[Bug c++/86678] New: constexpr evaluation incorrectly diagnoses unevaluated call to non-constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86678 Bug ID: 86678 Summary: constexpr evaluation incorrectly diagnoses unevaluated call to non-constexpr function Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/86677] New: popcount builtin detection is breaking some kernel build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86677 Bug ID: 86677 Summary: popcount builtin detection is breaking some kernel build Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

Is branding your concern?

Is branding your concern? Most companies are thinking which way is the most effective yet affordable way to reach customers or clients? Having difficulty to reach the person that make it happen? We are the solution! Big data is the

Submitting Your Manuscripts _ Dear bug-gcc _ 3206753

Dear Author/Researcher, For the purpose of supplying a better platform for you authors to publish papers, we sincerely invite scholars and researchers to submit papers to the journals or to join in the editorial board/reviewer team. To Become One of the Editorial

[Bug libstdc++/86676] 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Wed Jul 25 23:38:17 2018 New Revision: 262984 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262984=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/86676 another alignment fix for test PR libstdc++/86676

[Bug libstdc++/86553] libstdc++-v3 build failure on AIX 5.3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86553 --- Comment #15 from The Written Word --- Created attachment 3 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3=edit gcc/config/rs6000/aix53.h patch Similar to r227907 but for AIX 5.3 Have used this to successfully build

[Bug libstdc++/86676] 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/86676] 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Wed Jul 25 20:23:07 2018 New Revision: 262980 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262980=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/86676 Do not assume stack buffer is aligned PR

[Bug libstdc++/86676] 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Oops, the test depends on stack alignment of a char buffer. Patch incoming.

[Bug fortran/25829] [F03] Asynchronous IO support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829 --- Comment #45 from Nicolas Koenig --- Author: koenigni Date: Wed Jul 25 19:34:33 2018 New Revision: 262979 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262979=gcc=rev Log: 2018-07-25 Nicolas Koenig Thomas Koenig PR fortran/25829

[Bug libstdc++/86676] 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- The AIX failures are different and should be fixed at r262977

[Bug libstdc++/86676] 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/25829] [F03] Asynchronous IO support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829 --- Comment #44 from Dominique d'Humieres --- AFAICT this 2018-07-25 Nicolas Koenig Thomas Koenig PR fortran/25829 * testsuite/libgomp.fortran/async_io_1.f90: New test. *

[Bug fortran/25829] [F03] Asynchronous IO support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829 --- Comment #43 from Nicolas Koenig --- Author: koenigni Date: Wed Jul 25 18:48:39 2018 New Revision: 262978 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262978=gcc=rev Log: 2018-07-25 Nicolas Koenig Thomas Koenig PR fortran/25829

[Bug libstdc++/86676] 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug libstdc++/86676] New: 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86676 Bug ID: 86676 Summary: 20_util/monotonic_buffer_resource/release.cc FAILs Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c/86668] mixing ansi prototype with K definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86668 --- Comment #5 from amr --- I know all these rules , I mean he said the prototype in scope ,, he means inside main or outside in my example

[Bug target/86651] [8/9 Regression] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 --- Comment #10 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 2 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=2=edit preprocessed source to trigger ICE (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9) > Thanks for

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/85745] variable with asm register assignment allocated in wrong reg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85745 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|rtl-optimization|c --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug c/85745] variable with asm register assignment allocated in wrong reg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85745 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||arnd at linaro dot org --- Comment #5

You'rе my viсtim

Hi, viсtim. I write yоu beсausе I рut а malwаre оn thе web раgе with pоrn whiсh you have visited. My virus grabbеd аll yоur реrsоnаl info аnd turnеd оn your саmеra which captured thе process оf your оnаnism. Just аfter thаt thе soft saved your соntаct list. I will delete thе соmpromising vidеo

[Bug c/86668] mixing ansi prototype with K definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86668 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/scope

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #16 from Alexander Monakov --- > I don't see what should we warn about. I think the suggestion was to warn when a register const variable appears in constraints, because the asm is not then guaranteed to receive that operand in that

[Bug c++/85515] Bogus suggestions from "GCC's leaky abstractions"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85515 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Jul 25 16:46:34 2018 New Revision: 262975 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262975=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/85515 * cp-tree.h (enum cp_tree_index): Add

