[Bug target/68110] __builtin_sub_overflow unsigned performance issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68110 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- (separately from the missing DCE at RTL level) Replacing __builtin_sub_overflow (a, b, ) with a < b when r is unused is something we could already easily do at the GIMPLE level, but since we don't have any

[Bug c/64880] OpenACC gcc/g++ Discrepancy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64880 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/68110] __builtin_sub_overflow unsigned performance issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68110 --- Comment #3 from Paul Eggert --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > So the question is does anyone use this function without "a - b" later on? Not that I know of. The usual pattern for callers of the Gnulib macro is to use the

[Bug sanitizer/68016] ASan doesn't catch overflow in globals when COPY relocation is involved.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68016 --- Comment #8 from Maxim Ostapenko --- (In reply to Reid Kleckner from comment #7) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) > > Because symbol size is part of the ABI, and LLVM emits different symbol size > > between -fsanitize=address and

[Bug c/64765] [OpenACC] Bogus "'copy' is not valid for '#pragma acc kernels loop'"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64765 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/68016] ASan doesn't catch overflow in globals when COPY relocation is involved.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68016 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Maxim Ostapenko from comment #8) > Jakub is right, here an example, where I believe COPY relocations are not > involved: Yeah, that, semantic interposition is used heavily not just by libasan

[Bug tree-optimization/67742] 3rd-level restrict ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67742 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #5 from

[Bug tree-optimization/68104] [6 Regression] ice in vect_update_misalignment_for_peel with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68104 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/64880] OpenACC gcc/g++ Discrepancy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64880 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge --- Author: tschwinge Date: Tue Oct 27 08:39:15 2015 New Revision: 229404 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229404=gcc=rev Log: [PR c/64765, c/64880] Support OpenACC Combined Directives in C, C++

[Bug c/64765] [OpenACC] Bogus "'copy' is not valid for '#pragma acc kernels loop'"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64765 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge --- Author: tschwinge Date: Tue Oct 27 08:39:15 2015 New Revision: 229404 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229404=gcc=rev Log: [PR c/64765, c/64880] Support OpenACC Combined Directives in C, C++

[Bug tree-optimization/68104] [6 Regression] ice in vect_update_misalignment_for_peel with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68104 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug fortran/68101] Provide a way to allocate arrays aligned to 32 bytes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68101 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- I would say dependent on an environment variable libgfortran could use posix_memalign to allocate to a requested alignment. IIRC it also inlines some direct malloc calls into the code thus those would need

[Bug fortran/68111] New: [6 Regression] 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68111 Bug ID: 68111 Summary: [6 Regression] 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[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 #11 from Dominik Vogt --- Created attachment 36596 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36596=edit Minimal test code The attached test code causes the ICE on s390x and x86_64 using gccgo-5.2.0.

[Bug fortran/68111] [6 Regression] 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68111 Mikael Morin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/68108] [6 regression] erroneous error message 'scalar integer expression expected'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68108 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0 Summary|[6.0

[Bug tree-optimization/68105] optimizing repeated floating point addition to multiplication

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68105 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug middle-end/66311] [5 Regression] Problems with some integer(16) values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66311 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/68110] __builtin_sub_overflow unsigned performance issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68110 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- value-numbering would need to special-case them via the insertion trick it does for conversions. somehow. not sure if feasible or worthwhile.

[Bug c/68107] Non-VLA type whose size is half or more of the address space constructed via a pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68107 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid, wrong-code

[Bug target/68109] GCC fails to vectorize popcount on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68109 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[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 #31 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Henderson from comment #28) > (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",

[Bug target/68102] [5/6 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1782 with float64x1_t @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68102 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.3

[Bug fortran/68111] [6 Regression] 465.tonto in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68111 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug fortran/68108] [6 regression] erroneous error message 'scalar integer expression expected'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68108 Mikael Morin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68063 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Schwinge --- Author: tschwinge Date: Tue Oct 27 10:32:32 2015 New Revision: 229411 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229411=gcc=rev Log: [PR testsuite/68063] Add missing private clause in libgomp.c++/member-1.C

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67976 --- Comment #3 from Dominik Vogt --- When do you expect Go 1.5 to be merged?

