[Bug tree-optimization/69989] [6 Regression] ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes (in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989 Chengnian Sun changed: What|Removed |Added CC||chengniansun at gmail dot com ---

[Bug tree-optimization/69989] [6 Regression] ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes (in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libgcc/69998] New: GCC5.3.0 _Unwind_ForcedUnwind Always Abort While pthread_exit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69998 Bug ID: 69998 Summary: GCC5.3.0 _Unwind_ForcedUnwind Always Abort While pthread_exit Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical

[Bug libgcc/69997] New: GCC5.3.0 _Unwind_ForcedUnwind Always Abort While pthread_exit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69997 Bug ID: 69997 Summary: GCC5.3.0 _Unwind_ForcedUnwind Always Abort While pthread_exit Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: blocker

[Bug fortran/61156] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Internal compiler error for Fortran files when specifying a file instead of an include directory with -I

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61156 --- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Feb 28 06:50:27 2016 New Revision: 233789 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233789=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-27 Jerry DeLisle Backported from

[Bug tree-optimization/69740] [5/6 Regression] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "verify_loop_structure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Sun Feb 28 06:43:07 2016 New Revision: 233788 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233788=gcc=rev Log: Revert 2016-02-26 Richard Biener

[Bug tree-optimization/69740] [5/6 Regression] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "verify_loop_structure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED See Also|

[Bug tree-optimization/69740] [5 Regression] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "verify_loop_structure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740 --- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Sun Feb 28 06:34:20 2016 New Revision: 233787 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233787=gcc=rev Log: Revert 2016-02-26 Richard Biener

[Bug tree-optimization/69989] [6 Regression] ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes (in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz

[Bug middle-end/69987] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/69456] Namelist value with trailing sign is ignored without error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/56744] [meta-bug] Namelist bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56744 Bug 56744 depends on bug 69456, which changed state. Bug 69456 Summary: Namelist value with trailing sign is ignored without error https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456 What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/69910] ICE with NEWUNIT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69910 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/69989] [6 Regression] ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes (in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- WRT fallout and reverting on the gcc-5 branch. Based on what I'm seeing, that may make sense. The problem in this particular case is we've marked loops for fixup, then loop distribution is explicitly

[Bug tree-optimization/69989] [6 Regression] ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes (in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug middle-end/69996] [6 Regression] 186.crafty in SPEC CPU 2000 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69996 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/69996] [6 Regression] 186.crafty in SPEC CPU 2000 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69996 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/69996] New: [6 Regression] 186.crafty in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69996 Bug ID: 69996 Summary: [6 Regression] 186.crafty in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/69081] forward_list::splice_after does not handle the case of first<=last properly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69081 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69995] New: [C++14] Invalid result when evaluating constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69995 Bug ID: 69995 Summary: [C++14] Invalid result when evaluating constexpr function Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major

[Bug fortran/69910] ICE with NEWUNIT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69910 --- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Feb 27 19:07:13 2016 New Revision: 233782 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233782=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-27 Jerry DeLisle Steven G. Kargl

[Bug target/69988] libgo.so: undefined reference to `__unorddf2'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988 --- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- Hmm, the symbol is present in the glibc I used: root@atlantis:/srv/sid-powerpcspe-sbuild/lib/powerpc-linux-gnuspe# objdump -T libgcc_s.so.1 |grep unorddf2 00010a78 gDF .text 0088

[Bug target/69988] libgo.so: undefined reference to `__unorddf2'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988 --- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- Looking at the source code, I found this: ppc_fp_compat= case ${ppc_fp_type} in soft|e500v1|e500v2) if test $glibc_version_major -gt 2 \ || ( test $glibc_version_major -eq 2 \ &&

[Bug target/69988] libgo.so: undefined reference to `__unorddf2'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed: What|Removed |Added Version|5.2.1 |5.3.1 --- Comment #2 from

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] [4.9/5/6 Regression] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-{1,2}.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/69994] New: [6 regression] test case gfortran.dg/reassoc_6.f fails starting with r233669

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69994 Bug ID: 69994 Summary: [6 regression] test case gfortran.dg/reassoc_6.f fails starting with r233669 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/67164] ICE: tree check: expected class ‘expression’, have ‘exceptional’ (argument_pack_select) in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3356

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67164 --- Comment #6 from Louis Dionne --- The code I posted above does not seem to trigger the bug anymore on GCC trunk. However, the following code still produces an ICE on trunk: > ~/code/gcc/prefix/bin/g++ --version > g++ (GCC) 6.0.0 20160226

[Bug c/69993] Misleading wording for -Wmisleading-indentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69993 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] [4.9/5/6 Regression] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-{1,2}.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 --- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Feb 27 19:07:13 2016 New Revision: 233782 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233782=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-27 Jerry DeLisle Steven G. Kargl

