline

[Bug tree-optimization/85168] [7 Regression] ICE in tree-ssa-coalesce.c: SSA corruption: Unable to coalesce ssa_names which are marked as MUST COALESCE when -O2 is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85168 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 26 10:00:24 2018 New Revision: 259670 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259670=gcc=rev Log: 2018-04-26 Richard Biener Backport from mainline

[Bug c++/85533] Missing optimization for right-shift of unsigned int (avr-g++)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85533 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization --- Comment #1

[Bug fortran/85534] New: allocation of array with source give shifted index

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85534 Bug ID: 85534 Summary: allocation of array with source give shifted index Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/85533] New: Missing optimization for right-shift of unsigned int (avr-g++)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85533 Bug ID: 85533 Summary: Missing optimization for right-shift of unsigned int (avr-g++) Product: gcc Version: 7.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/84956] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE in replace_block_by, at tree-ssa-tail-merge.c:1546

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84956 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.5

[Bug fortran/85531] Implement some loop fusion in the Fortran front end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85531 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug fortran/85531] Implement some loop fusion in the Fortran front end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85531 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Can you provide a testcase that can be compiled? --- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig --- Here it is. The internal writes are there just to confuse the optimizer. module x implicit none contains

[Bug fortran/85526] [6/7/8/9 regression] ICE when calling a (pure) function from inside another pure function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 --- Comment #4 from Pietro Delugas --- a quick and dirty workaround is to move all the routines in the "leng" interface at the bottom of the file. But some compilers do not accept this code as valid. A better solution is to move the leng

[Bug bootstrap/84402] [meta] GCC build system: parallelism bottleneck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #23

[Bug middle-end/85450] ICE: invalid types in nop conversion during GIMPLE pass: ompexp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 26 07:21:42 2018 New Revision: 259667 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259667=gcc=rev Log: 2018-04-26 Richard Biener PR middle-end/85450

[Bug middle-end/85450] ICE: invalid types in nop conversion during GIMPLE pass: ompexp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85450 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/85526] [6/7/8/9 regression] ICE when calling a (pure) function from inside another pure function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.5

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] [8/9 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Known to work|

[Bug fortran/85531] New: Implement some loop fusion in the Fortran front end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85531 Bug ID: 85531 Summary: Implement some loop fusion in the Fortran front end Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3

[Bug target/83748] Local variables not aligned to word boundary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83748 --- Comment #8 from Sumit --- Hi Segher, I somehow missed the below update from your side. Can you help me understand if this was some known issue in GCC which got fixed in r205896? If yes, can you let us know if got fixed in 4.8.1 version?

  1   2   >