[Bug c++/59381] Internal compiler error in get_expr_operands, in tree-ssa-operands.c:1035

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59381 --- Comment #2 from Heimdell --- Created attachment 31375 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31375&action=edit Project sources

[Bug c++/59381] Internal compiler error in get_expr_operands, in tree-ssa-operands.c:1035

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59381 --- Comment #1 from Heimdell --- Created attachment 31374 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31374&action=edit The (compressed) file, produced by compiler.

[Bug c++/59381] New: Internal compiler error in get_expr_operands, in tree-ssa-operands.c:1035

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59381 Bug ID: 59381 Summary: Internal compiler error in get_expr_operands, in tree-ssa-operands.c:1035 Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/59380] libstdc++.a: could not read symbols: Bad value

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59380 --- Comment #2 from littlestar --- similar to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58638

[Bug c++/59380] libstdc++.a: could not read symbols: Bad value

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59380 littlestar changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unknown |4.8.2 --- Comment #1 from littlestar --- wo

[Bug c++/59380] New: libstdc++.a: could not read symbols: Bad value

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59380 Bug ID: 59380 Summary: libstdc++.a: could not read symbols: Bad value Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c++/59378] Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 fr

[Bug target/59371] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Performance regression in GCC 4.8 and later versions.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59371 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Maciej W. Rozycki from comment #5) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > > Well that corrects how i++ is done. > > Old MIPS assembly code produced was AFAICT correct. The loop terminat

[Bug target/59371] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Performance regression in GCC 4.8 and later versions.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59371 --- Comment #5 from Maciej W. Rozycki --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > Well that corrects how i++ is done. Old MIPS assembly code produced was AFAICT correct. The loop termination condition was expressed as: bne$3,$6,$L

[Bug ipa/58253] IPA-SRA creates calls with different arguments that the callee accepts

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253 --- Comment #8 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke --- (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #7) > Thanks I have posted the updated patch (which checks for > gimple_register_type rather than non-BLKmode) FWIW, it is possible to have a BLKmode struct pa

[Bug target/59379] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/59379] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- Created attachment 31372 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31372&action=edit A testcase The outputs from stage 2 and stage 3 cc1 are different: [hjl@gnu-mic-2 pr59379]$ make /export/build/gnu/gcc

[Bug c++/59378] Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek --- No, that doesn't work for the second testcase...

[Bug target/59371] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Performance regression in GCC 4.8 and later versions.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59371 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Maciej W. Rozycki from comment #3) > Caused by: Well that corrects how i++ is done.

[Bug target/59371] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Performance regression in GCC 4.8 and later versions.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59371 Maciej W. Rozycki changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ma...@linux-mips.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug rtl-optimization/59317] [4.9 Regression] [LRA,MIPS] ICE: in check_rtl, at lra.c (insn does not satisfy constraints)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59317 Vladimir Makarov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug fortran/58099] [4.8/4.9 Regression] [F03] over-zealous procedure-pointer error checking

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58099 --- Comment #27 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #26) > A: "The specific intrinsic procedure itself retains the elemental property > (so a reference using its own name can be elemental), but the dummy > procedure or p

[Bug target/59003] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap miscompiles gcc during stagefeedback --with-tune=amdfam10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59003 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka --- > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59003 > > --- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- > Switching off misaligned_move_string_pro_epilogues for AMD "fixes" > the issue: We need to figure out why

[Bug c++/59378] Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- I wonder whether the following could be the right thing to do. --- a/gcc/cp/pt.c +++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c @@ -12823,6 +12823,9 @@ tsubst_copy (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl) in re

[Bug target/59343] miscompiled for loop in sh4 target (-Os)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59343 --- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to chrbr from comment #5) > This has been fixed by Oleg in the 4.9 with a new cflow pass. In 4.8 I think > it's best to just disable it as unsafe, The following workaround is enough > to to fix the probl

[Bug target/59375] internal compiler error: in expand_shift_1, at expmed.c:2245

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59375 Oleg Endo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 fr

[Bug target/59379] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1) > Maybe a dup of Bug59003? Maybe.

