[Bug c++/68073] New: free(): invalid pointer errors with short strings using _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68073 Bug ID: 68073 Summary: free(): invalid pointer errors with short strings using _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=1 Product: gcc Version: 5.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/68046] -ftrapv doesn't catch leaq-based overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68046 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug middle-end/68066] New: [6 Regression]: ICE in max_value, at wide-int.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68066 Bug ID: 68066 Summary: [6 Regression]: ICE in max_value, at wide-int.cc Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c/68067] New: Wrong constant folding

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68067 Bug ID: 68067 Summary: Wrong constant folding Product: gcc Version: trans-mem Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee:

[Bug rtl-optimization/67609] [5/6 Regression] Generates wrong code for SSE2 _mm_load_pd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67609 --- Comment #28 from Richard Henderson --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #26) > Hmm, I don't see this documented anywhere. In fact there is no such > thing as a "vector register", there are only vector modes. And we > are using %xmm

[Bug middle-end/68066] [6 Regression]: ICE in max_value, at wide-int.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68066 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org Target

[Bug middle-end/68068] [6 Regression] ICE: in get_untransformed_body, at cgraph.c:3268

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68068 --- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- markus@x4 Release % cat WebDOMActivityLogger.ii template struct A { static void deletePtr(T *p1) { delete p1; } }; template class PassOwnPtr; template PassOwnPtr adoptPtr(T *); template class

[Bug middle-end/68066] [6 Regression]: ICE in max_value, at wide-int.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68066 --- Comment #2 from Ilya Enkovich --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Hmm, the boolean type shouldn't have precision 0. Ilya? Yep. I sent a patch to fix it. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02298.html

[Bug target/68059] [arm] libgcc uses __write to report error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68059 nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/57443] Captured variable hide the parameter if they have the same name in Lambdas

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57443 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug testsuite/68063] FAIL: libgomp.c++/member-2.C execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68063 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/68071] New: Generic lambda variadic argument pack cannot be empty

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68071 Bug ID: 68071 Summary: Generic lambda variadic argument pack cannot be empty Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/67736] Wrong optimization with -fexpensive-optimizations on mips64el

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67736 --- Comment #5 from Steve Ellcey --- Author: sje Date: Fri Oct 23 15:58:33 2015 New Revision: 229260 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229260=gcc=rev Log: 2015-10-23 Steve Ellcey Andrew Pinski

[Bug rtl-optimization/67736] Wrong optimization with -fexpensive-optimizations on mips64el

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67736 --- Comment #4 from Steve Ellcey --- Author: sje Date: Fri Oct 23 15:56:15 2015 New Revision: 229259 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229259=gcc=rev Log: 2015-10-23 Steve Ellcey Andrew Pinski

[Bug c/68065] Size calculations for VLAs can overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065 --- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- This seems like a matter for -fsanitize=undefined as I suggested in .

[Bug go/67968] go1: internal compiler error: in write_specific_type_functions, at go/gofrontend/types.cc:1812

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67968 --- Comment #5 from Dominik Vogt --- Unfortunately I cannot reproduce this yet. Please try to identify the "faulty" source file and strip it down to the minimum. 1. Find out in which file the ICE occurs. 1.a Recompile GCC with debug

[Bug go/67968] go1: internal compiler error: in write_specific_type_functions, at go/gofrontend/types.cc:1812

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67968 --- Comment #6 from Dominik Vogt --- @Ian: Any hints to help Gong isolating the problem?

[Bug middle-end/68066] [6 Regression]: ICE in max_value, at wide-int.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68066 --- Comment #3 from Ilya Enkovich --- Author: ienkovich Date: Fri Oct 23 13:38:16 2015 New Revision: 229256 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229256=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ PR middle-end/68066 * tree.c (build_truth_vector_type):

[Bug rtl-optimization/67609] [5/6 Regression] Generates wrong code for SSE2 _mm_load_pd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67609 --- Comment #27 from Vladimir Makarov --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #25) > So it would be nice to benchmark it. I'll try to do this on > Friday. Practically every SPEC2000 benchmark failed to compile with this patch. GCC