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #6) > Bingo! With both files present I can even reproduce it on my x86_64 machine. Unfortunately, I cannot reproduce it with r230753, so it seems quite a

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > Note that this first started to ICE with r223470, which is also the first > revision where it starts opening cmds-check.c (which also premature to me, >

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > Note that this first started to ICE with r223470, which is also the first > revision where it starts opening cmds-check.c (which also premature to me, >

[Bug c/69993] Misleading wording for -Wmisleading-indentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69993 --- Comment #1 from David Malcolm --- There's an alternate suggestion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/47pejg/gcc_6_wmisleadingindentation_vs_goto_fail/d0eqyih > This is just passive voice, there is nothing tricky about it. >

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Note that this first started to ICE with r223470, which is also the first revision where it starts opening cmds-check.c (which also premature to me, because no warning is actually emitted; I'd think that it

[Bug c/69993] New: Misleading wording for -Wmisleading-indentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69993 Bug ID: 69993 Summary: Misleading wording for -Wmisleading-indentation Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC|

[Bug middle-end/69987] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/69989] [6 Regression] ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes (in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69989 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- Created attachment 37813 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37813=edit c file (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4) > (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #0) >

[Bug target/69992] New: test case gcc.dg/sms-4.c fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69992 Bug ID: 69992 Summary: test case gcc.dg/sms-4.c fails Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (gdb) bt #0 0x110c60d8 in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset (set=0x3fffb7f7, loc=, offset=) at ../../gcc/libcpp/line-map.c:925 #1 0x101051b4 in location_from_offset (loc=,

[Bug tree-optimization/69991] New: missed tail merge optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69991 Bug ID: 69991 Summary: missed tail merge optimization Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #0) > If I move the cmds-check.i file to a different directory gcc no longer ICEs, > so reducing is impossible. One idea. Do you still have cmds-check.c

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #0) > If I move the cmds-check.i file to a different directory gcc no longer ICEs, > so reducing is impossible. What is the complete path to cmds-check.i

[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/69886] ICE: in process_insert_insn, at gcse.c:1976 with --param=gcse-unrestricted-cost=0 @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69886 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sat Feb 27 13:31:39 2016 New Revision: 233781 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233781=gcc=rev Log: PR target/69613 PR rtl-optimization/69886 *

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sat Feb 27 13:31:39 2016 New Revision: 233781 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233781=gcc=rev Log: PR target/69613 PR rtl-optimization/69886 *

[Bug c++/69889] [6 Regression] ICE: in assign_temp, at function.c:961

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69889 --- Comment #7 from Benjamin Bannier --- Thanks for taking care of this so quickly. I currently do not observe any more ICEs from that codebase.

[Bug tree-optimization/69990] New: decl alignment not respected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69990 Bug ID: 69990 Summary: decl alignment not respected Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug c++/69564] [5/6 Regression] lto and/or C++ make scimark2 LU slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Artem S. Tashkinov from comment #15) > Is this the same bug? > > https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article=ubuntu-1604- > compilers=2 > > In Dense LU Matrix Factorization GCC 5.3.1/6.0

[Bug middle-end/69987] [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987 Joost VandeVondele changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz

[Bug c++/69564] [5/6 Regression] lto and/or C++ make scimark2 LU slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564 --- Comment #15 from Artem S. Tashkinov --- Is this the same bug? https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article=ubuntu-1604-compilers=2 In Dense LU Matrix Factorization GCC 5.3.1/6.0 is more than 2 times slower than Clang. G++ options: -O3

[Bug tree-optimization/69989] New: ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes (in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639)

--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160227 (experimental) [trunk revision 233778] (GCC) $: $: gcc-trunk -O3 small.c small.c: In function ‘fn1’: small.c:3:6: error: loop verification on loop tree that needs fixup void fn1() { ^~~ small.c:3:6

[Bug target/69988] libgo.so: undefined reference to `__unorddf2'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988 --- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- Full build log here: > https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/gcc-5_5.2.1-14_powerpcspe-20160226-2238.build

[Bug target/69988] New: libgo.so: undefined reference to `__unorddf2'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988 Bug ID: 69988 Summary: libgo.so: undefined reference to `__unorddf2' Product: gcc Version: 5.2.1 URL: https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/gcc-5_5.2.1-14_pow

[Bug middle-end/69987] New: [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987 Bug ID: 69987 Summary: [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1639 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/69986] New: smaller code possible with -Os by using push/pop to spill/reload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69986 Bug ID: 69986 Summary: smaller code possible with -Os by using push/pop to spill/reload Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: