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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85530 Bug ID: 85530 Summary: [X86] _mm512_mullox_epi64 and _mm512_mask_mullox_epi64 not implemented Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/85529] New: wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85529 Bug ID: 85529 Summary: wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug rtl-optimization/85528] New: ICE in code_motion_process_successors, at sel-sched.c:6403

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85528 Bug ID: 85528 Summary: ICE in code_motion_process_successors, at sel-sched.c:6403 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-checking,

[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 #3 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:33:34PM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote: > The code compiles with 6.4.0 and 7.3.0, but not with 6.4.1, 7.3.1, > 8.0.1 and trunk (9.0). This is likely r258347 for gcc8,

[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 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/85526] [6.4 regression] calling a (pure) function from inside another pure function may cause segmentation fault during compilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug testsuite/85527] New: [openacc] atomic_capture-1.{c,f90} undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85527 Bug ID: 85527 Summary: [openacc] atomic_capture-1.{c,f90} undefined behaviour Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 --- Comment #7 from Tom Ritter --- I'm compiling some AVX code with MinGW+gcc. I'm afraid it's difficult to create a test case, but I think there's an alignment issue here. Registers at crash site: rbp is 0x00 % 20 > 0:000> r >

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 --- Comment #6 from Tom Ritter --- Created attachment 44020 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44020=edit Disassembly of affected function

[Bug fortran/85526] New: [6.4 regression] calling a (pure) function from inside another pure function may cause segmentation fault during compilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85526 Bug ID: 85526 Summary: [6.4 regression] calling a (pure) function from inside another pure function may cause segmentation fault during compilation Product: gcc

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 --- Comment #5 from Tom Ritter --- ./x86_64-w64-mingw32-g++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=./x86_64-w64-mingw32-g++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/builds/worker/workspace/build/src/mingw32/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/6.4.0/lto-wrapper

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 --- Comment #4 from Tom Ritter --- Created attachment 44018 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44018=edit Preprocessed source file

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 --- Comment #2 from Tom Ritter --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > What exact target is this on? Sorry, this is x64 if that's what you mean?

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |target --- Comment #1 from Andrew

[Bug c/85525] New: Alignment Issue in AVX compiler intrinsics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85525 Bug ID: 85525 Summary: Alignment Issue in AVX compiler intrinsics Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/81084] [8 Regression] powerpcspe port full of confusing configury / command-line options not related to SPE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81084 --- Comment #48 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #47) > Believe it or not, but the rs6000 port maintainers *care* about older > systems. Then why is something that is still working and being used

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #12 from Hans Åberg --- (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #11) > > The problem is that #4 has an earlier capture, making it impossible to see > > that it is left undefined later. > > I wouldn't say it's impossible. libc++

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #11 from Tim Shen --- > The problem is that #4 has an earlier capture, making it impossible to see > that it is left undefined later. I wouldn't say it's impossible. libc++ implements it correctly at a cost. Specifically, see

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #10 from Hans Åberg --- (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #9) > Ah with the example it's clear, thanks! You are welcome. > > The last line gives for #1 the sub-string "z" , and for #2 "aacbbbcac". > > This is not what ECMAScript

[Bug c++/85523] Add fix-it hint for missing return statement in assignment operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85523 --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- Note to self: this came out of this ML thread: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-04/msg00168.html

[Bug c++/85523] Add fix-it hint for missing return statement in assignment operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85523 --- Comment #3 from David Malcolm --- Note to self: test coverage should also verify += and so on.

[Bug middle-end/85524] Strange cbrt() result on linux in C

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85524 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Component|c

[Bug c/85524] New: Strange cbrt() result on linux in C

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85524 Bug ID: 85524 Summary: Strange cbrt() result on linux in C Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/85473] internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:3722

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85473 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/85523] Add fix-it hint for missing return statement in assignment operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85523 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/85523] Add fix-it hint for missing return statement in assignment operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85523 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Created attachment 44017 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44017=edit Proof-of-concept patch to add fix-it

[Bug c++/85523] New: Add fix-it hint for missing return statement in assignment operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85523 Bug ID: 85523 Summary: Add fix-it hint for missing return statement in assignment operators Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #9 from Tim Shen --- Ah with the example it's clear, thanks! > The last line gives for #1 the sub-string "z" , and for #2 "aacbbbcac". This is not what ECMAScript produces either. for capture #2, ECMAScriptn produces "ac", the last

[Bug target/85473] internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:3722

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85473 --- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: hjl Date: Wed Apr 25 17:31:20 2018 New Revision: 259654 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259654=gcc=rev Log: x86: Correct movdir64b builtin function gcc/ChangeLog: Backport

