[Bug c++/69564] [5/6 Regression] lto and/or C++ make scimark2 LU slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564 --- Comment #18 from Patrick Palka --- So with the patch, g++ -flto -Ofast is on par with gcc -flto -Ofast and better than g++ -Ofast. Could anyone confirm?

[Bug c++/69564] [5/6 Regression] lto and/or C++ make scimark2 LU slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564 --- Comment #17 from Patrick Palka --- The following patch by itself closes the gap between the C++ and C FEs, to make compilation with the C++ FE at least as good as with the C FE: diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.c b/gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.c index

[Bug target/70216] [SH] Implement __builtin_trap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70216 --- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Rich Felker from comment #7) > Is there a reason we don't use an undefined instruction that will trap? > 0xfffd is mentioned as permanently undefined here on page 85: > >

[Bug fortran/70235] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Incorrect output with PF format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235 --- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Created attachment 38090 [details] > Updated patch correcting problem found by Dominique With this updated patch and y = 643.125 and d=2, I get -8pf18.2 y= 1.00 -7pf18.2 y=

[Bug c/70407] alignment of array elements is greater than element size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70407 Dehuan Xin changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor

[Bug c/70407] New: alignment of array elements is greater than element size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70407 Bug ID: 70407 Summary: alignment of array elements is greater than element size Product: gcc Version: 4.8.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/70319] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/sso/q2.c -O1 -fno-inline execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70319 --- Comment #13 from John David Anglin --- Author: danglin Date: Fri Mar 25 01:00:40 2016 New Revision: 234476 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234476=gcc=rev Log: PR target/70319 * config/pa/pa.md (bswapdi2): Use a scratch

[Bug target/70319] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/sso/q2.c -O1 -fno-inline execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70319 --- Comment #12 from John David Anglin --- Author: danglin Date: Fri Mar 25 00:59:02 2016 New Revision: 234475 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234475=gcc=rev Log: PR target/70319 * config/pa/pa.md (bswapdi2): Use a scratch

[Bug target/70359] [6 Regression] Code size increase for ARM compared to gcc-5.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359 --- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > CCing authors of the other commits. That said, complaining about size > regressions generally should be only if it (significantly) increases sizes > of

[Bug fortran/68441] ICE on using transfer with character parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68441 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #2

[Bug fortran/70235] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Incorrect output with PF format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235 --- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle --- Created attachment 38091 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38091=edit A more exhaustive testing program This test allows at least visual inspection of the patterns. The test omits the

[Bug c/70400] GCC compiles a return statement with an expression in a void function (illegal under C90 6.6.6.4) with -std=c90 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70400 --- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Thu, 24 Mar 2016, ryao at gentoo dot org wrote: > How would GCC "reject all programs" without emitting an error? If there is > some By emitting a warning. That's a rejection. The

[Bug fortran/70235] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Incorrect output with PF format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235 --- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle --- Created attachment 38090 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38090=edit Updated patch correcting problem found by Dominique This is what I came up with independent of Dominiques patch.

[Bug fortran/70071] ICE on wrong usage of a subscript triplet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70071 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/70353] [5/6 regression] ICE on __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ in a constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70353 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug target/69770] [ARM] -mlong-calls does not affect calls to __gnu_mcount_nc generated by -pg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69770 cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0 --- Comment #3 from

[Bug fortran/34640] ICE when assigning item of a derived-component to a pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34640 --- Comment #27 from chester.gingrich at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 38089 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38089=edit workaround (of sorts) This is how I get around this issue. Note that I don't usually have to

[Bug c++/70386] [6 Regression] ICE with -Wall on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2232

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70386 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/70216] [SH] Implement __builtin_trap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70216 --- Comment #7 from Rich Felker --- Is there a reason we don't use an undefined instruction that will trap? 0xfffd is mentioned as permanently undefined here on page 85: http://documentation.renesas.com/doc/products/mpumcu/rej09b0003_sh4a.pdf

[Bug target/70359] [6 Regression] Code size increase for ARM compared to gcc-5.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- All I wanted to say is that it is to be expected that on some code a newer GCC version ends up needing one or two more instructions, even at -Os, and what matters is not the size of a single function, but

[Bug target/70406] New: ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2287 (unrecognizable insn) with -mtune=pentium2 -mavx512f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70406 Bug ID: 70406 Summary: ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2287 (unrecognizable insn) with -mtune=pentium2 -mavx512f Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/70406] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2287 (unrecognizable insn) with -mtune=pentium2 -mavx512f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70406 --- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka --- Created attachment 38088 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38088=edit reduced testcase

[Bug rtl-optimization/70405] New: -fcompare-debug failure with -mavx512f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70405 Bug ID: 70405 Summary: -fcompare-debug failure with -mavx512f Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal

[Bug target/70359] [6 Regression] Code size increase for ARM compared to gcc-5.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I would suggest that you definitely keep reporting these things and extracting examples from csibe or other benchmarks to show the codesize increases. While some folks will prioritize performance, it

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointers-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 --- Comment #5 from Hadula, Tomasz --- Created attachment 38086 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38086=edit Original and preprocessed source generated with -E

[Bug rtl-optimization/70174] [6 Regression] ICE at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu in gen_lowpart_general, at rtlhooks.c:63

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70174 Dominik Vogt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---

[Bug target/70404] New: pr71074.c fails on s390x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70404 Bug ID: 70404 Summary: pr71074.c fails on s390x Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug c++/70386] [6 Regression] ICE with -Wall on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2232

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70386 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Thu Mar 24 19:21:38 2016 New Revision: 234469 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234469=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/70386 * constexpr.c (cxx_eval_bare_aggregate): Handle PMFs.

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointers-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 --- Comment #4 from Hadula, Tomasz --- Created attachment 38085 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38085=edit output from -fdump-tree-optimized I attached dump from -fdump-tree-optimized for the affected source

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointers-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Hadula, Tomasz from comment #2) > The whole thing is huge (compiles for almost 2 hours). > The problem is that when I attempt to make it smaller in form of a simple, > standalone app, the

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell --- Indeed, manually editing the assembly to such an initializer results in a working program. The CONSTRUCTOR created for ab's DECL_INITIAL has the correct things in it, but in declaration order. I.e. it

[Bug target/70359] [6 Regression] Code size increase for ARM compared to gcc-5.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359 --- Comment #6 from Fredrik Hederstierna --- Thanks for your analysis on this. One comment on this 'complaint', it's not only about size - in my example the compiler uses 2 more regs push and pop, and

[Bug target/63890] [4.9/5/6 regression] Compiling trivial program with -O -p leads to misaligned stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #29

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointers-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 --- Comment #2 from Hadula, Tomasz --- The whole thing is huge (compiles for almost 2 hours). The problem is that when I attempt to make it smaller in form of a simple, standalone app, the problem doesn't happen anymore. I've been searching for

[Bug c++/70386] [6 Regression] ICE with -Wall on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2232

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70386 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/69945] Provide an equivalent of __libc_freeres to release emergency EH pool memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69945 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu Mar 24 18:13:40 2016 New Revision: 234465 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234465=gcc=rev Log: libstdc++/69945 Add __gnu_cxx::__freeres hook PR libstdc++/69945

[Bug ipa/65076] [5 Regression] 16% tramp3d-v4.cpp compile time regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65076 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com

[Bug rtl-optimization/68695] [6 Regression] Performance regression related to ssa patch / ifcvt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68695 --- Comment #23 from Vladimir Makarov --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #22) > Going back to variants of the original testcase: > int > foo (int x, int y, int a) > { > int i = x; > int j = y; > #ifdef EX1 > if (__builtin_expect

[Bug fortran/70235] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Incorrect output with PF format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235 --- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Created attachment 38084 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38084=edit A new patch for testing With y = 1.0 and d=8 I now get -8pf18.8 y=0.0001 -7pf18.8 y=

[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 70323, which changed state. Bug 70323 Summary: [6 regression] missing error on integer overflow in constexpr function result converted to bool https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70323 What

[Bug c++/70323] [6 regression] missing error on integer overflow in constexpr function result converted to bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70323 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/70323] [6 regression] missing error on integer overflow in constexpr function result converted to bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70323 --- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Thu Mar 24 17:59:58 2016 New Revision: 234463 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234463=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/70323 * constexpr.c (cxx_eval_call_expression): Don't

[Bug c++/70403] A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointers-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/69845] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Expression getting incorrectly optimized after being rewritten by compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69845 --- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Thu Mar 24 17:52:11 2016 New Revision: 234462 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234462=gcc=rev Log: 2016-03-24 Richard Henderson PR middle-end/69845

[Bug c++/70403] New: A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointers-checks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403 Bug ID: 70403 Summary: A null pointer check removed with -O2 even with -fno-delete-null-pointers-checks Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/64971] [5/6 Regression] gcc.c-torture/compile/pr37433.c ICEs with -mabi=ilp32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64971 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug libstdc++/69332] [6 Regression] FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/libfundts.cc print ab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69332 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug target/70359] [6 Regression] Code size increase for ARM compared to gcc-5.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug middle-end/70307] [6 Regression] ICE: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:10915 on valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70307 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- I think we need to teach c_fully_fold how to fold VEC_COND_EXPR. Until r229128 this wasn't necessary as the C FE never saw any VEC_COND_EXPRs. But since that revision we create a VEC_COND_EXPR when

[Bug c++/70323] [6 regression] missing error on integer overflow in constexpr function result converted to bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70323 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug hsa/70402] New: HSA: SBR instruction can be undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70402 Bug ID: 70402 Summary: HSA: SBR instruction can be undefined Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: hsa

[Bug rtl-optimization/70164] [6 Regression] Code/performance regression due to poor register allocation on Cortex-M0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70164 --- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Some further notes. I was looking at what the impact would be if we just stopped recording the problematical equivalences in CSE, both to see if the equivalences are useful at all, and if they are, to get

[Bug c++/62212] [4.9/5 Regression] ICE compiling template function with array reference parameter whose size depends on a template parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62212 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE|[4.9/5 Regression] ICE

[Bug c++/62212] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE compiling template function with array reference parameter whose size depends on a template parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62212 --- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka --- Author: ppalka Date: Thu Mar 24 15:59:53 2016 New Revision: 234457 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234457=gcc=rev Log: Fix PR c++/62212 (ICE during mangling of array type) gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

[Bug c++/70029] [6 Regression] ICE with C++11 and -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70029 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- The problem is that decl_attributes uses build_type_attribute_qual_variant, which uses build_qualified_type, which doesn't understand C++ type variants and blithely returns an attribute-qualified type which

[Bug target/70359] [6 Regression] Code size increase for ARM compared to gcc-5.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c/70400] GCC compiles a return statement with an expression in a void function (illegal under C90 6.6.6.4) with -std=c90 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70400 Richard Yao changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug target/70216] [SH] Implement __builtin_trap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70216 --- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo --- Created attachment 38083 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38083=edit Proposed patch This patch adds two new target options: -msh4-trapa-sleep-bug -mbuiltin-trap= and two configure

[Bug c/70400] GCC compiles a return statement with an expression in a void function (illegal under C90 6.6.6.4) with -std=c90 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70400 --- Comment #4 from Richard Yao --- How would GCC "reject all programs" without emitting an error? If there is some other way, it is not being done as GCC emits assembly that assembles and links without a problem. Rejecting the program should

[Bug c++/70401] New: [c++1z on mingw]compile variadic template failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70401 Bug ID: 70401 Summary: [c++1z on mingw]compile variadic template failed Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yeah, that was with -std=c++0x. With -std=c++1y it started one revision earlier (r217663).

[Bug c/70400] GCC compiles a return statement with an expression in a void function (illegal under C90 6.6.6.4) with -std=c90 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70400 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/70400] GCC compiles a return statement with an expression in a void function (illegal under C90 6.6.6.4) with -std=c90 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70400 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- Use -pedantic-errors to turn pedantic diagnostics into errors.

[Bug ipa/70366] [6 Regression] chromium fails to build with LTO due to segfault in ipa-inline-transform.c:inline_call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70366 --- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #4) > Created attachment 38076 [details] > patch > > Hi, > The attached patch suggested by Richard fixes the chromium build. > It passes

[Bug c/70400] New: GCC compiles a return statement with an expression in a void function (illegal under C90 6.6.6.4) with -std=c90 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70400 Bug ID: 70400 Summary: GCC compiles a return statement with an expression in a void function (illegal under C90 6.6.6.4) with -std=c90 -pedantic Product: gcc

[Bug hsa/70399] New: HSA: Wrong emission of st_align(4)_u8 HSAIL insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70399 Bug ID: 70399 Summary: HSA: Wrong emission of st_align(4)_u8 HSAIL insn Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug hsa/70399] HSA: Wrong emission of st_align(4)_u8 HSAIL insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70399 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Created attachment 38080 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38080=edit test case

[Bug fortran/70235] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Incorrect output with PF format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235 --- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #11) > > Created attachment 38075 [details] > > A patch for testing > > With the patch and using the test attached to comment 5 with y = 1.0 and > d=8, I get

[Bug tree-optimization/70396] ICE on valid code at -O3 in 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (in immed_wide_int_const, at emit-rtl.c:606)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70396 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Mar 24 14:07:42 2016 New Revision: 234455 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234455=gcc=rev Log: 2016-03-24 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/70396] ICE on valid code at -O3 in 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (in immed_wide_int_const, at emit-rtl.c:606)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70396 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/70297] [5/6 Regression] GCC Segfaults when using -g3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70297 --- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek --- Patch posted .

