[Bug target/70117] ppc long double isinf() is wrong?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117 --- Comment #17 from Alan Modra --- Author: amodra Date: Fri Apr 8 02:11:52 2016 New Revision: 234821 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234821=gcc=rev Log: PR70117, ppc long double isinf gcc/ PR target/70117 * builtins.c

[Bug c++/70587] 0e1_p+0 should not be parsed as a single pp-number in C++14 and earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70587 TC changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Version|6.0

[Bug c++/70587] 0e1_p+0 should not be parsed as a single pp-number in C++14 and earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70587 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Once more, with line breaks: when a GNU dialect of a standard is specified, all features supported by the compiler are enabled, even when those features change the meaning of the base standard. As

[Bug c++/70587] 0e1_p+0 should not be parsed as a single pp-number in C++14 and earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70587 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- It's rejected in -std=gnu++11 and gnu++14 mode, but not -std=c++11 / c++14, which agrees with the documentation for -std: > when a GNU dialect of a standard is specified, all features supported by the >

[Bug target/70589] New: PowerPC target attribute/pragma cannot set/disable -mfloat128

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70589 Bug ID: 70589 Summary: PowerPC target attribute/pragma cannot set/disable -mfloat128 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/70588] [5/6 regression] SIGBUS on a VLA larger than SIZE_MAX / 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70588 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Known to work|

[Bug c++/70588] New: [5/6 regression] SIGBUS on a VLA larger than SIZE_MAX / 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70588 Bug ID: 70588 Summary: [5/6 regression] SIGBUS on a VLA larger than SIZE_MAX / 2 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/70587] New: 0e1_p+0 should not be parsed as a single pp-number in C++14 and earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70587 Bug ID: 70587 Summary: 0e1_p+0 should not be parsed as a single pp-number in C++14 and earlier Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/70529] Unhelpful diagnostic for hex float literals, inconsistent parsing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529 --- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529 > > --- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- > (In reply to Axel Naumann from

[Bug fortran/69654] ICE in gfc_trans_structure_assign

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69654 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/70529] Unhelpful diagnostic for hex float literals, inconsistent parsing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529 --- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Axel Naumann from comment #2) > You asked for it, so here is my wish list: > - for C++ < 1z, do not support hexfloats, neither with "unsigned" not > negative exponents. Since "unsigned"

[Bug testsuite/70581] [6 regression] gcc.dg/lto/simd-function FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70581 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Apr 7 21:45:26 2016 New Revision: 234817 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234817=gcc=rev Log: PR testsuite/70581 * gcc.dg/lto/simd-function_0.c: New test.

[Bug c++/70529] Unhelpful diagnostic for hex float literals, inconsistent parsing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529 --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) > But that wouldn't make any difference between 0x123p-2 and 0x123p - 2 > (or some of them coming from macro, other not etc.). > So perhaps you want to

[Bug fortran/66643] Missing compilation error for formatted data transfer without format

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66643 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Note the extra comma in gfortran.dg/integer_exponentiation_6.F90 (see pr60751). Any reason to keep it?

[Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751 --- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Note that the extra comma is used in the following tests: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_49.f90 gfortran.dg/integer_exponentiation_6.F90 gfortran.dg/graphite/pr38083.f90 Any reason to keep it?

[Bug c++/70584] constexpr variables cannot be used as intrinsic arguments where an immediate is expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70584 --- Comment #2 from Andrés Agustín Tiraboschi --- #include int main() { __m128i r; constexpr auto index = 1; enum {index2 = index}; r = _mm_aeskeygenassist_si128(r, index2); } This works also.

[Bug c++/70529] Unhelpful diagnostic for hex float literals, inconsistent parsing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- But that wouldn't make any difference between 0x123p-2 and 0x123p - 2 (or some of them coming from macro, other not etc.). So perhaps you want to also check the locus of each of the tokens and find out

[Bug c++/70529] Unhelpful diagnostic for hex float literals, inconsistent parsing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529 --- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #4) > On Tue, 5 Apr 2016, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > According to the manual, if an extension is not incompatible with the base > >

[Bug tree-optimization/70586] [4.9/5/6 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit and 64-bit modes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70586 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- int a, e, f; short b, c, d; int foo (int x, int y) { return (y == 0 || (x && y == 1)) ? x : x % y; } static short bar (void) { int i = foo (c, f); f = foo (d, 2); int g = foo (b, c); int h = foo

[Bug tree-optimization/70586] [4.9/5/6 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit and 64-bit modes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70586 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/70586] New: wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit and 64-bit modes

