[Bug fortran/71758] ICE in verify_gimple_in_cfg, at tree-cfg.c:5212

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71758 --- Comment #2 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Reduced to mismatch in device(.), without option -fdefault* : $ cat z1.f90 program p use omp_lib, only: omp_is_initial_device integer(8), parameter :: n = 10

[Bug ipa/71190] [7 Regression] ICE in assemble_variable_contents, at varasm.c:2054

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71190 --- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- OK. I've given up on reducing. Honza, you can find the unreduced testcase on gcc112 in /home/trippels/lto_ice_testcase : trippels@gcc2-power8 lto_ice_testcase % ~/gcc_test/usr/local/bin/c++ -w

[Bug target/71763] powerpc64: ICE due to need for output reload on jump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763 --- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool --- Well. Here it is using a vector register (v31) as the iterator reg, which we do not handle. Should we? Where does it come from?

[Bug fortran/71764] compiler internal error: segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71764 --- Comment #1 from 鍾 --- $ uname -a CYGWIN_NT-6.1 LLVM 2.5.2(0.297/5/3) 2016-06-23 14:29 x86_64 Cygwin $ gcc -v 使用内建 specs。 COLLECT_GCC=gcc COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-cygwin/5.4.0/lto-wrapper.exe 目标：x86_64-pc-cygwin

[Bug fortran/71764] New: compiler internal error: segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71764 Bug ID: 71764 Summary: compiler internal error: segmentation fault Product: gcc Version: 5.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/49905] Better sanity checking on sprintf src & dest to produce warning for dodgy code ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49905 --- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor --- I have tweaked the patch to print the following for the test case in comment #13: xyz.c: In function ‘f’: xyz.c:10:46: warning: ‘%+03d’ directive output may be truncated between ‘3’ and ‘9’ bytes into a

[Bug target/71763] powerpc64: ICE due to need for output reload on jump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/71763] New: powerpc64: ICE due to need for output reload on jump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763 Bug ID: 71763 Summary: powerpc64: ICE due to need for output reload on jump Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug middle-end/71762] New: [4.9 Regression] ifcombine wrong codegen with uninitialized data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71762 Bug ID: 71762 Summary: [4.9 Regression] ifcombine wrong codegen with uninitialized data Product: gcc Version: 4.9.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/59498] [DR 1430][4.9/5/6/7 Regression] Pack expansion error in template alias

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59498 --- Comment #13 from Paul Keir --- Yup, I just came up with exactly the same solution. Thanks.

[Bug fortran/71759] [7 Regression] ICE in enforce_single_undo_checkpoint, at fortran/symbol.c:3478

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71759 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug c++/71756] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in ~saved_token_sentinel, at cp/parser.c:1228

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71756 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug c++/71069] -Waddress didn't catch all cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71069 --- Comment #3 from Eugene Zelenko --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > -fsantize=undefined will catch this at runtime. What is undefined is > passing a NULL to setData. It'll be much better to report such problems during

[Bug fortran/66575] Endless compilation on missing end interface

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66575 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/66575] Endless compilation on missing end interface

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66575 --- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Mon Jul 4 21:04:55 2016 New Revision: 237994 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237994=gcc=rev Log: 2016-07-04 Jerry DeLisle PR fortran/66575

[Bug c++/59498] [DR 1430][4.9/5/6/7 Regression] Pack expansion error in template alias

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59498 --- Comment #12 from Louis Dionne --- Not sure, as I've been off pure-type computations for a while now. Looking at how Meta does it might be useful: https://github.com/ericniebler/meta/blob/master/include/meta/meta.hpp#L819

[Bug tree-optimization/71761] missing tailcall optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71761 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- For clang, this seems based on size: up to size 16 they get jmp, starting from 17 they get a call. For gcc, we give up on anything more complicated than a "register": /* If the LHS of our call is not just

[Bug tree-optimization/71761] missing tailcall optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71761 --- Comment #2 from Ivan Sorokin --- I compared this with clang. 1) typedef int token; Both GCC and clang optimize this to a single jump. 2) struct token {int a}; clang optimizes this into a single jump. GCC generates: subq$8, %rsp