[Bug c/68062] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE when comparing vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062 --- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich --- (In reply to Ilya Enkovich from comment #3) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > > I suppose that is Iljas fault (only happens on trunk). > > Yes, -funsigned-char seems to be my fault. I'll

[Bug middle-end/65855] missing optimization: triangular numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65855 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug c/68069] -fstack-protector-strong does not protect from buffer overflow attack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68069 --- Comment #1 from Vladimir Miloserdov --- Created attachment 36568 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36568=edit gcc -v output

[Bug c/68069] New: -fstack-protector-strong does not protect from buffer overflow attack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68069 Bug ID: 68069 Summary: -fstack-protector-strong does not protect from buffer overflow attack Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major

[Bug target/62109] __gthr_i486_lock_cmp_xchg missing clobber

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62109 --- Comment #11 from Kai Tietz --- (In reply to David from comment #10) > (In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #5) > > This patch is clear stage 1 material. > > We're in stage 1. Is it time? Sure, patch for it is welcome. > The patch adds

[Bug middle-end/68068] New: [6 Regression] ICE: in get_untransformed_body, at cgraph.c:3268

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68068 Bug ID: 68068 Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: in get_untransformed_body, at cgraph.c:3268 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/68068] [6 Regression] ICE: in get_untransformed_body, at cgraph.c:3268

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68068 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug rtl-optimization/67443] [5/6 regression] DSE removes required store instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443 --- Comment #21 from Dominik Vogt --- Trying to write a test case for Power, I was unable to force the bug to show in the first place. Although I can force the addresses used into different registers, dead store elimination on power does not

[Bug ipa/68057] [6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/65947] Vectorizer misses conditional assignment of constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65947 --- Comment #5 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: alahay01 Date: Fri Oct 23 12:40:33 2015 New Revision: 229245 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229245=gcc=rev Log: Support for vectorizing conditional expressions 2015-10-23 Alan

[Bug testsuite/68063] FAIL: libgomp.c++/member-2.C execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68063 --- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: vries Date: Fri Oct 23 10:45:13 2015 New Revision: 229229 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229229=gcc=rev Log: Add missing private clause in libgomp.c++/member-2.C 2015-10-23 Tom de

[Bug c/68062] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE when comparing vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062 --- Comment #3 from Ilya Enkovich --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > I suppose that is Iljas fault (only happens on trunk). Yes, -funsigned-char seems to be my fault. I'll have look.

[Bug libgcc/66883] config/epiphany/udivsi3-float.c:52: bad if test ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66883 --- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke --- Author: amylaar Date: Fri Oct 23 11:57:26 2015 New Revision: 229236 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229236=gcc=rev Log: PR libgcc/66883 * config/epiphany/udivsi3-float.c: Fix

[Bug middle-end/65855] missing optimization: triangular numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65855 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- match.pd now has the desired simplification. So we run into (chrec_apply (varying_loop = 1 ) (chrec = {1, +, {2, +, 1}_1}_1) (x = (long unsigned int) n_3(D) + 18446744073709551615) (res =

[Bug libgomp/68063] FAIL: libgomp.c++/member-2.C execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68063 --- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 36566 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36566=edit minimized version

[Bug c/68065] Size calculations for VLAs can overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- VLA also does not detect stack overflows either.

[Bug c++/68052] No printf format warnings in C++ code for macro in system headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68052 --- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Olivier Blin from comment #3) > Quoting Martin Sebor's answer from the gcc-help mailing list: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-10/msg00128.html What Martin describes there is a

[Bug c/68067] Wrong constant folding

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68067 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Yep. Btw, what happens is that we see if (tem - 1 != 2147483647) and that is obviously always true unless tem - 1 wraps from -2147483648 to 2147483647 which would invoke undefined behavior.