[Bug c/19315] document undocumented extension that allows code where variable is not emitted in the asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19315 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On July 25, 2018 5:50:40 PM GMT+02:00, "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19315 > >Eric Gallager changed: > > What|Removed

[Bug c/86668] mixing ansi prototype with K definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86668 --- Comment #3 from amr --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #1) > Please use gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org for user questions. > > With the prototype in scope the non-prototyped definition of fun is > adjusted. This doesn't happen if the

[Bug c/86668] mixing ansi prototype with K definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86668 --- Comment #2 from amr --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #1) > Please use gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org for user questions. > > With the prototype in scope the non-prototyped definition of fun is > adjusted. This doesn't happen if the

[Bug fortran/86587] Derived-type with attributes BIND(C) and PRIVATE raises an error but standard accepts it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86587 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- register const void __user *__p asm("r0") = __ptr; etc. isn't a problem, here __p isn't const, only *__p is. The problem is if the register variable itself is const. So arch/h8300/kernel/sim-console.c:

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #13 from Arnd Bergmann --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #12) > arch/h8300/kernel/sim-console.c: register const int fd __asm__("er0") = > 1; I found that too, and then noticed it is already fixed in linux-next:

[Bug target/86651] [8/9 Regression] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On July 25, 2018 5:21:38 PM GMT+02:00, jwjagersma at gmail dot com wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 > >--- Comment #8 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com --- >(In reply to

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #12 from Andreas Schwab --- arch/h8300/kernel/sim-console.c:register const int fd __asm__("er0") = 1; /* stdout */

[Bug c/19315] document undocumented extension that allows code where variable is not emitted in the asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19315 --- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe --- IMHO (as you say in c#3) this is "surprising behaviour" * if there's any case you'd want it - then maybe you should have to ask for it. (so if it's intentional it should be behind some flag?) * it ought

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #11 from Arnd Bergmann --- I have checked all instances of 'register const' or 'const register' in the current linux kernel (4.18-rc), and we never assign a constant expression to any of them, so I guess none of them are affected:

[Bug target/86651] [8/9 Regression] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 --- Comment #8 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7) > There are latent bugs that now affect darwin, mingw and djgpp (after your > patch) by default when compiling with -g0 and linking with -g >

[Bug c/19315] document undocumented extension that allows code where variable is not emitted in the asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19315 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug c/86670] unsized static array var is removed but still accessed.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86670 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Indeed, lowering ignores map clauses for declare target to global vars, but it can do that only if always is not present. Will have a look.

[Bug debug/86675] C++ lambdas are not debugable with -std=c++17 (or above) and -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86675 --- Comment #1 from Bernd Amend --- Created attachment 1 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1=edit Script to test the compiler with different command line args

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #9 from cesar at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #8) > Hmm, for me that minimizes to: > ... > extern "C" void abort (); > > #pragma omp declare target > int results[2000]; > #pragma omp end declare target

[Bug debug/86675] New: C++ lambdas are not debugable with -std=c++17 (or above) and -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86675 Bug ID: 86675 Summary: C++ lambdas are not debugable with -std=c++17 (or above) and -Og Product: gcc Version: 8.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #7) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) > > LLSDA labels are for EH support, this testcase doesn't really use exceptions > > in any way, but it isn't compiled

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #9 from Arnd Bergmann --- Reproduced on arm64 and x86 as well, see x86 version: void fn1() { register const int h asm("edx") = 1; __asm__(".ifnc %0,edx; .err; .endif" :: "r"(h)); }

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #8 from Thomas Preud'homme --- (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #7) > (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #6) > > The following simpler testcase also shows the problem: > > > > void fn1() { > > register const

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #7 from Thomas Preud'homme --- (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #6) > The following simpler testcase also shows the problem: > > void fn1() { > register const int h asm("r2") = 1; > __asm__(".ifnc %0,r2; .err;

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Preud'homme --- The following simpler testcase also shows the problem: void fn1() { register const int h asm("r2") = 1; __asm__(".ifnc %0,r2; .err; .endif\n\t" "bl __put_user_4" :: "r"(h)); }