[Bug fortran/35849] "wrong" line shown in error message for parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35849 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/71761] missing tailcall optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71761 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug fortran/35849] "wrong" line shown in error message for parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35849 --- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Mon Jul 4 19:14:54 2016 New Revision: 237993 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237993=gcc=rev Log: 2016-07-04 Jerry DeLisle Steven G. Kargl

[Bug fortran/71758] ICE in verify_gimple_in_cfg, at tree-cfg.c:5212

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71758 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/71761] New: missing tailcall optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71761 Bug ID: 71761 Summary: missing tailcall optimization Product: gcc Version: 6.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 --- Comment #8 from Timo Teräs --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > LIBSTDCXX_RAW_CXX_CXXFLAGS="\ > -I\$(top_builddir)/../libstdc++-v3/include \ > -I\$(top_builddir)/../libstdc++-v3/include/\$(target_noncanonical) \ >

[Bug middle-end/49905] Better sanity checking on sprintf src & dest to produce warning for dodgy code ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49905 --- Comment #16 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14) > But 9 is maximum length just for the %+03d part, %02d with the limited VRP > range is exactly 2 and then the '\0', so that is 12 maximum, 6 minimum. Yes. > So

[Bug other/71760] New: libiberty - Segmentation fault when attempting to delete a non-existent element in a hash table

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71760 Bug ID: 71760 Summary: libiberty - Segmentation fault when attempting to delete a non-existent element in a hash table Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/71759] ICE in enforce_single_undo_checkpoint, at fortran/symbol.c:3478

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71759 --- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Another typo : $ cat z2.f90 program p print *, [character((100)) :: 'x'] print *, [character((1,0)) :: 'x'] end $ gfortran-6 z2.f90 z2.f90:3:23:

[Bug fortran/71759] New: ICE in enforce_single_undo_checkpoint, at fortran/symbol.c:3478

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71759 Bug ID: 71759 Summary: ICE in enforce_single_undo_checkpoint, at fortran/symbol.c:3478 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/71758] New: ICE in verify_gimple_in_cfg, at tree-cfg.c:5212

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71758 Bug ID: 71758 Summary: ICE in verify_gimple_in_cfg, at tree-cfg.c:5212 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/47425] Array constructor with type-spec: Fails with more complicated length type expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47425 --- Comment #4 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Some simplifications : $ cat z1.f90 program p character(3) :: x integer :: n = 3 print *, [character(len(x(1:n))) :: 'a'] end $ gfortran-7-20160703

[Bug c++/71739] [6/7 Regression] ICE on valid C++11 code: tree check: expected identifier_node, have tree_list in private_is_attribute_p, at tree.c:6080

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71739 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Jul 4 17:33:50 2016 New Revision: 237992 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237992=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/71739 * tree.c (attribute_value_equal): Use

[Bug fortran/47425] Array constructor with type-spec: Fails with more complicated length type expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47425 Gerhard Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug c++/71739] [6/7 Regression] ICE on valid C++11 code: tree check: expected identifier_node, have tree_list in private_is_attribute_p, at tree.c:6080

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71739 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Jul 4 17:31:38 2016 New Revision: 237991 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237991=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/71739 * tree.c (attribute_value_equal): Use

[Bug fortran/65173] ICE while compiling wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65173 Gerhard Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug fortran/67883] ICE on empty array constructor of character function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67883 --- Comment #3 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- For the following cases, every line produces an ICE : $ cat zz5.f90 program p character(*), parameter :: x1(*) = [character(*) ::] // [character(0) ::]

[Bug fortran/67883] ICE on empty array constructor of character function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67883 --- Comment #2 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Another group of examples. First case is working in a sufficient manner. Concatenating two empty hulls (zero len and size, respectivly) gives an empty hull as

[Bug debug/71058] ICE when building heavy templating and -std=c++17 -gstabs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71058 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Why would someone even try to use stabs debugging info. It provides almost no debug information anyways.