[Bug target/59379] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu --- Symptom is msgfmt never stops: 30751 pts/0t 43:26 msgfmt -o de.mo /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/libstdc++- 30752 pts/0R 64:42 msgfmt -o fr.mo /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/libstdc++- (gdb) info shared >F

[Bug target/59379] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||octoploid at yandex dot com --- Com

[Bug c/53424] dynamic array expressions get wrong sizeof() if pointers to const are involved and the pointers are changed (const is misapplied to the whole expression)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53424 --- Comment #4 from Joseph S. Myers --- Created attachment 31371 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31371&action=edit Patch to tree_invariant_p_1 I tried restricting tree_invariant_p_1 as in the attached patch, but while this fix

[Bug c++/59378] Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/59003] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap miscompiles gcc during stagefeedback --with-tune=amdfam10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59003 --- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- Switching off misaligned_move_string_pro_epilogues for AMD "fixes" the issue: diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune.def b/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune.def index 4c13c3a0ec69..af58b3e1f77e 100644 --- a/gcc/

[Bug target/59379] New: gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379 Bug ID: 59379 Summary: gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/59378] Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 Bauke Conijn changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #31367|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c++/59378] Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 --- Comment #2 from Bauke Conijn --- Created attachment 31369 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31369&action=edit Testcase 2

[Bug c++/59378] Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 --- Comment #1 from Bauke Conijn --- Created attachment 31368 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31368&action=edit Testcase 1

[Bug c++/59378] New: Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59378 Bug ID: 59378 Summary: Internal compiler error when using __builtin_shuffle in a template function Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug target/59003] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap miscompiles gcc during stagefeedback --with-tune=amdfam10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59003 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target|

[Bug rtl-optimization/58726] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu (affecting trunk/4.7/4.6, but not 4.8)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58726 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 31366 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31366&action=edit gcc49-pr58726.patch Untested patch that does that, fixes the testcase.

[Bug rtl-optimization/58726] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu (affecting trunk/4.7/4.6, but not 4.8)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58726 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/57363] IBM long double: adding NaN and number raises inexact exception

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57363 Ulrich Weigand changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/59058] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu (affecting gcc 4.6 to trunk)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59058 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de --- "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59058 > >Jakub Jelinek changed: > > What|Removed |Added >-

[Bug rtl-optimization/59020] [4.9 Regression] internal compiler error: in maybe_add_or_update_dep_1, at sched-deps.c:933

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59020 --- Comment #5 from wmi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: wmi Date: Tue Dec 3 18:35:24 2013 New Revision: 205644 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205644&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2013-12-03 Wei Mi PR rtl-optimization/59020 * sched-deps.c

[Bug c/59367] Syntax error with #pragma message before "else"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59367 --- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab --- All preprocessing directives are deleted at the end of phase 4.

[Bug tree-optimization/59377] VRP produces bogus warning with -Warray-bounds

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59377 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > I think this is an invalid testcase. GCC does not know what this > strlen/memcmp does. If we add extern "C" around strlen and memcmp, GCC does > not warn. Does

[Bug tree-optimization/59377] VRP produces bogus warning with -Warray-bounds

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59377 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/59367] Syntax error with #pragma message before "else"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59367 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I think #pragma are being considered a statement which is why you are getting a parse error. I almost want to say they are statements based on what I have read (though I don't have any explicit references to

[Bug target/59376] -mmemcpy-strategy= and -mmemset-strategy= are undocumented

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59376 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/59376] -mmemcpy-strategy= and -mmemset-strategy= are undocumented

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59376 davidxl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xinliangli at gmail dot com --- Comment #1 from

[Bug target/59316] gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59316 --- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou --- > Properly it should cause traps if those are enabled (although enabling > traps is outside the scope of ISO C, and my guess is that when TS 18661-5 > provides C bindings for IEEE 754-2008 alternate excepti

[Bug ipa/58253] IPA-SRA creates calls with different arguments that the callee accepts

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p

[Bug c/58943] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong calculation of indirect structure member arithmetic via function call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58943 --- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I think it should be fixed for all C standard versions, not just C11 (that is, the front end should produce something like (save (rhs), save (lhs) = save (lhs) op save (rhs)) to get the righ