[Bug fortran/68108] [6 regression] erroneous error message 'scalar integer expression expected'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68108 Mikael Morin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67976 --- Comment #4 from Dominik Vogt --- The patch behind the link in comment 2 fixes the problem.

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65962 --- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt --- Ah, great! More vectorization is good. :) Thanks for looking into this so quickly! Bill

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65962 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener --- The main difference is +/home/wschmidt/gcc/gcc-mainline-base/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-62.c:39:3: note: LOOP VECTORIZED

[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 #12 from Dominik Vogt --- The test code also crashes on x86_64 with the current gcc-5-branch and the gcc-6 development branch.

[Bug tree-optimization/68097] We should track ranges for floating-point values too

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68097 --- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Tue Oct 27 11:52:54 2015 New Revision: 229423 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229423=gcc=rev Log: Move signbit folds to match.pd Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu,

[Bug tree-optimization/67794] [6 regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67794 renlin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||renlin at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/67929] [4.9/5/6 Regression][arm] Wrong code for FP mult-by-power-of-2 + int conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67929 --- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Tue Oct 27 12:23:51 2015 New Revision: 229436 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229436=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR target/67929 Tighten vfp3_const_double_for_bits checks

[Bug target/68102] [5/6 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1782 with float64x1_t @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68102 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last

[Bug c++/68113] New: VLA+typeof+new -- confusing warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68113 Bug ID: 68113 Summary: VLA+typeof+new -- confusing warning Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug fortran/63861] OpenACC coarray ICE (also with OpenMP?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC|

[Bug testsuite/68112] New: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512ifma-vpmaddhuq-2.c (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68112 Bug ID: 68112 Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512ifma-vpmaddhuq-2.c (test for excess errors) Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status:

[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 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68066 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[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 #4 from Ilya Enkovich --- Was it fixed by the patch?

[Bug fortran/68108] [6 regression] erroneous error message 'scalar integer expression expected'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68108 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Tue Oct 27 16:42:24 2015 New Revision: 229446 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229446=gcc=rev Log: 2015-10-27 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug fortran/63865] [OpenACC] support acc cache

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63865 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/65045] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE when using the same name for a block and a variable.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65045 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- On Tobias Burnus 2015-03-12 15:59:34 UTC Tobias Burnus wrote: > Looks good to me - okay with a test case and a ChangeLog. What is the status of this patch?

[Bug c++/68116] New: ice in add_expr, at tree.c:7840

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68116 Bug ID: 68116 Summary: ice in add_expr, at tree.c:7840 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug libfortran/68115] New: [6 Regression] Unsatisfied symbol "__sync_lock_test_and_set_4" in file /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/./libgomp/../libgfortran/.libs/libgfortran.sl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68115 Bug ID: 68115 Summary: [6 Regression] Unsatisfied symbol "__sync_lock_test_and_set_4" in file /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/./libgomp/../

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065 Daniel Micay changed: What|Removed |Added CC||danielmicay at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug fortran/68108] [6 regression] erroneous error message 'scalar integer expression expected'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68108 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/65045] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE when using the same name for a block and a variable.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65045 --- Comment #8 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- I have been working my through my backlog of patches/PRs as you might have noticed. This one, being a regression is next but two :-) Cheers Paul On 27 October 2015 at 18:30, dominiq

[Bug c++/68114] New: gcc doesn't show error when return type of deleted function is incomplete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68114 Bug ID: 68114 Summary: gcc doesn't show error when return type of deleted function is incomplete Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug fortran/63865] [OpenACC] support acc cache

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63865 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/67806] ICE on initialization of type(character) with len null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67806 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug testsuite/67948] xor-and.c needs updating after r228661

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67948 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/68102] [5/6 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1782 with float64x1_t @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68102 --- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Tue Oct 27 18:32:37 2015 New Revision: 229455 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229455=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64] PR 68102: Check that operand is REG before checking the

