[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 Milan Bouchet-Valat changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #37514|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug other/69554] New: Multi-location diagnostics writes too many lines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69554 Bug ID: 69554 Summary: Multi-location diagnostics writes too many lines Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug other/69554] Multi-location diagnostics writes too many lines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69554 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/66137] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE with -ffixed-ebp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66137 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libgomp/69555] libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 --- Comment #5 from Dominik Vogt --- Hm, actually the chapter about "private" says nothing about how to actually *handle* a reference type whereas it states that for "firstprivate" and "lastprivate" the reference must bind to the same object for

[Bug other/69554] Multi-location diagnostics writes too many lines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69554 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig --- Created attachment 37522 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37522=edit patch to expose the problem

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely --- Apparently the case they actually care about in Julia is not what was posted here, which might be where the disagreement comes from. What they actually have is: typedef struct mytype { struct mytype

[Bug libstdc++/69553] New: Optimizations O1/O2 makes std::array value incorrect when passed to function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69553 Bug ID: 69553 Summary: Optimizations O1/O2 makes std::array value incorrect when passed to function Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/69553] [6 Regression] Optimizations O1/O2 makes std::array value incorrect when passed to function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69553 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug libgomp/69555] New: libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 Bug ID: 69555 Summary: libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/69556] New: [6 Regression] forwprop4/match.pd undoing work from recip

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69556 Bug ID: 69556 Summary: [6 Regression] forwprop4/match.pd undoing work from recip Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libgomp/69555] libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 --- Comment #6 from Dominik Vogt --- Example: -- snip -- #include int main () { int a; int = a; printf("a %p\n", ); printf("g %p\n", ); #pragma omp target private (c) { printf("t %p\n", ); } return 0; } --

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #11 from Milan Bouchet-Valat --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #9) > Note that this was only accepted by the C++ compiler; the C compiler always > rejected such a code (going back to at least gcc 3.4). Indeed you're right.

[Bug target/69161] [6 Regression] ICE in simplify_const_unary_operation, at simplify-rtx.c:1633

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69161 --- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek --- Any progress on this?

[Bug bootstrap/69506] [6 Regression] check-in 232454 seems to cause problems with cygwin builds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69506 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69161] [6 Regression] ICE in simplify_const_unary_operation, at simplify-rtx.c:1633

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69161 --- Comment #20 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19) > Any progress on this? Yes, I'm testing patches for both arm and aarch64 to fix this. I'll try to post them early next week

[Bug target/68701] [4.9/5/6 Regression] "gcc -m32 -finstrument-functions -ffixed-ebp" produces internal compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68701 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- *** Bug 66137 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/69553] [6 Regression] Optimizations O1/O2 makes std::array value incorrect when passed to function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69553 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at ucw dot cz

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libgomp/69555] libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 --- Comment #2 from Dominik Vogt --- Does it work on other platforms?

[Bug middle-end/32401] [PPC/Altivec] Non optimal code structure with -mabi=altivec

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32401 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libgomp/69555] libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 --- Comment #4 from Dominik Vogt --- Sure. Can I provide any debug information or another kind of help?

[Bug c++/69553] [6 Regression] Optimizations O1/O2 makes std::array value incorrect when passed to function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69553 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Known to work|

[Bug target/66137] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE with -ffixed-ebp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66137 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jan 29 14:07:40 2016 New Revision: 232981 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232981=gcc=rev Log: PR target/66137 * gcc.target/i386/pr66137.c: New test. Added:

[Bug target/69551] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jan 29 14:14:56 2016 New Revision: 232982 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232982=gcc=rev Log: PR target/69551 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_vector_set) : For

[Bug target/69161] [6 Regression] ICE in simplify_const_unary_operation, at simplify-rtx.c:1633

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69161 --- Comment #21 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Patches posted at: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg02308.html https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg02309.html

[Bug target/69551] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jan 29 14:37:02 2016 New Revision: 232983 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232983=gcc=rev Log: PR target/69551 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_vector_set) : For

[Bug libgomp/69555] libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- But the test is OpenMP 4.5, and OpenMP 4.5 does allow reference types in the privatization clauses.

[Bug libgomp/69555] libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Works on x86_64/i686/ppc64/ppc64le/aarch64 for me, fails on armv7hfp, s390{,x}. I'm not saying there is not a middle-end bug, will need to analyze it.

[Bug libgomp/69555] libgomp.c++/target-6.C fails because of undefined behaviour

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69555 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- It is well defined. Anyway, most likely the bug is already during gimplification. I see in the omplower dump: int[0:(sizetype) D.2477] & c; ... D.2477 = D.2476 + -1; ... #pragma omp target

[Bug c++/69516] [5/6 regression] infinite recursion on a VLA with excess initializer elements in constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69516 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Jan 29 09:25:14 2016 New Revision: 232969 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232969=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/69509 PR c++/69516 * constexpr.c

[Bug c++/69509] [5/6 regression] infinite loop compiling a VLA in a recursive constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69509 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Jan 29 09:25:14 2016 New Revision: 232969 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232969=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/69509 PR c++/69516 * constexpr.c

[Bug debug/66869] [6 regression] -Wunused-function no longer warns for static declarations without definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66869 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69533] [6 Regression] python miscompilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69533 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Ok, makes sense if b and c are signed and thus overflow is undefined. Where's that code in python?

[Bug target/69548] libatomic fails to build with -Os on powerpc64-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69548 --- Comment #1 from Alan Modra --- Created attachment 37516 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37516=edit possible fix This fixes the testcase on gcc-5. I haven't yet bootstrapped it, or investigated why the problem doesn't

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek --- (In reply to Milan Bouchet-Valat from comment #8) > As I said, I don't deny it's the correct application of the standard, nor > that it's a sane behavior. But the fact that this was accepted without even > a

[Bug c++/65143] [C++11] missing devirtualization for virtual base in "final" classes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65143 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Version|5.3.0 |4.9.2 Severity|major

[Bug bootstrap/69506] [6 Regression] check-in 232454 seems to cause problems with cygwin builds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69506 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Fri Jan 29 10:52:08 2016 New Revision: 232974 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232974=gcc=rev Log: Fix Cygwin bootstrap error due to TM symbols PR libstdc++/69506 *

[Bug c++/67184] Missed optimization with C++11 final specifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67184 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/69445] Fail to devirtualize call to base class function even though derived class type is 'final'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69445 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- The code is nonsense, what's it even supposed to do? It would be invalid in C (where flexible arrays are actually standard) because flexible arrays can only be the last member, *and* because apart from

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #4 from Milan Bouchet-Valat --- Yes, -fpermissive is a better solution. The code at stake has been replaced in the master branch, but breaking API in stable releases isn't great.

[Bug target/69551] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #8 from Milan Bouchet-Valat --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #6) > (In reply to Milan Bouchet-Valat from comment #5) > > Note this actually also happens with the C compiler (the attached example > > also illustrates this).

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Milan Bouchet-Valat from comment #5) > Note this actually also happens with the C compiler (the attached example > also illustrates this). Which is a Good Thing. It's also a Good Thing that

[Bug c++/69550] New: Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 Bug ID: 69550 Summary: Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/67451] [5/6 Regression] ICE with sourced allocation from coarray.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67451 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/69418] [5/6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected record_type ... in gfc_class_vptr_get, at fortran/trans-expr.c:149

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69418 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/69551] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- So --- gcc/config/i386/i386.c.jj 2016-01-28 15:07:25.0 +0100 +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.c 2016-01-29 13:02:32.100788474 +0100 @@ -46744,6 +46744,7 @@ ix86_expand_vector_set (bool mmx_ok, rtx

[Bug target/69533] [6 Regression] python miscompilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69533 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I believe it's in replace_substring.

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu --- Also see PR 60336 for impact of empty class.