[Bug c++/68052] No printf format warnings in C++ code for macro in system headers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68052 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Olivier Blin from comment #2) > No, the difference that I observe is that, in this specific case involving a > macro in system header, there is a warning in C, and none in C++. > This has

[Bug c/68067] Wrong constant folding

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68067 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libgomp/68063] FAIL: libgomp.c++/member-2.C execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68063 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Is that the #pragma omp parallel private (f) { f = false; #pragma omp single #pragma omp taskloop lastprivate (a, T::t, b, n) part? That indeed sounds like a data race, there should be

[Bug c/68067] Wrong constant folding

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68067 Joseph S. Myers changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug go/67976] Cgo + Gccgo not working like Cgo + Golang?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67976 --- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt --- When cgo encounters the "C.foo_cgo", it determines that it must be a variable, but finds no C definition, so it generates "extern char foo_cgo[]" (out.go) as the type. This conflicts with the declaration in

[Bug go/67976] Cgo + Gccgo not working like Cgo + Golang?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67976 --- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor --- This is probably https://golang.org/issue/8945 , which is fixed in the gc repository but not in the gccgo repository. That fix should come in when I merge in the Go 1.5 sources.

[Bug tree-optimization/68067] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong constant folding

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68067 Joseph S. Myers changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4 Summary|Wrong

[Bug libgomp/65099] nvptx offloading: hard-coded 64-bit assumptions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65099 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug go/67968] go1: internal compiler error: in write_specific_type_functions, at go/gofrontend/types.cc:1812

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67968 --- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor --- Dominik: Chris has committed a number of recent fixes for gccgo compiler crashes. Are you testing with current mainline or with the 5.2.1 release that gong_su is using? Or is the problem that you don't

[Bug go/67968] go1: internal compiler error: in write_specific_type_functions, at go/gofrontend/types.cc:1812

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67968 --- Comment #8 from Dominik Vogt --- I had been testing with the latest gcc-5-branch and didn't see any ICEs but a lot of other problems with the ethereum package that may be the fault of the code or cgo, I don't know. I can see the ICE on

[Bug go/68072] New: malformed DWARF TagVariable entry

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68072 Bug ID: 68072 Summary: malformed DWARF TagVariable entry Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: go

[Bug go/67968] go1: internal compiler error: in write_specific_type_functions, at go/gofrontend/types.cc:1812

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67968 --- Comment #9 from Ian Lance Taylor --- Does it crash on x86_64 or only on s390?

[Bug ipa/68057] [6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057 --- Comment #4 from Mikhail Maltsev --- Created attachment 36570 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36570=edit reproducer Compile like this: /opt/gcc-6.0.0/bin/g++ -O3 -flto tu{1,2,3}.cc lto1: internal compiler error: in

[Bug c++/60417] [DR 1518] Bogus error on C++03 aggregate initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60417 --- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill --- Following discussions of DR1518/1630 in Kona, the testcase is now ill-formed in C++11 and up.

[Bug c++/60417] [DR 1518] Bogus error on C++03 aggregate initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60417 --- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Sat Oct 24 02:58:10 2015 New Revision: 229283 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229283=gcc=rev Log: DR 1518 DR 1630 PR c++/54835 PR c++/60417

[Bug c++/54835] [C++11][DR 1518] Explicit default constructors not respected during copy-list-initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54835 --- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Sat Oct 24 02:58:10 2015 New Revision: 229283 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229283=gcc=rev Log: DR 1518 DR 1630 PR c++/54835 PR c++/60417

[Bug c++/54835] [C++11][DR 1518] Explicit default constructors not respected during copy-list-initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54835 --- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill --- Since the last meeting it has been suggested that this effect of DR 1630 was unintended, and the testcase should be ill-formed. So I've changed it back.

[Bug ipa/68057] [6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/67830] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67830 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/67830] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67830 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Oct 23 19:16:53 2015 New Revision: 229267 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229267=gcc=rev Log: [RFA] Fix pr67830, another type narrowing problem PR

[Bug c++/68073] free(): invalid pointer errors with short strings using _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68073 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/68074] New: [C++14] Complex ConstExpr Evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68074 Bug ID: 68074 Summary: [C++14] Complex ConstExpr Evaluation Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 URL: http://goo.gl/T7h3Qg Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rejects-valid,

[Bug c++/68074] [C++14] Complex ConstExpr Evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68074 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Reischuck --- Fixed some issues in my example. http://goo.gl/Rxq7TP The ranged for loops now compile on clang. The problem is not the loop, but the address calculation.