[Bug target/59316] gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59316 --- Comment #15 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Tue, 3 Dec 2013, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > In any case, c11-atomic-exec-5.c does not test anything relating to enabled > > traps, although the feholdexcept code sequence fro

[Bug debug/55586] Incorrect .debug_line section for function with variable number of arguments in PowerPC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55586 Paul Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||psmith at gnu dot org --- Comment #4 from Pa

[Bug debug/47471] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] stdarg functions extraneous too-early prologue end

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47471 Paul Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||psmith at gnu dot org --- Comment #11 from P

[Bug debug/54533] breakpoint on C-style variadic function not hit at -O0 on amd64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54533 Paul Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||psmith at gnu dot org --- Comment #4 from Pa

[Bug target/59371] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Performance regression in GCC 4.8 and later versions.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59371 --- Comment #2 from Steve Ellcey --- Created attachment 31365 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31365&action=edit runnnable performance test case Here is a runnable test case. You may need to increase the loop counts depending

[Bug tree-optimization/59058] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu (affecting gcc 4.6 to trunk)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59058 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #11

[Bug c++/59268] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE with constexpr in a virtual function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59268 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/59268] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE with constexpr in a virtual function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59268 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug c++/59231] [4.8/4.9 Regression] gcc misses [-Werror=sign-compare] when inside a template

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59231 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug sanitizer/59063] [4.9 Regression] ASAN: segfault in __interceptor_clock_gettime

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59063 --- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Dec 3 16:01:13 2013 New Revision: 205639 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205639&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR sanitizer/59063 * lib/asan-dg.exp: Don't add anything to flags i

[Bug ipa/58721] [4.9 Regression] The subroutine perdida is no longer inlined in fatigue.f90

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58721 --- Comment #7 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- I saw that on old compiler sources (dated by 20130911) with my patch 'perdida' was inlined without any additional inline parameters (using -flto) but now it does not inlined since another large function read

[Bug tree-optimization/59377] VRP produces bogus warning with -Warray-bounds

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59377 --- Comment #1 from Paul Pluzhnikov --- Google ref: b/7233326

[Bug tree-optimization/59377] New: VRP produces bogus warning with -Warray-bounds

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59377 Bug ID: 59377 Summary: VRP produces bogus warning with -Warray-bounds Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tre

[Bug bootstrap/59368] [4.9 Regression] libsanitizer spec file installed in the wrong place

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59368 --- Comment #4 from Dmitry Gorbachev --- Yes, the patch works. Thanks.

[Bug c++/59231] [4.8/4.9 Regression] gcc misses [-Werror=sign-compare] when inside a template

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59231 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug ipa/58721] [4.9 Regression] The subroutine perdida is no longer inlined in fatigue.f90

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58721 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > It turned out that proposed fix does not help trunk compilers > since now another huge routine is inlined firstly (read_input) > and for perdida we got the following message: This has been seen bef

[Bug c/58943] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong calculation of indirect structure member arithmetic via function call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58943 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/59343] miscompiled for loop in sh4 target (-Os)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59343 gcc-bugzilla-f5d8 at theblacksun dot eu changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.7.3 --- Commen

[Bug gcov-profile/59003] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap miscompiles gcc during stagefeedback --with-tune=amdfam10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59003 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.9 Regression]|[4.9 Regression]

[Bug c/59367] Syntax error with #pragma message before "else"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59367 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/59355] [4.9 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in hash_table::find_slot_with_hash() with -fno-devirtualize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59355 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/59351] ICE on empty compound literal with -pedantic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59351 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/59351] ICE on empty compound literal with -pedantic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59351 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Tue Dec 3 13:52:12 2013 New Revision: 205632 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205632&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2013-12-03 Marek Polacek PR c/5935

[Bug target/58944] [4.9 Regression] bogus -Wunused-macros warnings when compiling Libreoffice

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58944 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/59363] [4.9 Regression] r203886 miscompiles git

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59363 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/59374] [4.8/4.9 Regression] -ftree-slp-vectorize breaks unique_ptr's move constructor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59374 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 31362 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31362&action=edit patch Patch I am testing.