[Bug pch/86674] New: -W(no)-error=invalid-pch does not affect incorrect language warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86674 Bug ID: 86674 Summary: -W(no)-error=invalid-pch does not affect incorrect language warning Product: gcc Version: 8.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/86599] Problems building libgfortran from 7.2.0 on HP-UX 11.31/PA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86599 --- Comment #7 from The Written Word --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6) > This looks like a target issue. Have you ever build gcc on HP-UX 11.31/PA? Definitely a target issue. With some patches I can build gcc 4.x on

[Bug c++/86672] Facing issue with gcc-4.9.0 while using with llvm-6.0.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86672 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- What possible reason could you have to use gcc-4.9.0 instead of gcc-4.9.4? Anyway this seems to be a duplicate of PR 66426 which is fixed in gcc-5

[Bug fortran/86599] Problems building libgfortran from 7.2.0 on HP-UX 11.31/PA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86599 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/86651] [8/9 Regression] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, jwjagersma at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 > > --- Comment #6 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com --- > (In reply to Richard Biener

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #5 from Arnd Bergmann --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #4) > Why are you using empty constraints when a register is required? creduce did that, it had no effect on the result. The original source looks like: #define

[Bug c/86667] [7/8/9 Regression] can no longer traverse environment table

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86667 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab --- Why are you using empty constraints when a register is required?

[Bug target/86673] [8/9 regression] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Target||arm-none-linux-gnueabi ,

[Bug c/86667] [7/8/9 Regression] can no longer traverse environment table

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86667 --- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres --- The test works as expected if I replace *ep=*ep++; with *ep++; in the C file.

[Bug target/86651] [8/9 Regression] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 --- Comment #6 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) After building a more complex program with the above patch (applied to gcc 8.1.0 release sources), this ICE appears during linking: lto1.exe:

[Bug target/86673] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 Arnd Bergmann changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/86651] [8/9 Regression] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/86673] inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 --- Comment #1 from Arnd Bergmann --- Further inspection shows that this happens for the cases where the input argument to the inline asm is a compile-time constant, but not for those that are variables.

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) > LLSDA labels are for EH support, this testcase doesn't really use exceptions > in any way, but it isn't compiled with -fno-exceptions; but that is the case > of

[Bug lto/86654] [9 Regression] ICE in gen_member_die, at dwarf2out.c:24933

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86654 --- Comment #16 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #13) > Just for record, building Firefox w/ GCC 8.1 w/o LTO produces: > > VM SIZE FILE SIZE > -- --

[Bug target/86651] [8/9 Regression] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 --- Comment #4 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 44439 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44439=edit Proposed patch I cloned the fix that was applied to cygwin/mingw targets in SVN r259347. There didn't

[Bug target/86673] New: inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86673 Bug ID: 86673 Summary: inline asm sometimes ignores 'register asm("reg")' declarations Product: gcc Version: 8.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug lto/86654] [9 Regression] ICE in gen_member_die, at dwarf2out.c:24933

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86654 --- Comment #15 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Jul 25 12:10:13 2018 New Revision: 262965 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262965=gcc=rev Log: 2018-07-25 Richard Biener PR debug/86654 * dwarf2out.c

[Bug c++/86672] Facing issue with gcc-4.9.0 while using with llvm-6.0.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86672 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ada/86659] [9 regression] gnat.dg/sso/q[23].adb FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86659 --- Comment #1 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- A reghunt now identified this patch as the culprit: 2018-07-24 Richard Biener * match.pd: Add BIT_FIELD_REF canonicalizations. Comparing the assembler output, I find ---

[Bug c++/86672] New: Facing issue with gcc-4.9.0 while using with llvm-6.0.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86672 Bug ID: 86672 Summary: Facing issue with gcc-4.9.0 while using with llvm-6.0.1 Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- LLSDA labels are for EH support, this testcase doesn't really use exceptions in any way, but it isn't compiled with -fno-exceptions; but that is the case of most of the C++ tests in libgomp (I see only 6

[Bug gcov-profile/85336] [GCOV] wrong coverage for builtin functions and "||" logic operators in return statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85336 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- So a nvptx backend bug? Does ptxas require only decimal constants and not hexadecimal, or require 64-bit load from something that needs to be initialized with 64-bit initializer rather than series of bytes,

[Bug gcov-profile/85201] [GCOV] A statement with two && operators and a comma operator in the for loop body is wrongly marked in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85201 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug gcov-profile/85217] [GCOV] A no side effect statement between a break statement and a continue statement will lead to incorrect code coverage in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85217 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- I've got patch candidate for that.