[Bug fortran/63865] [OpenACC] support acc cache

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63865 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge --- Author: tschwinge Date: Tue Oct 27 16:54:52 2015 New Revision: 229448 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229448=gcc=rev Log: [PR fortran/63865] OpenACC cache directive: match Fortran support with C/C++

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065 --- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I think it's undefined at the point where a type exceeds the limit on the size of an object (half the address space minus one byte), whether or not sizeof is used or any object with that

[Bug fortran/67933] [5/6 Regression] ICE for array of a derived type with allocatable class in derived type object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67933 --- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Tue Oct 27 18:03:18 2015 New Revision: 229452 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229452=gcc=rev Log: 2015-01-27 Paul Thomas PR fortran/67933 *

[Bug middle-end/68117] New: [6 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault building Firefox on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117 Bug ID: 68117 Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault building Firefox on ppc64le Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug preprocessor/68118] New: C preprocessor inserts whitespace after macro parameter substitution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68118 Bug ID: 68118 Summary: C preprocessor inserts whitespace after macro parameter substitution Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/68119] New: GCC diagnostic push/pop interfere with control flow statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68119 Bug ID: 68119 Summary: GCC diagnostic push/pop interfere with control flow statements Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical

[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 #32 from Richard Henderson --- Author: rth Date: Tue Oct 27 19:59:41 2015 New Revision: 229458 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229458=gcc=rev Log: PR rtl-opt/67609 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_cannot_change_mode_class):

[Bug c/68120] New: can't easily deal with integer overflow at compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68120 Bug ID: 68120 Summary: can't easily deal with integer overflow at compile time Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement

[Bug middle-end/68117] [6 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault building Firefox on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug middle-end/68116] [6 Regression] ice in add_expr, at tree.c:7840

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68116 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/68123] GCC vector extension behaves funny with large vector size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68123 --- Comment #1 from Dehuan Xin --- compiler info: arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.8-2013.11 - Linaro GCC 2013.10) 4.8.3 2013 (prerelease)

[Bug fortran/68108] [6 regression] erroneous error message 'scalar integer expression expected'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68108 --- Comment #7 from Jürgen Reuter --- Thanks to Steven Kargl: confirming that our code completely works again with gcc's r229446.

[Bug c/68119] GCC diagnostic push/pop interfere with control flow statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68119 DJ Delorie changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug preprocessor/68118] C preprocessor inserts whitespace after macro parameter substitution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68118 Joseph S. Myers changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/68124] New: [6 Regression] Many i386 test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68124 Bug ID: 68124 Summary: [6 Regression] Many i386 test failures Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug c/68121] New: __builtin_constant_p should not warn about integer overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68121 Bug ID: 68121 Summary: __builtin_constant_p should not warn about integer overflow Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug c/68123] New: GCC vector extension behaves funny with large vector size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68123 Bug ID: 68123 Summary: GCC vector extension behaves funny with large vector size Product: gcc Version: 4.8.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug middle-end/68112] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512ifma-vpmaddhuq-2.c (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68112 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/68122] New: ICE in gcc/toplev.c:353 with -fsanitize=undefined and -fgnu-tm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68122 Bug ID: 68122 Summary: ICE in gcc/toplev.c:353 with -fsanitize=undefined and -fgnu-tm Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/68122] ICE in gcc/toplev.c:353 with -fsanitize=undefined and -fgnu-tm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68122 --- Comment #1 from Lars Gullik Bjønnes --- Command used to call: gcc -fsanitize=undefined -fgnu-tm tm-thread.c

[Bug c++/68114] gcc doesn't show error when return type of deleted function is incomplete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68114 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug c++/68094] Compiler segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68094 --- Comment #3 from Matha Goram --- For error, please see attachment that has the screen shot.