[Bug target/69533] [6 Regression] python miscompilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69533 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Ugh, totally insufficient patch. Probably warrants a CVE, I'm sure some of them we optimized before, like old_size = sz; sz += a; if (sz < old_size) ... I'll dig further (just look for

[Bug middle-end/69546] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple int128 arithmetics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69546 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug middle-end/69547] [6 regression] no-op array initializer emits an empty loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69547 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jan 29 11:21:19 2016 New Revision: 232976 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232976=gcc=rev Log: 2016-01-29 Richard Biener PR

[Bug fortran/69495] unused-label warning does not tell which flag triggered it

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69495 --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #2) > Im sure there are more... One more case that I just ran across by coincidence (from resolve.c): if (warn_compare_reals)

[Bug middle-end/69551] New: Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 Bug ID: 69551 Summary: Wrong code with single element vector insert Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/69551] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |target --- Comment #2 from Richard

[Bug target/67839] Bit addressable instructions generated for invalid memory address

://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5-branch@232962), built it with main.c from PR 69330, and this is what I got cbi 0x20,0 ldi r24,0 ldi r25,0 ret .size main, .-main .ident "GCC: (GNU) 5.3.1 20160129" The problem shows up

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek --- (In reply to Milan Bouchet-Valat from comment #5) > Note this actually also happens with the C compiler (the attached example > also illustrates this). That's the correct behavior.

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/67184] Missed optimization with C++11 final specifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67184 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Last reconfirmed|2015-08-11

[Bug middle-end/69547] [6 regression] no-op array initializer emits an empty loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69547 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/69551] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug driver/69552] flto save-temps overwrites file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69552 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Yes, there's no linker output so we use whatever else. We could try falling back to a.out. Similarly without LTO -save-temps overwrites files if you do gcc t.c t.C both assembly and linker files will be

[Bug target/69533] [6 Regression] python miscompilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69533 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 37519 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37519=edit patch to fix it in two places Uh, indeed. Looks like those kind of broken overflow checks are everywhere (well, the

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Milan Bouchet-Valat from comment #0) > Would it be possible to provide a way to turn the error into a warning? For > example, -std=gnu++11 could allow this, while -std=c++11 would still >

[Bug debug/66869] [6 regression] -Wunused-function no longer warns for static declarations without definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66869 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jan 29 11:14:42 2016 New Revision: 232975 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232975=gcc=rev Log: PR debug/66869 * decl.c (wrapup_globals_for_namespace): Warn about

[Bug fortran/69524] [6 Regression] [F08] Compiler segfaults on "module procedure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69524 --- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas --- (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #7) > I could be wrong but I do not agree that this is valid code. I will turn to > it tomorrow. I believe that a MODULE SUBROUTINE/FUNCTION declaration cannot > appear in

[Bug target/69551] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- if (SSE2) else /* For SSE1, we have to reuse the V4SF code. */ rtx t = gen_reg_rtx (V4SFmode); ix86_expand_vector_set (false, t, gen_lowpart (SFmode,

[Bug driver/69552] New: flto save-temps overwrites file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69552 Bug ID: 69552 Summary: flto save-temps overwrites file Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: trivial Priority: P3 Component: driver

[Bug target/69551] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/69551] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong code with single element vector insert

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69551 --- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > So > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.c.jj 2016-01-28 15:07:25.0 +0100 > +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.c2016-01-29 13:02:32.100788474 +0100 > @@ -46744,6 +46744,7

[Bug c++/69550] Need a way to disable "flexible array member in an otherwise empty struct" error on GCC 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69550 --- Comment #5 from Milan Bouchet-Valat --- Note this actually also happens with the C compiler (the attached example also illustrates this).

[Bug debug/69518] [6 Regression] Flag -g causes "error: type variant has different TYPE_VFIELD"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69518 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/69538] gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/builtin-apply-4.c fails with flto for aarch32 targets with single precision FPU

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69538 --- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- I suspect the place to start at is looking what arm_function_value does for the lto case. This is where the code decides what register the function returns its value based on ABI. But I'm

[Bug target/69538] gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/builtin-apply-4.c fails with flto for aarch32 targets with single precision FPU

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69538 --- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- So during LTO compilation inside aapcs_allocate_return_reg the pcs_variant used is ARM_PCS_AAPCS_LOCAL (/* Private call within this compilation unit. */) whereas for non-LTO it is:

[Bug c++/69462] FLT_EVAL_METHOD and DECIMAL_DIG missing in float.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69462 --- Comment #6 from Andreas Krebbel --- Author: krebbel Date: Fri Jan 29 10:03:26 2016 New Revision: 232970 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232970=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/69462: Provide FLT_EVAL_METHOD and DECIMAL_DIG in float.h.

[Bug middle-end/69546] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple int128 arithmetics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69546 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug fortran/69544] [5/6 Regression] Internal compiler error with -Wall and where

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69544 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/69516] [5/6 regression] infinite recursion on a VLA with excess initializer elements in constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69516 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/69537] [6 Regression] Incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with enum variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69537 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jan 29 08:36:04 2016 New Revision: 232968 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232968=gcc=rev Log: 2016-01-29 Richard Biener PR middle-end/69537

[Bug middle-end/69537] [6 Regression] Incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with enum variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69537 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69517] [5/6 regression] SEGV on a VLA with excess initializer elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69517 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69006 --- Comment #5 from Andreas Krebbel --- Author: krebbel Date: Fri Jan 29 10:12:11 2016 New Revision: 232972 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232972=gcc=rev Log: PR other/69006: S/390: Fix extra newlines after diagnostics. gcc/ChangeLog

[Bug middle-end/69547] [6 regression] no-op array initializer emits an empty loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69547 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug c++/69509] [5/6 regression] infinite loop compiling a VLA in a recursive constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69509 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69459] [5 Regression] wrong code with -O2 and vector arithmetics @ x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69459 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5/6 Regression] wrong code |[5 Regression] wrong code

[Bug target/69533] [6 Regression] python miscompilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69533 --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Quick update. It appears that we've got something like this t = b * c; r = b / c; if (r != b) Which python is using as an overflow check. We now know how to optimize the mul/div sequence,

[Bug middle-end/69547] [6 regression] no-op array initializer emits an empty loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69547 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug preprocessor/69543] [6 Regression] _Pragma does not apply within macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69543 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug rtl-optimization/69557] New: [ARM] revsh instruction not being conditionalised for Thumb2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69557 Bug ID: 69557 Summary: [ARM] revsh instruction not being conditionalised for Thumb2 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/69556] [6 Regression] forwprop4/match.pd undoing work from recip

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69556 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug target/69459] [5 Regression] wrong code with -O2 and vector arithmetics @ x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69459 --- Comment #14 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Fri Jan 29 16:52:15 2016 New Revision: 232988 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232988=gcc=rev Log: PR target/69459 * config/i386/constraints.md (C): Only

[Bug c++/68763] [6 Regression] ICE: in verify_unstripped_args, at cp/pt.c:1132

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68763 --- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 37523 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37523=edit gcc6-pr68763.patch Updated non-working patch. Clearly adjusting the METHOD_TYPEs of some cdtors is a nightmare,

[Bug rtl-optimization/69530] [6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in ix86_split_long_move (i386.c:24353) with -fno-split-wide-types -mavx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69530 --- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #12) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #11) > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10) > > > Created attachment 37512 [details] > > > A new patch > > > > > > I am

[Bug target/65604] MIPS -fno-delayed-branch generates incorrect code with -mcheck-zero-division

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65604 --- Comment #4 from Steve Ellcey --- Author: sje Date: Fri Jan 29 16:29:58 2016 New Revision: 232985 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232985=gcc=rev Log: PR target/65604 * config/mips/mips.c (mips_output_division): Check

[Bug target/65010] ppc backend generates unnecessary signed extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65010 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/65604] MIPS -fno-delayed-branch generates incorrect code with -mcheck-zero-division

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65604 --- Comment #5 from Steve Ellcey --- Author: sje Date: Fri Jan 29 16:31:18 2016 New Revision: 232986 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232986=gcc=rev Log: PR target/65604 * gcc.target/mips/div-delay.c: New test. Added:

[Bug middle-end/69553] [6 Regression] Optimizations O1/O2 makes std::array value incorrect when passed to function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69553 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- foo (_13, _11); _9 = [(const int[2] &)t_2(D) + 8][1]; foo (_11, _9); [tail call] Trying to reduce the issue. (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #2) > Started with r229265: > > commit

[Bug tree-optimization/69556] [6 Regression] forwprop4/match.pd undoing work from recip

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69556 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I suspect we should disable "Fold (C1/X)*C2 into (C1*C2)/X" for gimple then > and have it only for generic. Or check for single use of the divide.

  1   2   3   >