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #3) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > > Created attachment 44437 [details] > > gcc9-pr86660.patch > > > > Untested patch. Does this fix it? > > I'll try

[Bug gcov-profile/85276] [GCOV] A comparative statement with '=', '&&' , '||', and '==' operators is wrongly marked as executed twice in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85276 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug gcov-profile/85349] [GCOV] struct varaible definition in while(1) will cause incorrect coverage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85349 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug gcov-profile/85197] [GCOV] The main function is wrongly marked as executed twice in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85197 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/83678] [GCOV] a pointer assignment before a break statment lead to incorrect coverage in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83678 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/83505] [GCOV] a pointer assignment before a dead return statment lead to incorrect coverage in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83505 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Assignee|marxin at gcc dot

[Bug gcov-profile/85332] [GCOV] wrong coverage with do-while in switch-case statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85332 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- I've got patch candidate for that.

[Bug gcov-profile/85337] [GCOV] inconsistent coverage in switch-case statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85337 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c/86670] unsized static array var is removed but still accessed.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86670 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug gcov-profile/85370] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with the target_clones attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85370 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- I've got patch candidate for that prints following: -:0:Source:pr85370.c -:0:Graph:pr85370.gcno -:0:Data:pr85370.gcda -:0:Runs:1 -:0:Programs:1

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Created attachment 44437 [details] > gcc9-pr86660.patch > > Untested patch. Does this fix it? I'll try it out.

[Bug testsuite/86660] libgomp.c++/for-15.C ICEs with nvptx offloading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 44437 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44437=edit gcc9-pr86660.patch Untested patch. Does this fix it?

[Bug gcov-profile/85351] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with exit() executed in a if statement within a called function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85351 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Assignee|marxin at gcc dot

[Bug other/60330] Licensed an unlicensed file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60330 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Copyright-Notices "You should maintain a proper copyright notice and a license notice in each nontrivial file in the package. (Any file more than ten lines

[Bug target/82005] Early lto debug not implemented on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005 --- Comment #45 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #44) > On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, iains at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005 > > > > --- Comment #43 from Iain Sandoe ---

[Bug lto/86654] [9 Regression] ICE in gen_member_die, at dwarf2out.c:24933

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86654 --- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86654 > > --- Comment #13 from Martin Liška --- > Just for record, building Firefox w/ GCC

[Bug target/82005] Early lto debug not implemented on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005 --- Comment #44 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, iains at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005 > > --- Comment #43 from Iain Sandoe --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment

[Bug gcov-profile/85372] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with setjmp and longjmp function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85372 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- I've got patch for that.

[Bug gcov-profile/85350] [GCOV] wrong coverage when using constant variable in struct declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85350 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- I've got patch candidate for that.

[Bug testsuite/86671] New: Many testsuite failures due to -latomic not found

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86671 Bug ID: 86671 Summary: Many testsuite failures due to -latomic not found Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug gcov-profile/85338] [GCOV] Type conversion leads to incorrect coverage in printf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85338 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- I've got patch candidate for that.

[Bug c/86670] New: unsized static array var is removed but still accessed.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86670 Bug ID: 86670 Summary: unsized static array var is removed but still accessed. Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/80645] FAIL: gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_3.f90 -O1 (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80645 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Target|m68k-*-*, ia64-*-*, |m68k-*-*, ia64-*-*,

[Bug libstdc++/86655] std::assoc_legendre should not constrain the value of m

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86655 --- Comment #2 from Matthias Kretz --- http://eel.is/c++draft/c.math#sf.cmath-1.3 might be the reason why `m <= l` is enforced. But unless I'm confused the footnote on "mathematically defined" tells us it should work: - "(a) if it is explicitly

  1   2   >