[Bug target/67215] -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu --- Created attachment 36190 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36190&action=edit A patch For x86, -fno-plt should be handled by ix86_expand_call to generate indirect call via GOT, not by forcing the

[Bug target/67223] Address misaligned for ldrexd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67223 Marcin Kamionowski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/58175] [OOP] Incorrect warning message on scalar finalizer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58175 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Benson --- This problem still occurs in gcc 6.0.0. In a code which makes extensive use of finalizors it results in many thousands of erroneous warning messages during compile, which have to be filtered out to find the r

[Bug middle-end/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #28 from Mikael Pettersson --- See PR67226 for another testcase that fails on ARM with the final fix for this PR (r223753), but succeeds with the initial proposed fix posted in: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01014.html

[Bug target/67226] Incorrect code generated for tail call, where parameters are structs passed by value, -O2 is used, and target is ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67226 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson --- This bug is clearly related to PR65358. This PR's test case is NOT fixed by the final fix for PR65358 (r223753), but it IS fixed (on both trunk and gcc-5 branch) by the initial proposed fix for PR65358:

[Bug c++/67228] New: Template partial ordering failure ambiguous overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67228 Bug ID: 67228 Summary: Template partial ordering failure ambiguous overload Product: gcc Version: 5.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug tree-optimization/67227] New: [6 regression] stage2 ada compiler miscompiled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67227 Bug ID: 67227 Summary: [6 regression] stage2 ada compiler miscompiled Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: build Severity: normal Priority: P

[Bug target/67169] -fstack-check=no doesn't disable stack checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67169 --- Comment #2 from David Woodhouse --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I suspect i686-w64-mingw32 can never be used for self host binaries. It has been. EDKII has toolchain configurations for it: http://tianocore.sourceforge.net/w

[Bug target/67226] Incorrect code generated for tail call, where parameters are structs passed by value, -O2 is used, and target is ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67226 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com --- Comm

[Bug c/36750] -Wmissing-field-initializers relaxation request

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36750 Nico changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nico.schloemer at gmail dot com --- Comment #13 f

[Bug c++/67193] Overzealous -Wstack-usage warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67193 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Schlüter --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > >(I know that alloca with a fixed argument is fairly pointless, but this can > >happen with templates.) > > Why not use normal arrays for that case? Well, I

[Bug c/67224] UTF-8 support for identifier names in GCC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224 --- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- There is no "C99" character set in glibc libiconv (after all, it's not a character set at all). Converting extended characters to UCNs like that would in any case be correct for C++ (provi

[Bug fortran/67219] [6 Regression] Incorrect conversion warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67219 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug target/67169] -fstack-check=no doesn't disable stack checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67169 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||i686-w64-mingw32 Component|c

[Bug target/67226] New: Incorrect code generated for tail call, where parameters are structs passed by value, -O2 is used, and target is ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67226 Bug ID: 67226 Summary: Incorrect code generated for tail call, where parameters are structs passed by value, -O2 is used, and target is ARM Product: gcc Version:

[Bug c/67224] UTF-8 support for identifier names in GCC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- I cannot say anything about the correctness of the patch, but I would expect such a patch to contain many testcases (at least similar to those that test for UCNs see https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2

[Bug target/67223] Address misaligned for ldrexd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67223 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson --- You didn't provide a self-contained test case. After extracting stats_record and the stats declaration from the source to linked to and providing my own stats_alloc (I'm not using your zcalloc), I cannot

[Bug c++/67225] New: [concepts] Expression constraint with a constrained result turns off access checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67225 Bug ID: 67225 Summary: [concepts] Expression constraint with a constrained result turns off access checking Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywor

[Bug c++/65974] [5/6 Regression] Bogus deprecated-declarations warnings for inline definitions of deprecated virtual methods

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65974 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Sat Aug 15 07:59:39 2015 New Revision: 226909 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226909&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/65974 * decl2.c (mark_vtable_entries): Suppress -Wd

[Bug c++/65974] [5/6 Regression] Bogus deprecated-declarations warnings for inline definitions of deprecated virtual methods

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65974 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Sat Aug 15 07:59:26 2015 New Revision: 226908 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226908&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/65974 * decl2.c (mark_vtable_entries): Suppress -Wd

[Bug bootstrap/67158] ICE dwarf2out.c:19910/gen_inlined_subroutine_die, at : Compiling gcc6.0 with gcc6.0 -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67158 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug lto/66468] [6 Regression] ICE in in check_die, at dwarf2out.c:5719

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66468 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dilyan.palauzov at aegee dot org

[Bug bootstrap/67158] ICE dwarf2out.c:19910/gen_inlined_subroutine_die, at : Compiling gcc6.0 with gcc6.0 -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67158 --- Comment #2 from David Binderman --- I am also seeing this problem when compiling some packages of Redhat Linux with gcc trunk dated 20150813.

[Bug c++/67193] Overzealous -Wstack-usage warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67193 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >(I know that alloca with a fixed argument is fairly pointless, but this can >happen with templates.) Why not use normal arrays for that case?