[Bug testsuite/68917] test suite failure for builtin-bitops-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68917 --- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger --- by the way, did you have also trouble to build the libgcc multilib configuration or did you --disable-multilib? this seems completely broken too...

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 --- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > int > read1 (_Atomic S p) > { > S s = p; > return s.x; That's fine. > read2 (_Atomic S *p) > { > S *s = p; No, assignment

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- FWIW, I think it would make sense to diagnose some of the constructs for other reasons besides accessing a member (of an atomic struct). For example, in write1(), the function is most likely not going to do

[Bug testsuite/68917] test suite failure for builtin-bitops-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68917 --- Comment #2 from Chen Gang --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #1) > does something like this help? > Oh, sorry for replying late. I shall try to give a test within this month. Thanks. :-) > Index: tilegx.md >

[Bug debug/68302] [5/6 Regression] ICE with debugging enabled on mips

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68302 --- Comment #18 from Steve Ellcey --- I think there is still a difference in our configurations. If you add '-v' to the compile line when compiling the test program what do you see? Specifically what does COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS show? Mine has:

[Bug other/69006] Extraneous newline emitted between error messages in GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69006 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug other/69006] New: Extraneous newline emitted between error messages in GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69006 Bug ID: 69006 Summary: Extraneous newline emitted between error messages in GCC 6 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/68770] [6 Regression] Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) default_secondary_reload() targhooks.c:940

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770 --- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #5) > Created attachment 37099 [details] > Initialise the t_icode field of the sri structure created by copy_cost. > Please could you try out the uploaded

[Bug driver/67425] -frandom-seed documentation doesn't match code, incomplete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67425 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||documentation

[Bug c++/67257] [5/6 regression] Internal compiler error in retrieve_specialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67257 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug c++/66921] [4.9/5/6 Regression] failure to determine size of static constexpr array that is nested within a templated class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66921 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug fortran/68993] MERGE does not evaluate its arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68993 --- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4) > > I would urge anyone trying to be clever to use clear syntax: > https://github.com/hfp/libxsmm/commit/cc308fc5debe6151157a4fa9efacc7aa03351283 is what

[Bug boehm-gc/66848] boehm-gc fails test suite on x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848 --- Comment #26 from Jack Howarth --- Created attachment 37100 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37100=edit proposed patch to suppress PR66848 on darwin The attached proposed patch suppresses PR66848 on darwin until either

[Bug fortran/68993] MERGE does not evaluate its arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68993 --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 08:29:57PM +, Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68993 > > --- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele ethz.ch> --- > (In reply

[Bug debug/68302] [5/6 Regression] ICE with debugging enabled on mips

-linux-gnu Configured with: /home/aurel32/git/gcc/configure --enable-languages=c --prefix=/usr --target=mipsel-linux-gnu --includedir=/usr/mipsel-linux-gnu/include Thread model: posix gcc version 5.3.1 20151221 (GCC) COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-B' '/home/aurel32/work/mips-gcc/build/./gcc/' '-O2' '-g

[Bug target/69007] New: [6 regression] test cases gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-s8a.c fails starting with r231815

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69007 Bug ID: 69007 Summary: [6 regression] test cases gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-s8a.c fails starting with r231815 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status:

[Bug c++/69008] New: gcc emits unneeded memory access when passing trivial structs by value (ARM)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69008 Bug ID: 69008 Summary: gcc emits unneeded memory access when passing trivial structs by value (ARM) Product: gcc Version: 5.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libstdc++/64132] [5/6 Regression] FAIL: 22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64132 --- Comment #8 from li xin --- (In reply to li xin from comment #7) > (In reply to li xin from comment #6) > > The LSB test cases also Failed. > > /22_locale/messages/members/char/2.cc 1 > > /22_locale/messages/members/char/wrapped_env.cc 1 > >

[Bug target/69008] gcc emits unneeded memory access when passing trivial structs by value (ARM)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69008 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target|

[Bug tree-optimization/68761] -floop-interchange internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68761 David Kredba changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nheghathivhistha at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libfortran/68987] [5/6 Regression] double free or corruption in _gfortran_st_write_done when a write statement to an internal file uses an invalid format and the ERR= specifier appears.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68987 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 --- Comment #5 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #4) > The footnote to 6.5.2.3/5 says "Members can be safely accessed using a > non-atomic object which is assigned to or from the atomic object." Does it > mean that

[Bug libfortran/68867] numeric formatting problem in the fortran library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867 --- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle --- (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #22) > Jerry, thanks very much for investigating. Given all the discussion here I > agree with XFAILing this test for all powerpc. However, it does appear to > be

[Bug libstdc++/68982] [6 Regression] Missing explicit qualification for std::forward in functional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68982 --- Comment #5 from Roger Orr --- Thank you ;-)