[Bug ipa/68057] [6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057 Mikhail Maltsev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug debug/67192] [6 Regression] Backward-goto in loop can get wrong line number

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192 --- Comment #21 from Andreas Arnez --- (In reply to Andreas Arnez from comment #20) > Posted a patch that is not as ambitious as completely getting rid of > input_location, but also doesn't require a new function like >

[Bug c/68069] -fstack-protector-strong does not protect from buffer overflow attack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68069 Anatoly Chugaev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||chugaev.tolya at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/68070] New: Undefined reference to default constructor of member template class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68070 Bug ID: 68070 Summary: Undefined reference to default constructor of member template class Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/68042] [6 Regression] c-c++-common/asan/(memcmp-1.c|sanity-check-pure-c-1.c) failures on x86_64-apple-darwin14 after r229111

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68042 --- Comment #6 from Maxim Ostapenko --- Should be fix on trunk.

[Bug c++/68061] Can't use [[deprecated]] with requires clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68061 --- Comment #1 from Christian Butcher --- Created attachment 36565 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36565=edit Short compilable (or not) case showing problem Commenting out the function definition for 'foo' allows

[Bug sanitizer/68042] [6 Regression] c-c++-common/asan/(memcmp-1.c|sanity-check-pure-c-1.c) failures on x86_64-apple-darwin14 after r229111

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68042 --- Comment #5 from Maxim Ostapenko --- Author: chefmax Date: Fri Oct 23 07:22:37 2015 New Revision: 229212 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229212=gcc=rev Log: Fix ASan output pattern tests on Darwin. gcc/testsuite/ PR

[Bug sanitizer/68042] [6 Regression] c-c++-common/asan/(memcmp-1.c|sanity-check-pure-c-1.c) failures on x86_64-apple-darwin14 after r229111

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68042 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/68055] ICE on using unsupported kinds in program without program statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68055 --- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl --- Patch posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-10/msg00112.html As I don't see an ICE, Gerhard can you test this?

[Bug fortran/68054] ICE on using protected attribute in program without program statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68054 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/68055] ICE on using unsupported kinds in program without program statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68055 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/67813] [C++14] copy-initialization of object with pointer member fails in constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67813 --- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Fri Oct 23 20:57:05 2015 New Revision: 229270 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229270=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/67813 * constexpr.c (cxx_eval_store_expression): Always use

[Bug middle-end/65962] Missed vectorization of strided stores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65962 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c/68062] ICE when comparing vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/68062] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE when comparing vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4 Summary|ICE when

[Bug ipa/68057] [6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug rtl-optimization/67609] [5/6 Regression] Generates wrong code for SSE2 _mm_load_pd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67609 --- Comment #26 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Henderson from comment #22) > (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #21) > > So going back to the original problem, for a subreg of a multi-word reg, > > why can't we simplify that

[Bug libgomp/68063] New: FAIL: libgomp.c++/member-2.C execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68063 Bug ID: 68063 Summary: FAIL: libgomp.c++/member-2.C execution test Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug ipa/68064] New: [6 Regression] ICE: in meet_with, at ipa-cp.c:874

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68064 Bug ID: 68064 Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: in meet_with, at ipa-cp.c:874 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug ipa/68064] [6 Regression] ICE: in meet_with, at ipa-cp.c:874

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68064 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug c/68062] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE when comparing vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- The FEs are missing a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR around one of the operands. But I suppose 4.8 is correct in rejecting this compare with mismatched sign (though the rejection isn't dependent on the sign of char).

[Bug tree-optimization/68060] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at tree-vect-stmts.c:1413

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68060 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/68065] New: Size calculations for VLAs can overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065 Bug ID: 68065 Summary: Size calculations for VLAs can overflow Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug ipa/68064] [6 Regression] ICE: in meet_with, at ipa-cp.c:874

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68064 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|