[Bug middle-end/49905] Better sanity checking on sprintf src & dest to produce warning for dodgy code ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49905 --- Comment #15 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #11) > BTW, I tried a Linux kernel build and got this > > drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c: In function ‘guid_show’: >

[Bug c++/71069] -Waddress didn't catch all cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71069 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- -fsantize=undefined will catch this at runtime. What is undefined is passing a NULL to setData.

[Bug fortran/66244] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE on assigning a value to a pointer variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66244 --- Comment #4 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Compiling slightly modified example from comment 0 : $ cat z4.f90 program p integer, target :: a(3)[*] integer, pointer :: z => a(3) z = 0 print *, z

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #38 from Jakub Jelinek --- Sorry, make that __attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void baz (int *p, int *q, int *r, int *s) { #pragma omp simd for (int i = 0; i < 1024; i++) { p[i] += q[0] * 6; r[i] += s[0] * 9; }

[Bug middle-end/49905] Better sanity checking on sprintf src & dest to produce warning for dodgy code ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49905 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #13) > (In reply to David Binderman from comment #9) > > I tried a build of the gcc fortran compiler and I found this warning: > > > >

[Bug c++/71227] [6/7 Regression] template friend function cannot be resolved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71227 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 --- Comment #7 from Timo Teräs --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6) > Are you sure __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length is being exported from > libstdc++v3? $ nm -D

[Bug middle-end/49905] Better sanity checking on sprintf src & dest to produce warning for dodgy code ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49905 --- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #9) > I tried a build of the gcc fortran compiler and I found this warning: > > ../../../src/trunk/libgfortran/intrinsics/date_and_time.c:173:33: warning: > ‘%+03d’

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Are you sure __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length is being exported from libstdc++v3?

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||build --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #3) > (In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #2) > > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > > What target is this on? I get all passes in the java testsuite with

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #37 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- Jakub, I assume that yoour #C33 test-case is not correct, i.e. it can not be marked with pragma omp simd. For example, even if we turn off lim phase it will be aborted: my_g++ -O3 -m64 t33.cpp -o

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 --- Comment #3 from Timo Teräs --- (In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #2) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > What target is this on? I get all passes in the java testsuite with GCC 6.1 > > on aarch-linux-gnu. > > Happens on

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 --- Comment #2 from Timo Teräs --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > What target is this on? I get all passes in the java testsuite with GCC 6.1 > on aarch-linux-gnu. Happens on x86_64-alpine-linux-musl for me. PIE enabled by

[Bug libgcj/71757] libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- What target is this on? I get all passes in the java testsuite with GCC 6.1 on aarch-linux-gnu.

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #36 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- #c33 testcase was not tested since I have some doubts about it. Note that original problem was #pragma omp simd for (int i=0; i

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #35 from Jakub Jelinek --- Doesn't it still miscompile the #c33 testcase? Say with __attribute__((noinline, noclone)) on baz and int v[2048]; int main () { v[1023] = 5; baz (v, v + 1023, v + 1024, v + 1023); int i; for (i =

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #34 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- Thanks a lot Jakub for your detail comments. I have simple fix which cures failures from 71734. The fix is simple enough and simply check that the ref in problem belongs to simd loop: diff --git

[Bug libgcj/71757] New: libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71757 Bug ID: 71757 Summary: libgcj: unknown symbol __cxa_throw_bad_array_new_length Product: gcc Version: 6.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/66960] Add interrupt attribute to x86 backend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66960 --- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Goswin von Brederlow from comment #13) > > > > > > In a kernel there will always be some exception that simply prints a > > > register dump and stack backtrace. So again how do you access the

[Bug c++/71756] New: internal compiler error: in ~saved_token_sentinel, at cp/parser.c:1228

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71756 Bug ID: 71756 Summary: internal compiler error: in ~saved_token_sentinel, at cp/parser.c:1228 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/71755] New: friend function may not be defined inside a class using a qualified name but GCC allows that

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71755 Bug ID: 71755 Summary: friend function may not be defined inside a class using a qualified name but GCC allows that Product: gcc Version: 6.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek --- In any case, loop->safelen > 0 test looks also wrong, if there are guarantees about single iteration only (safelen(1)), then there is nothing useful at all. So it must be loop->safelen >= 2. For foo in