[Bug libstdc++/59373] Table 92 is unreadable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59373 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/59363] [4.9 Regression] r203886 miscompiles git

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59363 --- Comment #22 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: hjl Date: Tue Dec 3 12:56:32 2013 New Revision: 205630 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205630&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Adjust destination address after gen_strset gcc/ PR target/593

[Bug c/59351] ICE on empty compound literal with -pedantic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59351 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Tue Dec 3 12:52:39 2013 New Revision: 205629 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205629&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c/59351 c/ * c-decl.c (build_compound_literal): Allow compound

[Bug target/59343] miscompiled for loop in sh4 target (-Os)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59343 chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2013-12-3 CC|

[Bug middle-end/56344] ICE for program with very large structs returned by value

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56344 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/59373] Table 92 is unreadable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59373 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- You can also look in the source, where the table is formatted correctly.

[Bug libstdc++/59373] Table 92 is unreadable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59373 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/59376] New: -mmemcpy-strategy= and -mmemset-strategy= are undocumented

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59376 Bug ID: 59376 Summary: -mmemcpy-strategy= and -mmemset-strategy= are undocumented Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug middle-end/56344] ICE for program with very large structs returned by value

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56344 --- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Tue Dec 3 12:11:36 2013 New Revision: 205628 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205628&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR middle-end/56344 * calls.c (expand_call): Disallow passing hug

[Bug c/59351] ICE on empty compound literal with -pedantic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59351 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Tue Dec 3 11:57:31 2013 New Revision: 205627 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205627&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c/59351 c/ * c-decl.c (build_compound_literal): Allow compound

[Bug tree-optimization/59374] [4.8/4.9 Regression] -ftree-slp-vectorize breaks unique_ptr's move constructor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59374 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Testcase: extern void abort (void); static struct X { void *a; void *b; } a, b; void __attribute__((noinline)) foo (void) { void *tem = a.b; a.b = (void *)0; b.b = tem; b.a = a.a; } int main() {

[Bug tree-optimization/59374] [4.8/4.9 Regression] -ftree-slp-vectorize breaks unique_ptr's move constructor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59374 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- bar = myalloc (); [return slot optimization] : _22 = MEM[(struct Bar * const &)&bar + 8]; MEM[(struct Bar * &)&bar + 8] = 0B; MEM[(struct Foo * &)&foo + 8] = _22; _23 = MEM[(const struct BarDelet

[Bug middle-end/59134] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] infinite loop between store_fixed_bit_field and store_split_bit_field with STRICT_ALIGNMENT

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59134 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- typedef struct { char pad; int arr[0]; } __attribute__((packed)) str; str * foo (int* src) { str *s = __builtin_malloc (sizeof (str) + sizeof (int)); s->arr[0] = 0x12345678; return s; } as said e

[Bug middle-end/59134] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] infinite loop between store_fixed_bit_field and store_split_bit_field with STRICT_ALIGNMENT

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59134 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4

[Bug bootstrap/59368] [4.9 Regression] libsanitizer spec file installed in the wrong place

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59368 --- Comment #3 from Yury Gribov --- Created attachment 31361 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31361&action=edit Proposed patch Dmitry, does this look fine?

[Bug middle-end/59134] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] infinite loop between store_fixed_bit_field and store_split_bit_field with STRICT_ALIGNMENT

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59134 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc-e500| Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/59316] gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59316 --- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou --- > Hopefully the other OSes use one of these two settings. At least FreeBSD uses the Linux setting.

[Bug target/59371] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Performance regression in GCC 4.8 and later versions.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59371 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target Milestone|-

[Bug bootstrap/59368] [4.9 Regression] libsanitizer spec file installed in the wrong place

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59368 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||build Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/59374] [4.8/4.9 Regression] -ftree-slp-vectorize breaks unique_ptr's move constructor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59374 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-* Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug target/59316] gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59316 --- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou --- > x86/x86-64 now have their own fenv.c file that defines the FE_* macros > itself and so is immune to that issue. I was hoping that generally the > macros would be defined to correspond to the appropriate