--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160407 (experimental) [trunk revision 234805] (GCC) $: $: gcc-trunk -w -m32 small.c -O3 ; ./a.out Floating point exception (core dumped) $: gcc-trunk -w -m32 small.c -O2 ; ./a.out Floating point exception

[Bug c++/70585] New: Bogus 'ambiguous template instantiation' error with partial specializations involving a pack expansion

mplate struct purr<int, meow...> {}; template struct purr<int, meow>; gcc HEAD 6.0.0 20160407 (experimental) on Wandbox prints: prog.cc:10:17: error: ambiguous template instantiation for 'struct purr<int, meow >' template struct purr<int, meow>; ^~~~

[Bug c++/70584] constexpr variables cannot be used as intrinsic arguments where an immediate is expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70584 --- Comment #1 from Daniel Gutson --- Additional data: an enumerator works: int main() { __m128i r; //constexpr auto index = 1; enum { index = 1 }; r = _mm_aeskeygenassist_si128(r, index); }

[Bug target/70381] On powerpc, -mfloat128 is on by default for all VSX systems

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70381 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70529] Unhelpful diagnostic for hex float literals, inconsistent parsing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529 --- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Tue, 5 Apr 2016, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > According to the manual, if an extension is not incompatible with the base > standard, it should not be disabled: In general, this

[Bug target/70117] ppc long double isinf() is wrong?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117 --- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Tue, 5 Apr 2016, amodra at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117 > > --- Comment #14 from Alan Modra --- > > if (fmt == _extended_double) > > No,

[Bug c++/70584] New: constexpr variables cannot be used as intrinsic arguments where an immediate is expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70584 Bug ID: 70584 Summary: constexpr variables cannot be used as intrinsic arguments where an immediate is expected Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/70583] New: [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.abi/vtable2.C -std=gnu++98 execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70583 Bug ID: 70583 Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.abi/vtable2.C -std=gnu++98 execution test Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug testsuite/70581] [6 regression] gcc.dg/lto/simd-function FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70581 --- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- > Created attachment 38215 > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38215=edit > gcc6-pr70581.patch > > Your assembler is too old.

[Bug c/66425] (void) cast doesn't suppress __attribute__((warn_unused_result))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425 costinc at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||costinc at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/70452] [5/6 Regression] Regression in C++ parsing performance between 4.9.3 and 5.3.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70452 --- Comment #14 from Patrick Palka --- trunk is now at Execution times (seconds) phase setup : 0.00 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.01 ( 1%) wall 1287 kB ( 1%) ggc phase parsing : 1.28 (100%) usr 0.20 (100%) sys

[Bug preprocessor/69650] [6 Regression] ICE in linemap_line_start, at libcpp/line-map.c:803

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69650 --- Comment #43 from Bernd Schmidt --- I suspect the message Roger quoted was from the earlier version with the printf; that one didn't give a location. I advocate no action until we have a reproducer so we can know what's going on.

[Bug preprocessor/70518] Conditional compilation of #line directives

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70518 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug preprocessor/69650] [6 Regression] ICE in linemap_line_start, at libcpp/line-map.c:803

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69650 --- Comment #42 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Roger Orr from comment #41) > I have seen the message before: for example from a build with revision > > line-map.c: file "/usr/include/asm/sockios.h" left but not entered You can also

[Bug preprocessor/70518] Conditional compilation of #line directives

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70518 --- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Sun, 3 Apr 2016, elyk03 at gmail dot com wrote: > Should #line be processed unconditionally? I know the preprocessor has to > keep It should not be processed in skipped blocks. See

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Of course. Patch changing both is preapproved.

[Bug testsuite/70581] [6 regression] gcc.dg/lto/simd-function FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70581 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ipa/70582] [6 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70582 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug ipa/70582] [6 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70582 --- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth --- Created attachment 38214 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38214=edit assembler output

[Bug ipa/70582] New: [6 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70582 Bug ID: 70582 Summary: [6 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c FAILs Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ipa

[Bug target/70581] [6 regression] gcc.dg/lto/simd-function FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70581 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug target/70581] New: [6 regression] gcc.dg/lto/simd-function FAILs

ction argument Near line: "vmovaps -120(%ebp), %zmm0" for both 32 and 64-bit. It seems the compiler started to emit avx512f insns despite the -mavx2. Either the testcase needs to be amended requiring the corresponding effective-target, or the compiler fixed not to emit those

[Bug fortran/70575] write syntax check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70575 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from

[Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||valeryweber at hotmail dot com

[Bug middle-end/70580] New: [gomp4] -O0 execution testing FAILs for libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/if-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70580 Bug ID: 70580 Summary: [gomp4] -O0 execution testing FAILs for libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/if-1.c Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: openacc

[Bug middle-end/70579] New: [gomp4] -O0 execution testing FAILs for libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/host_data-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70579 Bug ID: 70579 Summary: [gomp4] -O0 execution testing FAILs for libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/host_data-1.c Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug testsuite/70553] pr70496.c should exclude Thumb only targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70553 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Preud'homme --- Author: thopre01 Date: Thu Apr 7 16:19:20 2016 New Revision: 234811 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234811=gcc=rev Log: 2016-04-07 Thomas Preud'homme

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #9 from Yury Gribov --- Better do the same for halt_on_error-2.