[Bug target/68124] [6 Regression] Many i386 test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68124 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from

[Bug c++/68094] Compiler segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68094 --- Comment #2 from Matha Goram --- Created attachment 36600 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36600=edit Pre-processed source file Per request to attach pre-processed source file

[Bug target/68124] [6 Regression] Many i386 test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68124 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/68124] [6 Regression] Many i386 test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68124 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- Also FAIL: gcc.dg/gomp/simd-clones-2.c (internal compiler error) FAIL: gcc.dg/gomp/simd-clones-2.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/simd-function c_lto_simd-function_0.o-c_lto_simd-function_0.o link,

[Bug c/67999] Wrong optimization of pointer comparisons

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999 --- Comment #21 from Alexander Cherepanov --- On 2015-10-21 06:21, danielmicay at gmail dot com wrote: >> I think several issues are mixed: > > A conforming C implementation requires either fixing both the compiler and > libc > functions to

[Bug c/68119] GCC diagnostic push/pop interfere with control flow statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68119 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug c/67999] Wrong optimization of pointer comparisons

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999 --- Comment #22 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, ch3root at openwall dot com wrote: > What is missing in the discussion is a cost of support in gcc of objects > with size > PTRDIFF_MAX. I guess overhead in compiled

[Bug c/67999] Wrong optimization of pointer comparisons

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999 --- Comment #23 from Rich Felker --- I think you can always do the right-shift first. Pointer subtraction is undefined unless both pointers point to elements of the same array, and the addresses of elements of an array will inherently be

[Bug c/68119] GCC diagnostic push/pop interfere with control flow statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68119 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|normal

[Bug c/68119] GCC diagnostic push/pop interfere with control flow statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68119 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan --- I can see how 6.10.6.1 grants GCC very broad latitude in how to treat its own pragmas. However, if the implementation is going to define this preprocessing directive to behave as a statement, then it should at

[Bug inline-asm/68095] "cc" clobber with Flag Output Operands

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68095 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c/67999] Wrong optimization of pointer comparisons

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999 --- Comment #24 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I suppose that while EXACT_DIV_EXPR on the individual halves of a subtraction wouldn't be correct, it would also be correct (given any constant element size) to do the (right shift,

[Bug middle-end/67989] [4.9/5/6 Regression] g++ ICE on armel valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67989 --- Comment #16 from Gianfranco --- thanks a lot for the help! with this we will finally finish ocaml and llvm Debian transitions :)

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065 --- Comment #7 from Alexander Cherepanov --- On 2015-10-27 03:15, joseph at codesourcery dot com wrote: >> VLA size overflow is very similar to overflow in "new". Shouldn't it be >> handled in a similar way? > > I'm thinking of it as essentially

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215 --- Comment #7 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: hjl Date: Tue Oct 27 14:29:31 2015 New Revision: 229444 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229444=gcc=rev Log: Properly handle -fno-plt in ix86_expand_call prepare_call_address in

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/67794] [6 regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67794 --- Comment #11 from renlin at gcc dot gnu.org --- > > Hi Martin, > > After the backport patch to branch 5, aarch-none-elf fails to build because > of the following ICEs. > I mean "aarch64-none-elf" here, sorry for the typo.

[Bug target/67929] [4.9/5/6 Regression][arm] Wrong code for FP mult-by-power-of-2 + int conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67929 --- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Tue Oct 27 13:46:15 2015 New Revision: 229439 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229439=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR target/67929 Tighten vfp3_const_double_for_bits checks

[Bug tree-optimization/68104] [6 Regression] ice in vect_update_misalignment_for_peel with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68104 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Oct 27 13:48:15 2015 New Revision: 229440 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229440=gcc=rev Log: 2015-10-27 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/68104] [6 Regression] ice in vect_update_misalignment_for_peel with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68104 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/67929] [4.9/5/6 Regression][arm] Wrong code for FP mult-by-power-of-2 + int conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67929 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/67929] [4.9/5/6 Regression][arm] Wrong code for FP mult-by-power-of-2 + int conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67929 --- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Tue Oct 27 13:52:27 2015 New Revision: 229441 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229441=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR target/67929 Tighten vfp3_const_double_for_bits checks

[Bug middle-end/67989] [4.9/5/6 Regression] g++ ICE on armel valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67989 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

  1   2   >