[Bug tree-optimization/79997] New: simple-ssa-sprintf i18n: wrong plural form in maybe_warn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79997 Bug ID: 79997 Summary: simple-ssa-sprintf i18n: wrong plural form in maybe_warn Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #21 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On March 11, 2017 12:39:38 AM GMT+01:00, "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 > >--- Comment #17 from Thomas Koenig

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #20 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- The following fixes the warning for me: diff --git a/libgfortran/m4/reshape.m4 b/libgfortran/m4/reshape.m4 index 787844ec42d..42379d58a29 100644 --- a/libgfortran/m4/reshape.m4 +++

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #19 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- The reshape issue also happens with -O2. Thomas the issue is easily reproducible with a stage-1 cross (--target=powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu) and the attached testcase.

[Bug ipa/79848] diagnostics: too complicated %<%s%>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79848 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/79848] diagnostics: too complicated %<%s%>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79848 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Sat Mar 11 01:57:11 2017 New Revision: 246068 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246068=gcc=rev Log: Simplify uses of "%<%s%>" to "%qs" (PR translation/79848)

[Bug translation/79923] diagnostics: some diagnostics have trailing period

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79923 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Depends on|

[Bug translation/79923] diagnostics: some diagnostics have trailing period

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79923 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Sat Mar 11 01:43:48 2017 New Revision: 246067 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246067=gcc=rev Log: Remove trailing period from various diagnostic messages (PR translation/79923)

[Bug target/79925] aarch64: misplaced quote in diagnostic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79925 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/79925] aarch64: misplaced quote in diagnostic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79925 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Sat Mar 11 01:40:04 2017 New Revision: 246066 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246066=gcc=rev Log: aarch64.c: tweaks to quoting in error messages (PR target/79925) gcc/ChangeLog:

[Bug c++/79996] spurious -Wreturn-type on a function that calls a noreturn function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79996 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid See Also|

[Bug c++/79996] New: spurious -Wreturn-type on a function that calls a noreturn function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79996 Bug ID: 79996 Summary: spurious -Wreturn-type on a function that calls a noreturn function Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug ipa/79848] diagnostics: too complicated %<%s%>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79848 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/79926] i386: untranslated placeholder "exception/interrupt" in diagnostic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79926 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug target/79926] i386: untranslated placeholder "exception/interrupt" in diagnostic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79926 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/79995] Messages for iWMMXt builtins could use some cleanup

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79995 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #17 from Thomas Koenig --- On the one hand, I would like to see that libgfortran can be compiled on any platform. On the other hand, the options that I currently see (such as making the for loop into a do/while loop,

[Bug target/79995] New: Messages for iWMMXt builtins could use some cleanup

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79995 Bug ID: 79995 Summary: Messages for iWMMXt builtins could use some cleanup Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: trivial Priority: P3

[Bug c++/79994] New: Concepts technical specification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79994 Bug ID: 79994 Summary: Concepts technical specification Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug other/79991] typo in params.def, PARAM_VECT_MAX_PEELING_FOR_ALIGNMENT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79991 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/78911] [5/6 Regression] Infinite loop at -O2/O3 optimization levels while trying to compile server.c from Wine-2.0-rc2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78911 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] Infinite |[5/6 Regression] Infinite

[Bug rtl-optimization/78911] [5/6/7 Regression] Infinite loop at -O2/O3 optimization levels while trying to compile server.c from Wine-2.0-rc2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78911 --- Comment #13 from Bernd Schmidt --- Author: bernds Date: Fri Mar 10 21:17:13 2017 New Revision: 246059 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246059=gcc=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/78911 * lra-assigns.c (must_not_spill_p): New

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #16 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #15) > Created attachment 40944 [details] > Patch for reshape > > Does this fix the issues in reshape? No. The warning happens on line 266 and you patch

[Bug target/79439] Missing nop instruction after recursive call corrupts TOC register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79439 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/79439] Missing nop instruction after recursive call corrupts TOC register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79439 --- Comment #12 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Fri Mar 10 20:53:18 2017 New Revision: 246058 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246058=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2017-03-10 Michael Meissner

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #15 from Thomas Koenig --- Created attachment 40944 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40944=edit Patch for reshape Does this fix the issues in reshape?

[Bug rtl-optimization/79985] ICE in code_motion_path_driver, at sel-sched.c:6580

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985 --- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool --- Fails with -O2 -fselective-scheduling -mcpu=power8; also on BE, does not fail with power7. Confirmed.

[Bug tree-optimization/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #12 from Yanai --- It took me 5 minutes to guess that it polluted my home folder, but thanks anyway. More semi-on-topic: I have another potential bug (aside 4 others), the bug is that the compiler says there's no ::type in enable_if,

[Bug sanitizer/79993] New: ICE in tree_to_uhwi, at tree.c:7344

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79993 Bug ID: 79993 Summary: ICE in tree_to_uhwi, at tree.c:7344 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug tree-optimization/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Yanai from comment #8) > Even though I don't understand this low level prints of GCC (which I > interested in how you got them), > can you tell me how in a manner I can understand how that

[Bug tree-optimization/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug c++/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #9 from Yanai --- I don't mean step by step, but in which statement I created that lambda's storage and destroyed it, and between used it?

[Bug c++/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #8 from Yanai --- Even though I don't understand this low level prints of GCC (which I interested in how you got them), can you tell me how in a manner I can understand how that pointer pointed to an automatic storage (I assume)?

[Bug middle-end/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- [t1.cc:10:9] MEM[(struct &)[t1.cc:17:42] ] ={v} {CLOBBER}; [t1.cc:10:47] [t1.cc:10:47] MEM[(struct __lambda0 *)] = 1; [t1.cc:10:47] [t1.cc:10:47] D.35987.v = [t1.cc:24:29] &[t1.cc:24:20] MEM[(const

[Bug middle-end/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- MEM[(struct &)] ={v} {CLOBBER}; MEM[(struct __lambda0 *)] = 1; D.35987.v = [(const struct __lambda0 *)].__i; D.35988 = D.35987; D.35987 ={v} {CLOBBER}; _2 = MEM[(const int *)];

[Bug middle-end/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #5 from Yanai --- but if I still hold the lambda locally, shouldn't it point to inside the lambda's storage? See that I still hold no_pie_2 when accessing the variable that I got from it's lambda object.

[Bug middle-end/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- static auto get_wrapped_number() { return [i = 1] { return }; } This seems like you could reference a variable which has gone out of scope.

[Bug bootstrap/79952] [7 Regression] ICE in test_loading_cfg in read-rtl-function.c:2016 targeting hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 Yanai Eliyahu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yanai.eli11 at gmail dot com ---

[Bug middle-end/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Can you try -fsanitize=address -fsanitize=undefined ?

[Bug libstdc++/79511] Convertation issues in std::codecvt_utf8_utf16

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79511 --- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely --- And this is the fix for comment 3: --- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/codecvt.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/codecvt.cc @@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ namespace { static_assert(sizeof(C) >= 2, "a code unit must

[Bug middle-end/79992] New: accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 Bug ID: 79992 Summary: accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data Product: gcc Version:

[Bug middle-end/79992] accessing storage member of lambda via pointer with -no-pie causes the next function to overwrite the pointer's data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79992 --- Comment #1 from Yanai Eliyahu --- Created attachment 40943 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40943=edit the .cpp that has the bug

[Bug tree-optimization/79981] Forwprop not working for __atomic_compare_exchange_n

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79981 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Mar 10 19:47:44 2017 New Revision: 246054 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246054=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/79981 * tree-vrp.c (extract_range_basic):

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #14 from Thomas Koenig --- Author: tkoenig Date: Fri Mar 10 19:42:46 2017 New Revision: 246053 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246053=gcc=rev Log: 2017-03-10 Thomas Koenig PR libfortran/79956

[Bug driver/79875] diagnostics: missing question mark after "did you mean"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79875 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug driver/79875] diagnostics: missing question mark after "did you mean"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79875 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Fri Mar 10 19:22:35 2017 New Revision: 246047 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246047=gcc=rev Log: Add missing punctuation to message (PR driver/79875) gcc/ChangeLog: PR

[Bug c/79921] missing translation for "...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79921 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/79921] missing translation for "...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79921 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Fri Mar 10 19:09:02 2017 New Revision: 246045 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246045=gcc=rev Log: c-indentation.c: workaround xgettext limitation (PR c/79921)

[Bug bootstrap/79952] [7 Regression] ICE in test_loading_cfg in read-rtl-function.c:2016 targeting hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952 --- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law --- It does!

[Bug bootstrap/79952] [7 Regression] ICE in test_loading_cfg in read-rtl-function.c:2016 targeting hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952 --- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I was just about to test it... Results shortly :-)

[Bug bootstrap/79952] [7 Regression] ICE in test_loading_cfg in read-rtl-function.c:2016 targeting hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952 --- Comment #7 from David Malcolm --- Should be fixed by r246044. Jeff: does this fix the issue you mentioned in comment #2?

[Bug libstdc++/79511] Convertation issues in std::codecvt_utf8_utf16

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79511 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely --- I think this is the fix for comment 9: --- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/codecvt.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/codecvt.cc @@ -1483,7 +1483,11 @@ do_in(state_type&, const extern_type* __from, const

[Bug other/79991] New: typo in params.def, PARAM_VECT_MAX_PEELING_FOR_ALIGNMENT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79991 Bug ID: 79991 Summary: typo in params.def, PARAM_VECT_MAX_PEELING_FOR_ALIGNMENT Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/79952] [7 Regression] ICE in test_loading_cfg in read-rtl-function.c:2016 targeting hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Fri Mar 10 18:39:52 2017 New Revision: 246044 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246044=gcc=rev Log: Fix out-of-bounds write in RTL function reader (PR bootstrap/79952)

[Bug rtl-optimization/79985] ICE in code_motion_path_driver, at sel-sched.c:6580

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/78543] [6 Regression] ICE in push_reload, at reload.c:1349 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78543 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/79960] [5/6/7 Regression] Class template partial specializations for const volatile types don't match

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79960 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Fri Mar 10 17:35:54 2017 New Revision: 246042 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246042=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/79960 - alias templates and partial ordering * pt.c

[Bug c++/79967] ICE on non-type template argument declared noreturn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79967 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2) > It seems to be valid, clang++ accepts it and G++ too (with my patch). I don't have a strong opinion whether this should or should not be accepted but in comment

[Bug bootstrap/79771] [7 Regression] in-tree zlib breaks build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79771 --- Comment #6 from Yaakov Selkowitz --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > Do you really need even the zlib.def change? For standalone zlib, yes; if you try to export a symbol which doesn't exist, ld errors out. > That part has

[Bug testsuite/79356] XPASS in attr-alloc_size-11.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79356 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Target|s390x-*-*, powerpc*-*-*,|s390x-*-*, powerpc*-*-*,

[Bug target/79941] [7 Regression] Altivec vec_vmuleub regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79941 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/79941] [7 Regression] Altivec vec_vmuleub regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79941 --- Comment #2 from Will Schmidt --- Author: willschm Date: Fri Mar 10 16:18:44 2017 New Revision: 246040 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246040=gcc=rev Log: gcc: 2017-03-10 Will Schmidt PR target/79941

[Bug tree-optimization/78972] [5/6/7 Regression] poor x86 simd instruction scheduling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78972 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|7.0 |8.0

[Bug target/79185] [5/6/7 Regression] register allocation in the addition of two 128 bit ints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79185 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/79899] ICE in ctor_omit_inherited_parms at gcc/cp/method.c:576 on ARM target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79899 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/79896] [5/6 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:11950 on non-int128 target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79896 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] ICE in |[5/6 Regression] ICE in

[Bug tree-optimization/78972] [5/6/7 Regression] poor x86 simd instruction scheduling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78972 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |bernds at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/79967] ICE on non-type template argument declared noreturn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79967 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Mar 10 15:36:00 2017 New Revision: 246039 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246039=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/79967 * decl.c (grokdeclarator): Check ATTRLIST before

[Bug c++/79967] ICE on non-type template argument declared noreturn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79967 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/77333] Incorrect stack adjust in epilogue when targeting i686-w64-mingw32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333 --- Comment #21 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed two ways to fix this on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-03/msg00535.html (I have not yet looked at how much back-portable they are but I do not expect any

[Bug tree-optimization/77498] [7 regression] Performance drop after r239414 on spec2000/172mgrid

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77498 Thomas Preud'homme changed: What|Removed |Added CC||thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/79899] ICE in ctor_omit_inherited_parms at gcc/cp/method.c:576 on ARM target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79899 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Mar 10 15:33:04 2017 New Revision: 246038 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246038=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/79899 * optimize.c (maybe_thunk_body): Don't ICE if fns[0]

[Bug c++/79896] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:11950 on non-int128 target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79896 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Mar 10 15:28:26 2017 New Revision: 246034 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246034=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/79896 * decl.c (finish_enum_value_list): If value is

[Bug tree-optimization/79981] Forwprop not working for __atomic_compare_exchange_n

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79981 --- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > (simplify > (convert @1) > (if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@1)) > && INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type) > && (TREE_CODE (type) == BOOLEAN_TYPE > ||

[Bug testsuite/79356] XPASS in attr-alloc_size-11.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79356 --- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Fri Mar 10 15:23:06 2017 New Revision: 246032 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246032=gcc=rev Log: testsuite: attr-alloc_size-11.c (PR79356) As stated in the PR (and

[Bug bootstrap/79771] [7 Regression] in-tree zlib breaks build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79771 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Do you really need even the zlib.def change? That part has been added 5 years ago, so it would surprise me if it didn't build even with that. If that works, the gzguts.h and zlib.h changes is something we

[Bug tree-optimization/79981] Forwprop not working for __atomic_compare_exchange_n

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79981 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug libstdc++/79980] Possible bug in codecvt.cpp bitmask setting code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79980 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Apparently so is min vs max: maxcode = std::max(max_single_utf16_unit, maxcode);

[Bug target/79907] ICE in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2213 on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79907 Pat Haugen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/79907] ICE in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2213 on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79907 --- Comment #1 from Pat Haugen --- Author: pthaugen Date: Fri Mar 10 14:32:42 2017 New Revision: 246029 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246029=gcc=rev Log: PR target/79907 * config/rs6000/rs6000.c

[Bug c++/77509] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on invalid C++ code: in finish_class_member_access_expr, at cp/typeck.c:2783

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77509 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/51350] [4.7 Regression] Bogus -Wstrict-overflow warning: assuming signed overflow does not occur when assuming that (X + c) < X is always false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51350 Mic changed: What|Removed |Added CC||micwinx at web dot de --- Comment #2 from Mic

[Bug tree-optimization/77498] [7 regression] Performance drop after r239414 on spec2000/172mgrid

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77498 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Ok, so given we can't have PRE do as good as predcom and a "cost model" for PRE is out of the question for GCC 7 the following dumbs down PRE again. It does so in the very much simplest way rather than

[Bug rtl-optimization/63191] [5/6/7 Regression] 32-bit gcc uses excessive memory during dead store elimination with -fPIC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63191 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- Anyway, as far as memory consumption goes (compile time is still the same), the following patch helps a lot: --- gcc/config/i386/i386.c.jj 2017-03-07 20:04:52.0 +0100 +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.c

[Bug target/69804] [5/6] ICE with -fsanitize=undefined -fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69804 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Fri Mar 10 13:24:45 2017 New Revision: 246027 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246027=gcc=rev Log: MPX: Fix option handling. 2017-03-10 Martin Liska PR

[Bug target/65705] ICE: SIGSEGV in contains_struct_check with -fsanitize=null -fcheck-pointer-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65705 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Fri Mar 10 13:24:45 2017 New Revision: 246027 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246027=gcc=rev Log: MPX: Fix option handling. 2017-03-10 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/79891] Wrong count of line coverage in case of gcov -a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79891 --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7) > On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79891 > > > > --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---

[Bug c++/79986] [6/7 Regression][CHKP] ICE in fold_convert_loc with a flexiable array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79986 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug gcov-profile/79891] Wrong count of line coverage in case of gcov -a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79891 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79891 > > --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- > Yes, the merged is the issue, but looks

[Bug ipa/79966] [6/7 Regression] run time more than twice slower when using -fipa-cp-clone

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79966 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 CC|

[Bug gcov-profile/79891] Wrong count of line coverage in case of gcov -a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79891 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- Yes, the merged is the issue, but looks it's created at the very beginning: test.c.004t.gimple: ... : if (false_var != 0) goto ; else goto ; : ret = 111; : goto ; : ret = 999; : D.2320 =

[Bug c++/79960] [5/6/7 Regression] Class template partial specializations for const volatile types don't match

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79960 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener --- Again, changing loop exists from n == sdim to n >= sdim might help.

[Bug bootstrap/79952] [7 Regression] ICE in test_loading_cfg in read-rtl-function.c:2016 targeting hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug c++/79896] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:11950 on non-int128 target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79896 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug fortran/79886] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE in pp_format, at pretty-print.c:681

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79886 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug bootstrap/79771] [7 Regression] in-tree zlib breaks build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79771 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug c++/79652] [5/6/7 Regression] ICE on invalid c++ code in warn_extern_redeclared_static in cp/decl.c:1231

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79652 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

  1   2   >