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c/68994] GCC doesn't issue any diagnostic for missing end-of-line marker

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68994 l3x changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug preprocessor/14331] please add option to suppress warning message "no newline at end of file"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14331 l3x changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tvr.bc.32 at gmail dot com --- Comment #21 from

[Bug c++/67669] Wrong works fwrite or fread or both

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67669 TC changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 from TC

[Bug go/68562] morestack misaligns stack on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68562 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/68963] [4.9/5/6 Regression] O3 vs. O2 discards part of loop and terminates early

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68963 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Adjusted testcase for testsuite purposes: static const float a[3] = { 1, 2, 3 }; int b = 3; __attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void bar (int x) { if (x != b++) __builtin_abort (); } void foo (float

[Bug c++/68998] [5 Regression] Wrong code generated regarding constexpr arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68998 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/67669] Wrong works fwrite or fread or both

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67669 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug go/68562] morestack misaligns stack on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68562 --- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- This happens with glibc trunk. The dynamic linker now uses SSE instructions internally and as a result segfaults when the stack is misaligned.

[Bug libstdc++/68982] [6 Regression] Missing explicit qualification for std::forward in functional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68982 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Dec 21 14:16:36 2015 New Revision: 231881 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231881=gcc=rev Log: Rename test file that had incorrect bug number PR libstdc++/68982

[Bug tree-optimization/68990] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68990 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code CC|

[Bug middle-end/68999] [6 Regression]: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/save_1.f90 execution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68999 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/1078] Problems with attributes documentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1078 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug middle-end/68999] New: [6 Regression]: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/save_1.f90 execution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68999 Bug ID: 68999 Summary: [6 Regression]: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/save_1.f90 execution Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/68983] [6 Regression] ICE: in store_field, at expr.c:6659

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68983 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug other/66827] [6 Regression] left shifts of negative value warnings due to C++14 switch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66827 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/68761] -floop-interchange internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68761 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug libstdc++/66693] [C++17] std::tuple_size fails with const std::array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66693 --- Comment #3 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ville Date: Mon Dec 21 11:22:16 2015 New Revision: 231875 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231875=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/66693. * include/std/tuple (tuple_element,

[Bug other/66827] [6 Regression] left shifts of negative value warnings due to C++14 switch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66827 --- Comment #9 from Nick Clifton --- Author: nickc Date: Mon Dec 21 08:23:35 2015 New Revision: 231873 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231873=gcc=rev Log: PR 66827 * regex.c (EXTRACT_NUMBER): Cast sign byte to unsigned

[Bug c++/68998] [5 Regression] Wrong code generated regarding constexpr arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68998 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug tree-optimization/68963] [4.9/5/6 Regression] O3 vs. O2 discards part of loop and terminates early

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68963 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/68998] New: Wrong code generated regarding constexpr arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68998 Bug ID: 68998 Summary: Wrong code generated regarding constexpr arrays Product: gcc Version: 5.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P3

[Bug other/63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 Bug 63426 depends on bug 66827, which changed state. Bug 66827 Summary: [6 Regression] left shifts of negative value warnings due to C++14 switch https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66827 What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/68999] [6 Regression]: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/save_1.f90 execution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68999 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug bootstrap/68992] [6 Regression] bootstrap error on s390x-linux-gnu with r231848

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68992 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel --- Fixed with: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231876=gcc=rev

[Bug tree-optimization/68990] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68990 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Note you may need -march=x86-64 to reproduce. Started with r228231: commit 3ef16338b7f4970607d1d0b9c8228bfe3aeeca94 Author: ienkovich Date: Tue Sep 29

[Bug c++/69001] New: g++ --std=c++17 -g internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69001 Bug ID: 69001 Summary: g++ --std=c++17 -g internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:519 Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/68761] -floop-interchange internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68761 --- Comment #5 from David Kredba --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > Please report that into a separate PR, this one is graphite related, your is > some C++17 C++ FE bug. What is going on is that cp_genericize_r first > converts

[Bug libstdc++/68276] ios_base::_M_grow_words should use new (std::nothrow)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68276 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Dec 21 13:02:12 2015 New Revision: 231879 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231879=gcc=rev Log: libstdc++/68276 consistently qualify std::forward PR libstdc++/68276

[Bug libstdc++/68982] [6 Regression] Missing explicit qualification for std::forward in functional

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68982 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/68992] [6 Regression] bootstrap error on s390x-linux-gnu with r231848

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68992 Andreas Krebbel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/69000] New: regression: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69000 Bug ID: 69000 Summary: regression: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/66808] tree check fail in symbol_table::decl_assembler_name_hash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66808 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/68999] [6 Regression]: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/save_1.f90 execution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68999 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak --- Executing on host: /space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build-fast/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/../../gfortran -B/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build-fast/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/../../ -B/space/homedirs/uros/gcc

[Bug libstdc++/68995] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Including both and can cause ADL problems in std::function SFINAE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68995 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Dec 21 13:02:18 2015 New Revision: 231880 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231880=gcc=rev Log: libstdc++/68995 qualify calls to __callable_functor PR libstdc++/68995

[Bug tree-optimization/68990] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68990 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/69000] regression: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69000 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/66808] tree check fail in symbol_table::decl_assembler_name_hash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66808 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rogero at howzatt dot demon.co.uk

[Bug c++/69000] regression: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69000 --- Comment #2 from Roger Orr --- Thanks: apologies that my bugzilla-fu failed to find the duplicate.

[Bug c++/69001] g++ --std=c++17 -g internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:519

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69001 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/68276] ios_base::_M_grow_words should use new (std::nothrow)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68276 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- Oops, that was meant to be for Bug 68982

[Bug c++/66808] tree check fail in symbol_table::decl_assembler_name_hash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66808 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 37095 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37095=edit gcc6-pr66808.patch Untested fix. My understanding is that the tsubst_decl code just in some cases does not expect a

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1) > I actually wouldn't want to see GCC start issuing warnings for this code > because it has well-defined semantics there. Unfortunately, the generated code is

[Bug gcov-profile/69004] New: -fprofile-use stage fails on ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69004 Bug ID: 69004 Summary: -fprofile-use stage fails on ARM Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: gcov-profile

[Bug c++/69005] New: [5/6 Regression] infinite(?) recursion in template instantiations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69005 Bug ID: 69005 Summary: [5/6 Regression] infinite(?) recursion in template instantiations Product: gcc Version: 5.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/66808] tree check fail in symbol_table::decl_assembler_name_hash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66808 --- Comment #8 from Roger Orr --- Thank you. I've tested the fix and it successfully compiles works both the sample program uploaded to my duplicate pr69000 and also my original presenting case.

[Bug tree-optimization/65337] [5/6 Regression] bootstrap-lto gnat1 linktime ICE: gcc/ada/exp_aggr.adb:6570:0: internal compiler error: in forward_edge_to_pdom, at tree-ssa-dce.c:1086

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65337 --- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Mon Dec 21 15:15:50 2015 New Revision: 231882 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231882=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/65337 * tree-ssa-pre.c (eliminate): Also

[Bug tree-optimization/65337] [5 regression] LTO bootstrap failure with Ada enabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65337 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5/6 Regression]|[5 regression] LTO

[Bug lto/69003] New: Undefined reference with gcc -r incremental linking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69003 Bug ID: 69003 Summary: Undefined reference with gcc -r incremental linking Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/68990] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68990 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- I think the problem is: ** Pseudos coalescing #1: ** Coalescing move 5:r91(91)-r103(103) (freq=1) Removing move 5 (freq=1) deleting insn with uid = 5. Make unique value

[Bug tree-optimization/68990] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68990 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- BTW, with -mno-stv -O3 the testcase passes, and while the *.stv pass actually doesn't do anything at all on this testcase, that switch already changes expansion in a couple of places so no wonder that the RA

[Bug go/68980] [6 regression] ps -o cmd in gotest isn't portable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68980 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug libstdc++/60936] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Binary code bloat with std::string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c/69002] New: C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 Bug ID: 69002 Summary: C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/65867] [5/6 Regression] bootstrap fails for mingw32 due to missing header in ssp.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65867 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dj at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug fortran/68993] MERGE does not evaluate its arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68993 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 07:20:59AM +, Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch wrote: > I believe there was some confusion about the second testcase. > The real question > is if this is valid in all cases: >

[Bug libstdc++/60936] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Binary code bloat with std::string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936 --- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely --- It hasn't, but I'll do it for GCC 6 so people who care about the resulting size can use the non-verbose option

[Bug debug/68860] [6 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O3 -g line 16 arg1 == 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68860 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 37097 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37097=edit gcc6-pr68860-lto.patch I've noticed that the new tests still fail with LTO. It seems the reason is that LTO ignores

[Bug debug/68302] [5/6 Regression] ICE with debugging enabled on mips

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68302 --- Comment #17 from Aurelien Jarno --- Created attachment 37098 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37098=edit output log with cselib.c patched Please find attached the output with your cselib.c patch. Sorry for the delay. If

[Bug c/69002] C front end should warn about undefined access to atomic structure or union

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69002 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/67339] [5/6 Regression] Segfault when parsing a typename involving a template-alias

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67339 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug target/68770] [6 Regression] Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) default_secondary_reload() targhooks.c:940

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770 --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton --- Created attachment 37099 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37099=edit Initialise the t_icode field of the sri structure created by copy_cost. Hi Markus, Please could you try out the