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 --- Comment #9 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Patch posted at: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00351.html

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Right. Dominique, can you check if s/memset/__builtin_memset/g fixes the > issue? The test succeeds with the following patch --- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c

[Bug c++/70452] [5/6 Regression] Regression in C++ parsing performance between 4.9.3 and 5.3.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70452 --- Comment #13 from Patrick Palka --- Author: ppalka Date: Thu Apr 7 16:12:05 2016 New Revision: 234810 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234810=gcc=rev Log: Avoid needless unsharing during constexpr evaluation (PR c++/70452)

[Bug preprocessor/69650] [6 Regression] ICE in linemap_line_start, at libcpp/line-map.c:803

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69650 --- Comment #41 from Roger Orr --- I have seen the message before: for example from a build with revision line-map.c: file "/usr/include/asm/sockios.h" left but not entered I've only noticed it with builds from gcc-trunk, which I tested with

[Bug target/59683] ICE: in classify_argument, at config/i386/i386.c:6637 with #pragma GCC target("avx512f")

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59683 --- Comment #3 from Kirill Yukhin --- This hunk from Jakub's fix for PR61925 makes test working: diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c index a41efa4..6aebaed 100644 --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #7 from Yury Gribov --- Right. Dominique, can you check if s/memset/__builtin_memset/g fixes the issue?

[Bug preprocessor/69650] [6 Regression] ICE in linemap_line_start, at libcpp/line-map.c:803

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69650 --- Comment #40 from Bernd Schmidt --- The message previously was a plain printf, not a warning or error so it would not have interrupted compilation. Did you get the message with earlier compilers, or did it start to appear recently?

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Comment on attachment 38213 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38213 Proposed patch Perhaps just use __builtin_memset instead of memset instead?

[Bug target/70574] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -mavx2, read of partially initialised stack variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70574 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Actually, I believe the bug is already at fwprop1. We have: (insn 247 246 18 2 (set (reg:DI 301 [ u128_0 ]) (const_int 0 [0])) pr70574.c:7 85 {*movdi_internal} (nil)) (insn 18 247 19 2 (set

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #5 from Yury Gribov --- Created attachment 38213 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38213=edit Proposed patch Ah, so the problem is caused by _FORTIFY_SOURCE being enabled on Darwin by default. This check precedes

[Bug debug/70578] internal compiler error: in output_index_string, at dwarf2out.c with -gsplit-dwarf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #38211|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/70577] tree-ssa/prefetch-5.c scan-tree-dump-times aprefetch failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70577 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug debug/70578] New: internal compiler error: in output_index_string, at dwarf2out.c with -gsplit-dwarf

isl --disable-libatomic Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160407 (experimental) (GCC) I see: $ ./cc1plus -fpreprocessed q.ii -quiet -g3 -gsplit-dwarf -O -w q.ii:763:1: internal compiler error: in output_index_string, at dwarf2out.c:25505 } ^ 0xa09c4e output_index_string(indirect_string_n

[Bug fortran/70575] write syntax check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70575 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[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 CC||stackoverflow_dl@gmx-topmai

[Bug c++/70414] Function declaration in other scope: type safety violation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70414 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/70577] tree-ssa/prefetch-5.c scan-tree-dump-times aprefetch failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70577 --- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2016-03/msg00336.html : Regressions on trunk at revision 234600 vs revision 234546

[Bug preprocessor/69650] [6 Regression] ICE in linemap_line_start, at libcpp/line-map.c:803

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69650 --- Comment #39 from Roger Orr --- The resolution of this issue causes a problem for me as it results in compilation errors in our build. We are compiling with distcc which AIUI distributes the pre-processed intermediate output. With revision