[Bug libstdc++/85517] std::variant exception safety problems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85517 Matt Calabrese changed: What|Removed |Added CC||metaprogrammingtheworld@gma

[Bug libstdc++/85517] std::variant exception safety problems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85517 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/85434] Address of stack protector guard spilled to stack on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85434 --- Comment #9 from Thomas Preud'homme --- Managed to reach a state where nothing is spilled on the stack for Thumb-1 either. I want to do 3 more changes before I start full testing: - put some compiler barrier between address computation and

[Bug tree-optimization/85509] fails to promote local static to const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85509 --- Comment #5 from ASA --- > > I would expect this is likely true for any non-const static duration > > function pointer, not just the case when the auto type specifier is used, > > but I have not confirmed it. > > But it is the case for any

[Bug target/85401] segfault building code for VAX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401 --- Comment #4 from Martin Husemann --- The costs are missing for various modes: (gdb) p (default_target_ira_int->x_ira_register_move_cost) $6 = {0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x7f7ff7b8c8b0, 0x7f7ff7b8c8b0, 0x0 } (that is: only HImode and SImode

[Bug target/85401] segfault building code for VAX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401 --- Comment #3 from Martin Husemann --- Indeed. Digging a bit with gdb (but in our local 6.4 version) shows: #0 0x009fa7be in allocno_copy_cost_saving (allocno=0x7f7ff679a178, hard_regno=11) at

[Bug rtl-optimization/85522] ICE: in model_update_limit_points_in_group, at haifa-sched.c:1985 with -O2 -ftracer --param=max-sched-extend-regions-iters=5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85522 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/51677] don't suggest giving main() __attribute__((const))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51677 --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #3) > It should be easy to white-list the main function in the > -Wsuggest-attribute= checker. At the same time, I'm not sure it's necessary > or that the problem is

[Bug other/63613] dejagnu.h needs to be fix included

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63613 --- Comment #12 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #11) > Patch posted as https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg00468.html Does this still apply?

[Bug c/49702] Undefined static functions resolve to external definitions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49702 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/85414] [8 Regression] ICE: in ix86_expand_prologue, at config/i386/i386.c:13810 with -Og -fgcse

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85414 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 25 13:10:01 2018 New Revision: 259649 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259649=gcc=rev Log: PR middle-end/85414 * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_unary_operation_1) :

[Bug target/85401] segfault building code for VAX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401 Thomas Preud'homme changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|UNCONFIRMED CC|

[Bug c/36941] gcc does not reject invalid cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36941 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid, diagnostic

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #8 from Hans Åberg --- (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #5) > I'm not following the meaning of "action number" and "the partial reverse > NFA is recorded". > > How many actions numbers are recorded? for regex_match(s, regex(re)),

[Bug c/37200] duplicate warning message with braced initializer list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37200 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #3 from Eric

[Bug target/85473] internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:3722

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85473 --- Comment #4 from speryt at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: speryt Date: Wed Apr 25 12:39:57 2018 New Revision: 259648 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259648=gcc=rev Log: 2018-04-25 Sebastian Peryt

[Bug target/85401] segfault building code for VAX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401 Thomas Preud'homme changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[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 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||openacc, openmp, patch

[Bug target/84923] [8/9 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c failed on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84923 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- So in spirit of the comment#2 patch I'd propose Index: gcc/varasm.c === --- gcc/varasm.c(revision 259638) +++ gcc/varasm.c

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #7 from Hans Åberg --- (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #5) > (In reply to Hans Åberg from comment #4) > > I wrote an NFA/DFA that computes all matches, it seems, in an efficient > > manner: Action numbers are marked on the states

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #6 from Hans Åberg --- (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #5) > (In reply to Hans Åberg from comment #4) > > I wrote an NFA/DFA that computes all matches, it seems, in an efficient > > manner: Action numbers are marked on the states

[Bug rtl-optimization/85522] New: ICE: in model_update_limit_points_in_group, at haifa-sched.c:1985 with -O2 -ftracer --param=max-sched-extend-regions-iters=5

--disable-libstdcxx-pch --prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-259628-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-aarch64 Thread model: posix gcc version 8.0.1 20180425 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug target/84923] [8/9 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c failed on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84923 --- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > For x86_64 if I append > > const int *dat[] = { , }; > > the testcase links fine irrespective of where I place the > > .weakref

[Bug target/84923] [8/9 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c failed on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84923 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- For x86_64 if I append const int *dat[] = { , }; the testcase links fine irrespective of where I place the .weakrefWv12,wv12 .weak wv12 assembler declarations. When I look at

[Bug sanitizer/84307] asan blocks dead-store elimination

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84307 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 25 10:02:24 2018 New Revision: 259641 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259641=gcc=rev Log: PR sanitizer/84307 * c-decl.c (build_compound_literal): Call

