[Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368 --- Comment #42 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #41) > Yes, but it was suggested that -std=legacy wasn't the right flag in comment > 35... What -std=legacy mostly does is to allow extensioms, not to accept code which was

[Bug libfortran/69651] [6 Regession] Usage of unitialized pointer io/list_read.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69651 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/68679] [5/6 Regression] gcc-5.2.1 ICE in C++11 anon union of structs with template fns, OK in gcc <= 4.9.3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68679 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Thu Feb 18 05:07:55 2016 New Revision: 233512 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233512=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/68679 * decl2.c (reset_type_linkage_2): Look through member

[Bug c++/68585] [5/6 Regression] c++14 code accepted by 4.9 not accepted by 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68585 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Thu Feb 18 05:08:02 2016 New Revision: 233513 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233513=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/68585 * constexpr.c (cxx_eval_bare_aggregate): Fix 'changed'

[Bug c++/65985] [5/6 Regression] compiler segfault with assert() in constexpr constructor body

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65985 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Thu Feb 18 05:08:09 2016 New Revision: 233514 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233514=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/65985 * constexpr.c

[Bug libstdc++/69862] New: STL containers not using allocator's definition of pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69862 Bug ID: 69862 Summary: STL containers not using allocator's definition of pointers Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: blocker

[Bug c++/67767] -Wsuggest-attribute=noreturn suggests noreturn for function which already has noreturn and cold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67767 --- Comment #2 from zerotype at yahoo dot com --- This can be worked around by using: [[gnu::cold]] [[gnu::noreturn]] instead of [[gnu::cold, gnu::noreturn]]

[Bug tree-optimization/69776] [4.9/5 Regression] Wrong optimization with aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69776 --- Comment #12 from Alexander Cherepanov --- Seems to be fixed, thanks! I've tried several variations, ok too.

[Bug testsuite/69586] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-21.c for target defaulting to short enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69586 --- Comment #8 from Thomas Preud'homme --- Thanks!

[Bug libfortran/69856] libgfortran/intrinsics/ctime.c:59: order of evaluation problem ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69856 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/69709] [6 Regression] profiled bootstrap error on s390x-linux-gnu with r233194

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709 --- Comment #5 from Dominik Vogt --- @Matthias: So far it only happens for me when building a gcc rpm from source on a (very slow VM), but not when compiling the same sources. Is there anything special about your build machine or environment on

[Bug c++/69850] [6 Regression] unnecessary -Wnonnull-compare warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69850 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/68147] Potential incorrect code generation for string self-assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147 --- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig --- The fix for 47674 wasn't complete.

[Bug c++/69850] [6 Regression] unnecessary -Wnonnull-compare warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69850 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Feb 17 22:27:24 2016 New Revision: 233508 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233508=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/69850 * gimplify.c (gimplify_cond_expr): Call

[Bug middle-end/50847] missed warning about unreachable code after throw statment.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50847 --- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- Other testcases: int baz() { while(1) { break; return 5; // dead } do { continue; return 6; // dead } while(0); return 1; } int bax() { while(1) {

[Bug target/69857] gcc/config/arm/arm.c:15949: return in strange place ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69857 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/46476] Missing Warning about unreachable code after return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476 --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- Richard, perhaps a less aggressive -Wunreachable-code could be implemented just after (or while) building the control flow graph? It would not try to be smart with constant propagation or guessing

[Bug c++/65985] [5/6 Regression] compiler segfault with assert() in constexpr constructor body

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65985 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug c++/68585] [5/6 Regression] c++14 code accepted by 4.9 not accepted by 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68585 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/68679] [5/6 Regression] gcc-5.2.1 ICE in C++11 anon union of structs with template fns, OK in gcc <= 4.9.3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68679 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/69842] [6 Regression] Parameter deduction in polymorphic lambdas

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69842 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69842] [6 Regression] Parameter deduction in polymorphic lambdas

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69842 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Wed Feb 17 20:45:15 2016 New Revision: 233506 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233506=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/69842 * method.c (forward_parm): Split out from...