[Bug preprocessor/28810] gcc -MD -MP doesn't add phony rule for source file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28810 Vadim Zeitlin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek --- Also, the testcase has weird dg- directives: // { dg-do compile } // { dg-require-effective-target vect_simd_clones } // { dg-additional-options "-Ofast" } // { dg-additional-options "-mavx2 -fopenmp-simd"

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #31 from Jakub Jelinek --- A question is if #pragma GCC ivdep has similar guarantees/restrictions; the documentation only disallows certain loop-carried dependencies, in particular those that would prevent vectorization, so I think

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek --- Another thing to think of, e.g. void baz (int *p, int *q) { #pragma omp simd safelen(2) for (int i = 0; i < 1024; i++) p[4 * i] += q[0]; } for aliasing p[4 * 1022] I think still applies that if ([0]

[Bug c++/71753] Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71753 --- Comment #6 from Łukasz Spintzyk --- I confirm changing the code to use unsigned int fixed the problem. Also there is no signed overflow errors. Thanks a lot.

[Bug tree-optimization/71707] [7 Regression] ICE in get_stridx_plus_constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71707 Thomas Preud'homme changed: What|Removed |Added CC||thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/71715] FAIL: 23_containers/deque/modifiers/swap/2.cc (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71715 Thomas Preud'homme changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/71190] [7 Regression] ICE in assemble_variable_contents, at varasm.c:2054

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71190 --- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- I'm down to 16 *.ii files. It will probably take a few days to creduce them all.

[Bug libstdc++/71313] [Filesystem TS] remove_all fails to remove directory contents recursively

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71313 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/71313] [Filesystem TS] remove_all fails to remove directory contents recursively

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71313 --- Comment #5 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ville Date: Mon Jul 4 13:52:21 2016 New Revision: 237981 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237981=gcc=rev Log: Backport from mainline 2016-07-04 Ville Voutilainen

[Bug middle-end/71734] [7 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.fortran/simd4.f90 -O3 -g execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71734 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug tree-optimization/70729] Loop marked with omp simd pragma is not vectorized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729 --- Comment #29 from Jakub Jelinek --- The #c27 r237844 change looks bogus to me. First of all, IMNSHO you can argue this way only if ref is a reference seen in loop LOOP, which is the case of e.g. *.omp_data_i_23(D).a ref in simd3.f90 -O2

[Bug target/71754] [4.9 Regression] gcc prints internal error on ARM NEON code with buffer overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71754 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||arm*

[Bug middle-end/49905] Better sanity checking on sprintf src & dest to produce warning for dodgy code ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49905 --- Comment #12 from David Binderman --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #11) > So it looks to me like format %Lx isn't handled. Also, %lf seems to cause a crash.

[Bug c/71754] New: gcc prints internal error on ARM NEON code with buffer overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71754 Bug ID: 71754 Summary: gcc prints internal error on ARM NEON code with buffer overflow Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug libstdc++/71313] [Filesystem TS] remove_all fails to remove directory contents recursively

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71313 --- Comment #4 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ville Date: Mon Jul 4 13:15:10 2016 New Revision: 237980 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237980=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/71313 * src/filesystem/ops.cc

[Bug libstdc++/71313] [Filesystem TS] remove_all fails to remove directory contents recursively

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71313 --- Comment #3 from Ville Voutilainen --- Fixed on trunk so far, backporting to gcc-6 and gcc-5 shortly.

[Bug libstdc++/71313] [Filesystem TS] remove_all fails to remove directory contents recursively

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71313 --- Comment #2 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ville Date: Mon Jul 4 12:52:49 2016 New Revision: 237978 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237978=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/71313 * src/filesystem/ops.cc

[Bug debug/71667] [7 Regression] ICE in as_a, at is-a.h:192 w/ -g -O2 -ftree-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667 --- Comment #5 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Qirun: That looks like a separate issue. My fix for 71667 (under review) is specific to debug statements. Could you please raise your test case as a new bug and assign it to me. Thanks!

[Bug c/71719] [7 Regression] invalid set-but-not-used warning with vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71719 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/71010] error: 'begin' was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71010 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Ubikovich from comment #3) > But since C++14 cbegin invoke std::begin: > > // http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/iterator/begin > template< class C > > constexpr auto cbegin( const C& c ) ->

[Bug tree-optimization/71751] [7 Regression] Segmentation fault in ssa_default_def

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71751 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/71691] [6/7 Regression] wrong code at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (Floating point exception)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71691 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- I bet this is related to the uninitialized i. We have in bb3: # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 # i_57 = PHI and in bb5: # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 # i_48 = PHI

[Bug middle-end/70159] missed CSE optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Sat, 2 Jul 2016, hiraditya at msn dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159 > > AK changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug tree-optimization/71752] [7 Regression] ICE in compute_live_loop_exits, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:229 w/ -O1 -ftree-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71752 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/66960] Add interrupt attribute to x86 backend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66960 --- Comment #13 from Goswin von Brederlow --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #12) > (In reply to Goswin von Brederlow from comment #11) > > I think the design is fundamentally lacking in the following points: > > > > 1. interrupt handler

[Bug c++/71753] Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71753 --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Łukasz Spintzyk from comment #4) > Looking from this point of view is this really invalid? There is a perfectly valid way to write such code: "You need to use an unsigned type for this type of

[Bug tree-optimization/71691] [6/7 Regression] wrong code at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (Floating point exception)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71691 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- That said, char b; short f; unsigned e; int g = 20; void foo () { int l, h; for (l = 0; l <= 7; l++) { int j = 38; if (g) h = 0; for (; h <= 7; h++) { int

[Bug middle-end/49905] Better sanity checking on sprintf src & dest to produce warning for dodgy code ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49905 --- Comment #11 from David Binderman --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > I think the warning code should compute both > minimum and maximum, I'd be happy for the code to compute minimum only and have maximum postponed for the

[Bug c++/71753] Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71753 --- Comment #4 from Łukasz Spintzyk --- Yes, this code is utilizing overflow, but it is there for a reason to optimize the code and get rid of branches as they can slow down program execution. You can refer to

[Bug tree-optimization/71691] [6/7 Regression] wrong code at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (Floating point exception)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71691 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- The testcase looks invalid to me. In the second iteration of the outermost loop, l = 1, g = 0, so it compares uninitialized h with 7.

[Bug tree-optimization/71357] [7 Regression] [graphite] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block follows the use for SSA_NAME) w/ -O2 -floop-nest-optimize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71357 --- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha --- gcc-7.0.0-alpha20160703 snapshot ICEs w/ -O1 -floop-nest-optimize only, not w/ -O2 and above.

[Bug c++/71753] Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71753 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/71753] Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71753 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse --- -fsanitize=undefined a.c:11:21: runtime error: signed integer overflow: 260 + 2147483392 cannot be represented in type 'int' You need to use an unsigned type for this type of computation.

[Bug c++/71753] Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71753 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Comment on attachment 38830 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38830 Code that reproduces the issue value + 0x7F00 Will overflow most of the time.

[Bug target/71670] powerpc64le ICE in extract_constrain_insn with -mcpu=power9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71670 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/71670] powerpc64le ICE in extract_constrain_insn with -mcpu=power9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71670 --- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Mon Jul 4 09:52:38 2016 New Revision: 237958 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237958=gcc=rev Log: rs6000: Fix split of ashdi3_extswsli_dot for memory (PR71670) The splitter

[Bug ipa/71190] [7 Regression] ICE in assemble_variable_contents, at varasm.c:2054

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71190 --- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- In my case it only happens with "-flto=60 --param lto-partitions=60", -flto=60 alone works fine. So perhaps flto-partition=max will help reducing. (Will give it another try later today myself.)

[Bug c++/71753] New: Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71753 Bug ID: 71753 Summary: Clamp function does not work with O3 optimization Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/71752] New: [7 Regression] ICE in compute_live_loop_exits, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:229 w/ -O1 -ftree-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71752 Bug ID: 71752 Summary: [7 Regression] ICE in compute_live_loop_exits, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:229 w/ -O1 -ftree-vectorize Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

  1   2   >