[Bug ada/85007] -b flag to gnatlink not recognized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85007 --- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Wed Apr 25 10:01:55 2018 New Revision: 259640 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259640=gcc=rev Log: PR ada/85007 * gnat_ugn.texi: Regenerate. Modified:

[Bug ada/85007] -b flag to gnatlink not recognized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85007 --- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Wed Apr 25 10:01:13 2018 New Revision: 259639 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259639=gcc=rev Log: PR ada/85007 * gnat_ugn.texi: Regenerate. Modified:

[Bug target/84923] [8/9 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c failed on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84923 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |target Known to work|

[Bug target/68256] Defining TARGET_USE_CONSTANT_BLOCKS_P causes go bootstrap failure on aarch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68256 --- Comment #12 from Ramana Radhakrishnan --- (In reply to Steve Ellcey from comment #11) > FYI: This caused a regression on aarch64. > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84923 I have marked 84923 as an 8 regression as it wasn't

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #5 from Tim Shen --- (In reply to Hans Åberg from comment #4) > (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #1) > > I know exactly how libc++ produces this result. It creates an empty > > match_result during each repetition ("*" operator).

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #4 from Hans Åberg --- (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #1) > I know exactly how libc++ produces this result. It creates an empty > match_result during each repetition ("*" operator). It's less confusing but > much slower. I wrote

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #3 from Tim Shen --- Conclusively, yes it is a bug, but it is hard to fix without regressing normal case performance.

[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 #1 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0) > All these solutions work until the next failure shows up. It would be nice > to fix this more definitely in some way, but I'm not sure how. We could try to figure

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 --- Comment #2 from Tim Shen --- My bad, I didn't realize that "(z)((a+)?(b+)?(c))*" is exactly an example described in ECMAScript third edition 15.10.2.5. Therefore libstdc++ is not conforming.

[Bug libstdc++/85472] Regex match bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85472 Tim Shen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||timshen at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug lto/85405] [6 Regression] ICE in odr_types_equivalent_p, at ipa-devirt.c:1581

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85405 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug lto/85405] [6 Regression] ICE in odr_types_equivalent_p, at ipa-devirt.c:1581

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85405 --- Comment #9 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Wed Apr 25 07:41:44 2018 New Revision: 259634 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259634=gcc=rev Log: Backport r259431 2018-04-25 Martin Liska Backport from

[Bug lto/85248] [6 Regression] Miscompilation when using error function that returns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug lto/85405] [6 Regression] ICE in odr_types_equivalent_p, at ipa-devirt.c:1581

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85405 --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Wed Apr 25 07:41:25 2018 New Revision: 259633 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259633=gcc=rev Log: Backport r259429 2018-04-25 Martin Liska Backport from

[Bug lto/85248] [6 Regression] Miscompilation when using error function that returns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248 --- Comment #16 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Wed Apr 25 07:40:46 2018 New Revision: 259632 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259632=gcc=rev Log: Backport r259274 2018-04-25 Martin Liska Backport

[Bug lto/85248] [6 Regression] Miscompilation when using error function that returns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248 --- Comment #15 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Wed Apr 25 07:40:27 2018 New Revision: 259631 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259631=gcc=rev Log: Backport r259265 2018-04-25 Martin Liska Backport

[Bug rtl-optimization/85412] [8/9 Regression] ICE in put_TImodes, at sel-sched.c:7191

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,

[Bug middle-end/85516] [missed-optimization] gcc does not convert multiple compares against constants to a shift+bitmask test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85516 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/85509] fails to promote local static to const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85509 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to ASA from comment #3) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > > The issue is you fail to make PerformQuickly and PerformSafely const and GCC > > doesn't have local analysis to promote

[Bug c++/49171] [C++0x][constexpr] Constant expressions support reinterpret_cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 49171, which changed state. Bug 49171 Summary: [C++0x][constexpr] Constant expressions support reinterpret_cast https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171 What|Removed |Added

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 85437, which changed state. Bug 85437 Summary: [8 Regression] member pointer static upcast rejected in a constexpr context https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85437 What|Removed

[Bug c++/85437] [8 Regression] member pointer static upcast rejected in a constexpr context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85437 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 25 07:10:16 2018 New Revision: 259629 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259629=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/85437 PR c++/49171 * cp-tree.h (REINTERPRET_CAST_P):

[Bug c++/49171] [C++0x][constexpr] Constant expressions support reinterpret_cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 25 07:10:16 2018 New Revision: 259629 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259629=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/85437 PR c++/49171 * cp-tree.h

[Bug c++/85437] [8 Regression] member pointer static upcast rejected in a constexpr context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85437 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---