[Bug tree-optimization/70577] New: prefetch.c scan-tree-dump-times aprefetch failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70577 Bug ID: 70577 Summary: prefetch.c scan-tree-dump-times aprefetch failures Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/70414] Function declaration in other scope: type safety violation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70414 Jaak Ristioja changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jaak at ristioja dot ee --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/70576] G++ compiles and links invalid code when shadowing global function in function scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70576 Jaak Ristioja changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/70577] tree-ssa/prefetch-5.c scan-tree-dump-times aprefetch failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70577 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70576] New: G++ compiles and links invalid code when shadowing global function in function scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70576 Bug ID: 70576 Summary: G++ compiles and links invalid code when shadowing global function in function scope Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/70574] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -mavx2, read of partially initialised stack variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70574 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/70575] New: write syntax check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70575 Bug ID: 70575 Summary: write syntax check Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee:

[Bug target/64386] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2327 (unrecognizable insn) with -mavx512bw

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64386 Kirill Yukhin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/70574] New: [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -mavx2, read of partially initialised stack variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70574 Bug ID: 70574 Summary: [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -mavx2, read of partially initialised stack variable Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libgomp/69414] [OpenACC] "!$acc update self" does not provide expected result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69414 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Version|5.3.0

[Bug libgomp/69414] [OpenACC] "!$acc update self" does not provide expected result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69414 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Schwinge --- Author: tschwinge Date: Thu Apr 7 11:43:30 2016 New Revision: 234806 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234806=gcc=rev Log: [PR libgomp/69414] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug libstdc++/51749] Including pollutes global namespace

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51749 --- Comment #33 from Jonathan Wakely --- Thanks for the info. The locale_t functionality is the main thing that will need work, but it's good to know you were able to get everything else working well.

[Bug libstdc++/70564] Problem with std::experimental::not_fn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70564 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 --- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #7) > (In reply to ktkachov from comment #6) > > Ah, on second glance the peephole looks correct in itself, but the second > > branch following the bmi

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 --- Comment #7 from Richard Earnshaw --- (In reply to ktkachov from comment #6) > Ah, on second glance the peephole looks correct in itself, but the second > branch following the bmi uses an incorrect condition code. > So we have: > tst

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Problem is that we don't have access to Darwin hardware. Perhaps you could > get a failing stacktrace via gdb? (lldb) run Process 79186 launched:

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 --- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Ah, on second glance the peephole looks correct in itself, but the second branch following the bmi uses an incorrect condition code. So we have: tst r3, #2 bne .L3

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 --- Comment #3 from Yury Gribov --- Problem is that we don't have access to Darwin hardware. Perhaps you could get a failing stacktrace via gdb?

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ktkachov at gcc dot

[Bug target/70566] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Bad ARM code generated for evaluating unsigned int bitfield value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||arm

[Bug testsuite/70516] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Regtesting acats hangs on x86_64-apple-darwin15.4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70516 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- The thing is that there were no changes in the acats testsuite in the last 1.5 years, and if you say there is no ada process hanging around, it is unlikely gcc/ada changes affect it either.

[Bug c++/66487] sanitizer/warnings for lifetime DSE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487 --- Comment #20 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #19) > Martin, I suppose the sanitizer bits can be tracked as enhancement and not > regression. It is a firefox bug so I suppose we can declare this a > non-regression.

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/70573] FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 Yury Gribov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||y.gribov at samsung dot com --- Comment

[Bug testsuite/70516] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Regtesting acats hangs on x86_64-apple-darwin15.4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70516 --- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Perhaps just tcl bug on your platform then? > Do you have some revision where you can reliably not reproduce the hang > (say with 100 invocations)? Otherwise I kind of don't understand > the

[Bug testsuite/70516] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Regtesting acats hangs on x86_64-apple-darwin15.4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70516 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Perhaps just tcl bug on your platform then? Do you have some revision where you can reliably not reproduce the hang (say with 100 invocations)? Otherwise I kind of don't understand the Regression marking.

[Bug sanitizer/70573] New: FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70573 Bug ID: 70573 Summary: FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/halt_on_error-1.c -O* execution test x86_64-apple-darwin15 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/70572] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on code with decltype (auto) on x86_64-linux-gnu in digest_init_r, at cp/typeck2.c:1103 with -std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70572 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70571] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in verify_ctor_sanity, at cp/constexpr.c:2259

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70571 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/70516] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Regtesting acats hangs on x86_64-apple-darwin15.4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70516 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Can you bisect it? There aren't that many changes that could affect > anything at all. The problem is non-deterministic: it occurs less than once every two tests. So r234234 is the first revision

[Bug c++/61198] Crash when selecting specializations through aliases.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61198 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pangbw at gmail dot com --- Comment #12

[Bug c++/70567] internal compiler error: in retrieve_specialization, at cp/pt.c:1020

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70567 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

  1   2   >