[Bug c++/69842] [6 Regression] Parameter deduction in polymorphic lambdas

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69842 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/69861] ICE on declaring class parameter array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69861 --- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Whereas, with a scalar parameter : $ cat z2.f90 program p type t character :: c end type class(t), parameter :: z = t('a') print *, z%c end $

[Bug fortran/69861] New: ICE on declaring class parameter array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69861 Bug ID: 69861 Summary: ICE on declaring class parameter array Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug fortran/69860] ICE on missing end apostrophe with character(kind=4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69860 --- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- No ICE if "kind=4" is changed to "kind=1" : $ cat z2.f90 program p character(len=2, kind=1) :: a = 'aa', b = 'bb end $ gfortran-6 -g z2.f90 z2.f90:2:46:

[Bug fortran/69860] New: ICE on missing end apostrophe with character(kind=4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69860 Bug ID: 69860 Summary: ICE on missing end apostrophe with character(kind=4) Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/69859] ICE on incomplete character declaration statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69859 --- Comment #2 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- A bit different : $ cat z7.f90 program p type t character(2), allocatable :: a(*) character(*), allocatable :: b(2) character(*),

[Bug fortran/69859] ICE on incomplete character declaration statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69859 --- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Some other variants : $ cat z3.f90 program p type t character a , character b = character c : character d + character e .

[Bug fortran/69859] New: ICE on incomplete character declaration statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69859 Bug ID: 69859 Summary: ICE on incomplete character declaration statement Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/69499] [F03] ICE-on-invalid on combining select type with wrong statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69499 --- Comment #3 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Yet another example : $ cat z4.f90 module m class(*) :: z select type (x => z) end

[Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368 --- Comment #41 from Wilco --- (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #40) > Do you have a reduced test case of the Fortran code we can look at? See comment 13/14, the same common array is declared with different sizes in various places. > I

[Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug libstdc++/69853] An inheriting constructor of the class that inherited std::tuple isn't called correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69853 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|SUSPENDED --- Comment #2 from Ville

[Bug middle-end/17308] nonnull attribute not as useful as it could

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17308 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libfortran/69651] [6 Regession] Usage of unitialized pointer io/list_read.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69651 --- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Wed Feb 17 17:34:58 2016 New Revision: 233501 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233501=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-17 Jerry DeLisle PR

[Bug c++/69850] [6 Regression] unnecessary -Wnonnull-compare warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69850 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c/28901] -Wunused-variable ignores unused const initialised variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901 --- Comment #27 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #21) > Although in C a static const is not really like a #define I suspect that > there are cases where they are used as such in header files. If that is the >

[Bug libgomp/69858] New: OpenACC no free memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69858 Bug ID: 69858 Summary: OpenACC no free memory Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgomp Assignee:

[Bug libfortran/69651] [6 Regession] Usage of unitialized pointer io/list_read.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69651 --- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Wed Feb 17 16:48:57 2016 New Revision: 233500 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233500=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-17 Jerry DeLisle PR

[Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368 --- Comment #39 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37726 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37726=edit Proposed patch (without flag). Here's a prototype patch, that sets TYPE_SIZE to NULL_TREE but leaves

[Bug tree-optimization/69848] poor vectorization of a loop from SPEC2006 464.h264ref

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848 --- Comment #3 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org --- The standard way of dealing with condition reductions like this is to ignore the contents of the "if" statement and produce a lot of code to deal with the general case (it creates two vectors -

[Bug middle-end/69845] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Expression getting incorrectly optimized after being rewritten by compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69845 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- I believe the bug is in extract_muldiv_1, what it does for PLUS_EXPR/MINUS_EXPR looks inherently unsafe, unless it changes the operation to be actually performed in a type with defined overflow and then cast

[Bug target/69857] gcc/config/arm/arm.c:15949: return in strange place ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69857 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||arm

[Bug testsuite/69586] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-21.c for target defaulting to short enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69586 Richard Biener 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 Bug 69537 depends on bug 69586, which changed state. Bug 69586 Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-21.c for target defaulting to short enum https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69586 What|Removed

[Bug target/69857] New: gcc/config/arm/arm.c:15949: return in strange place ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69857 Bug ID: 69857 Summary: gcc/config/arm/arm.c:15949: return in strange place ? Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/69851] [6 Regression] ICE: in assign_temp, at function.c:961

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69851 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Do we want a memcpy/memmove like assignment in this case, something else? memcpy, yes. Why isn't that the default for whole bytes in memory, anyway?

[Bug c++/69851] [6 Regression] ICE: in assign_temp, at function.c:961

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69851 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #3) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > > Do we want a memcpy/memmove like assignment in this case, something else? > > memcpy, yes. Why isn't that the

[Bug target/65313] Compilation error in lto profiledbootstrap on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65313 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/65313] Compilation error in lto profiledbootstrap on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65313 --- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt --- OK, thanks. We'll get somebody looking at this, then.

[Bug rtl-optimization/69609] block reordering consumes an inordinate amount of time, REE consumes much memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69609 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Feb 17 14:57:58 2016 New Revision: 233498 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233498=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-17 Richard Biener PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/69609] block reordering consumes an inordinate amount of time, REE consumes much memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69609 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Known to work|

[Bug c++/55203] No unused warning for variables of non-trivial types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely --- Doc patch posted to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01184.html

[Bug libfortran/69856] New: libgfortran/intrinsics/ctime.c:59: order of evaluation problem ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69856 Bug ID: 69856 Summary: libgfortran/intrinsics/ctime.c:59: order of evaluation problem ? Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/69363] ICE when doing a pragma simd reduction with max

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69363 iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING --- Comment #5 from

[Bug testsuite/69586] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-21.c for target defaulting to short enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69586 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Feb 17 14:51:27 2016 New Revision: 233497 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233497=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-17 Richard Biener PR testsuite/69586

[Bug tree-optimization/69776] [4.9/5 Regression] Wrong optimization with aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69776 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener --- Now hopefully fixed on trunk.

[Bug c++/69855] Missing diagnostic for overload that only differs by return type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69855 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/69854] [6 regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'constant', have 'binary' (plus_expr) in generic_simplify_65, at generic-match.c:3110

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69854 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/69854] [6 regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'constant', have 'binary' (plus_expr) in generic_simplify_65, at generic-match.c:3110

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69854 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/69855] New: Missing diagnostic for overload that only differs by return type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69855 Bug ID: 69855 Summary: Missing diagnostic for overload that only differs by return type Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: accepts-invalid

[Bug middle-end/69854] New: [6 regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'constant', have 'binary' (plus_expr) in generic_simplify_65, at generic-match.c:3110

ase submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. gcc version 6.0.0 20160217 (experimental) (GCC) i can reproduce it on arm, aarch64 and x86_64 with the attached test case. (found while building acos.c in musl libc with CFLAGS+=-Ofast, the test case is preprocessed and somew

[Bug middle-end/49899] ICE when redeclaring a static function as weak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49899 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug target/65313] Compilation error in lto profiledbootstrap on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65313 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug c++/69826] problem with cilkplus pragma and preprocessor variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69826 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/69609] block reordering consumes an inordinate amount of time, REE consumes much memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69609 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law --- The PRE/GCSE limits were changed between gcc-5 and gcc-6 to allow it to run on larger CFGs such as this, but without totally blowing up. So I don't consider the PRE/GCSE bump a regression, a conscious

[Bug c++/69826] problem with cilkplus pragma and preprocessor variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69826 --- Comment #6 from collette --- Yes, I use ccache. Thanks for the highlight ...

[Bug target/65313] Compilation error in lto profiledbootstrap on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65313 --- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt --- What's the status here? Did Jakub's patch fix the underlying problem, or does this still need investigation?

[Bug c++/69826] problem with cilkplus pragma and preprocessor variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69826 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug libstdc++/69853] An inheriting constructor of the class that inherited std::tuple isn't called correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69853 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/69852] std::vector out of bounds access does not crash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69852 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |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 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[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 #24 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Wed Feb 17 13:42:35 2016 New Revision: 233496 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233496=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64] PR target/69161: Don't use special predicate for CCmode

[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 #23 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Wed Feb 17 13:39:30 2016 New Revision: 233495 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233495=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR target/69161: Don't ignore mode when matching comparison

[Bug rtl-optimization/56069] [4.9/5/6 Regression] RA pessimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56069 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug regression/69838] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Lra deletes EH_REGION

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69838 Dominik Vogt changed: What|Removed |Added Component|rtl-optimization|regression --- Comment #3 from Dominik

[Bug c++/69826] problem with cilkplus pragma and preprocessor variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69826 --- Comment #4 from collette --- The following bug has been filled on fedora bugtracker: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309321 This kind of code is used in the cbc solver (version 2.9.7 - with aboca level 4 enable) from the

[Bug target/69532] FAIL: gcc.target/arm/{vect-,}fmaxmin.c execution test on armv7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69532 davids at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug c/69522] [4.9/5 Regression] gcc hangs on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69522 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69532] FAIL: gcc.target/arm/{vect-,}fmaxmin.c execution test on armv7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69532 --- Comment #6 from davids at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: davids Date: Wed Feb 17 13:16:31 2016 New Revision: 233494 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233494=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-17 David Sherwood

[Bug rtl-optimization/69752] Reload removing instruction with side-effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69752 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69826] problem with cilkplus pragma and preprocessor variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69826 --- Comment #3 from collette --- I downloaded gcc-5.3.0 from the gnu ftp server. The example code compiles fine. So, this is a problem with the fedora gcc version (labelled 5.3.1).

[Bug c/69522] [4.9/5 Regression] gcc hangs on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69522 --- Comment #12 from Bernd Schmidt --- Author: bernds Date: Wed Feb 17 13:13:08 2016 New Revision: 233493 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233493=gcc=rev Log: Backport PR69522 use-after-free fix. c/ PR c/69522 * c-parser.c

[Bug c++/69850] [6 Regression] unnecessary -Wnonnull-compare warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69850 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/69522] [4.9/5 Regression] gcc hangs on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69522 --- Comment #11 from Bernd Schmidt --- Author: bernds Date: Wed Feb 17 13:10:59 2016 New Revision: 233492 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233492=gcc=rev Log: Backport use-after-free fix for PR69522. c/ PR c/69522 *

[Bug rtl-optimization/69752] Reload removing instruction with side-effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69752 --- Comment #5 from Bernd Schmidt --- Author: bernds Date: Wed Feb 17 13:03:44 2016 New Revision: 233491 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233491=gcc=rev Log: Backport PR69752 fix from mainline. PR rtl-optimization/69752 *

[Bug libstdc++/69853] New: An inheriting constructor of the class that inherited std::tuple isn't called correctly

Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc/configure --disable-multilib --enable-languages=c,c++ Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160217 (experimental) (GCC) Git (git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git) hash commit 0d85ea34a029adf4c3c31edaf8a317905d852faa Environment $ uname -a Linux

[Bug c++/69852] New: std::vector out of bounds access does not crash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69852 Bug ID: 69852 Summary: std::vector out of bounds access does not crash Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug bootstrap/69709] [6 Regression] profiled bootstrap error on s390x-linux-gnu with r233194

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709 --- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose --- still seen today; normal bootstrap works.

[Bug target/69671] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512vl-vpmovqb-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmovqb[ \\t]+[^{\n]*%ymm[0-9]+[^\n]*%xmm[0-9]+{%k[1-7]}{z}(?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69671 --- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69671 > > --- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek --- > Created attachment 37722 > -->

[Bug middle-end/39326] Segmentation fault with -O1, out of memory with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39326 --- Comment #57 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, sergstesh at yahoo dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39326 > > --- Comment #56 from Sergei Steshenko --- > "-O2 ... and 820MB peak memory use"

[Bug lto/69607] undefined reference to MAIN__._omp_fn.0 in atomic_capture-1.f with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69607 --- Comment #22 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- updated patch with testcase from comment 17-19: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01156.html .

[Bug rtl-optimization/69838] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Lra deletes EH_REGION

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69838 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ra, wrong-code

[Bug target/69671] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512vl-vpmovqb-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmovqb[ \\t]+[^{\n]*%ymm[0-9]+[^\n]*%xmm[0-9]+{%k[1-7]}{z}(?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69671 --- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 37722 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37722=edit gcc6-pr69671.patch Actually, on a closer look, I believe the only problem are the patterns that use a

[Bug middle-end/39326] Segmentation fault with -O1, out of memory with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39326 --- Comment #56 from Sergei Steshenko --- "-O2 ... and 820MB peak memory use" vs "-O3 ... and 700MB peak memory use" - according to my common sense -O3 is stronger than -02 optimization, and one should expect greater memory use. So, can the

[Bug objc/69844] [6 Regression] Possibly bogus error: unknown type name in ObjC code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69844 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0 Summary|Possibly bogus

[Bug c++/69850] [6 Regression] unnecessary -Wnonnull-compare warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69850 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Priority|P3

[Bug middle-end/37448] cannot compile big function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37448 --- Comment #52 from Richard Biener --- Even at -O1 the inliner degenerates (and var-tracking gives up if you enable -g) ipa inlining heuristics : 260.14 (84%) usr 0.50 (23%) sys 260.91 (84%) wall 102217 kB (10%) ggc

[Bug middle-end/39326] Segmentation fault with -O1, out of memory with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39326 --- Comment #55 from Richard Biener --- Current GCC 6 numbers: -O1 -g var-tracking dataflow : 89.37 (60%) usr 0.09 (23%) sys 89.53 (59%) wall 11542 kB ( 3%) ggc var-tracking emit : 47.70 (32%) usr 0.05 (13%) sys 47.81 (32%)

  1   2   >