[Bug rtl-optimization/70398] [6 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-9.c FAILs with -fno-tree-loop-optimize -fno-tree-ter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70398 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70353] [5/6 regression] ICE on __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ in a constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70353 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/70398] [6 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-9.c FAILs with -fno-tree-loop-optimize -fno-tree-ter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70398 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ra Target Milestone|---

[Bug hsa/70394] HSA: kernel dispatch packet mechanism uses uninitialized memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70394 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/70395] [C++11] Error when initializing array of non-copyable non-trivial type in constructor initializer list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70395 --- Comment #2 from Vladimír Vondruš --- Forgot to add that if I default the move constructor/assignment, it also compiles fine (as the error message suggests).

[Bug rtl-optimization/70398] New: [6 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-9.c FAILs with -fno-tree-loop-optimize -fno-tree-ter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70398 Bug ID: 70398 Summary: [6 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-9.c FAILs with -fno-tree-loop-optimize -fno-tree-ter Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/70396] ICE on valid code at -O3 in 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (in immed_wide_int_const, at emit-rtl.c:606)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70396 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/70396] ICE on valid code at -O3 in 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (in immed_wide_int_const, at emit-rtl.c:606)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70396 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70393] [5/6 Regression] Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug c++/70395] [C++11] Error when initializing array of non-copyable non-trivial type in constructor initializer list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70395 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Probably a dup of PR 63707

[Bug middle-end/70370] ICE in execute_todo, at passes.c:2003 when using __real__ or __imag__ as lvalue in asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70370 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Mar 24 12:19:56 2016 New Revision: 234453 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234453=gcc=rev Log: 2016-03-24 Richard Biener PR middle-end/70370

[Bug middle-end/70370] ICE in execute_todo, at passes.c:2003 when using __real__ or __imag__ as lvalue in asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70370 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/70397] New: ice while allocating ultimate polymorphic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70397 Bug ID: 70397 Summary: ice while allocating ultimate polymorphic Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug rtl-optimization/70396] New: ICE on valid code at -O3 in 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (in immed_wide_int_const, at emit-rtl.c:606)

--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160324 (experimental) [trunk revision 234448] (GCC) $: $: gcc-trunk -O3 small.c small.c:4:5: warning: array ‘a’ assumed to have one element int a[]; ^ small.c: In function ‘fn1’: small.c:11:14: warning: iteration 2147483645

[Bug c++/70395] New: [C++11] Error when initializing array of non-copyable non-trivial type in constructor initializer list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70395 Bug ID: 70395 Summary: [C++11] Error when initializing array of non-copyable non-trivial type in constructor initializer list Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status:

[Bug hsa/70394] New: HSA: kernel dispatch packet mechanism uses uninitialized memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70394 Bug ID: 70394 Summary: HSA: kernel dispatch packet mechanism uses uninitialized memory Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/70290] -mavx512vl breaks parsing of C++ vector condition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70290 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Mar 24 11:26:44 2016 New Revision: 234450 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234450=gcc=rev Log: PR target/70290 * g++.dg/ext/pr70290.C: Add -Wno-psabi -w to

[Bug other/70346] [libvtv] 6.0-20160313 build succeeds, install fails: cannot stat '.libs/libvtv.a': No such file or directory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70346 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70305] 5.3.0 solaris: ld: fatal: relocation error: R_SPARC_DISP32: file ../src/c++11/.libs/libc++11convenience.a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70305 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70393] New: Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393 Bug ID: 70393 Summary: Miscompilation: missing constructor call for static object Product: gcc Version: 5.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/70389] uint_16t left shift with -Wconversion produces incorrect warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70389 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug tree-optimization/70390] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in copy_loop_close_phi_args, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:2114

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70390 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug c++/70387] -fnon-call-exceptions has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70387 --- Comment #2 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 38077 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38077=edit Test case I reduced my code to the bare minimum required to reproduce this issue. Compile with djgpp:

[Bug tree-optimization/70392] New: [openacc] inconsistent line numbers in uninitialised warnings for if clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70392 Bug ID: 70392 Summary: [openacc] inconsistent line numbers in uninitialised warnings for if clause Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/70390] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in copy_loop_close_phi_args, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:2114

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70390 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- graphite uses a strange "premature optimization" with scev_analyzable_p which seems to be confused about a degenerate IV we have in the loop. _1 = PHI <_2, _3> _3 = _1; if () goto exit

[Bug hsa/70391] New: HSA back-end produces wrong alignment load/store instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70391 Bug ID: 70391 Summary: HSA back-end produces wrong alignment load/store instructions Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

  1   2   >