[Bug tree-optimization/84057] [8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in can_remove_branch_p)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84057 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/84048] [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-ld.c -O0 -pie -fPIE execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84048 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/84056] map insertes a pair when check a value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84056 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse --- Where is the bug? Did you read the documentation for operator[]?

[Bug tree-optimization/84057] New: [8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in can_remove_branch_p)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84057 Bug ID: 84057 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in can_remove_branch_p) Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug c++/84056] map insertes a pair when check a value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84056 --- Comment #1 from Alper Ce --- output: a => 1 b => 2 Map after if condition(a new pair ['c':0] inserted in map!): a => 1 b => 2 c => 0

[Bug c++/84056] New: map insertes a pair when check a value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84056 Bug ID: 84056 Summary: map insertes a pair when check a value Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c/84052] Using Randomizing structure layout plugin in linux kernel compilation doesn't generate proper debuginfo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84052 --- Comment #2 from pino --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Plugins issues like this should reported to the plugin author and not to gcc. I don't know gcc internals, from my very limited understanding about gcc & that plugin, the

[Bug c++/84055] warning: ignoring attributes on template argument ‘cl_uint {aka unsigned int}’ [-Wignored-attributes]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84055 --- Comment #2 from Kip Warner --- Created attachment 43250 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43250=edit Assembly listing of minimal.cpp

[Bug c++/84055] warning: ignoring attributes on template argument ‘cl_uint {aka unsigned int}’ [-Wignored-attributes]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84055 --- Comment #1 from Kip Warner --- Created attachment 43249 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43249=edit Pre-processed intermediate form of minimal.cpp

[Bug c++/84055] New: warning: ignoring attributes on template argument ‘cl_uint {aka unsigned int}’ [-Wignored-attributes]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84055 Bug ID: 84055 Summary: warning: ignoring attributes on template argument ‘cl_uint {aka unsigned int}’ [-Wignored-attributes] Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status:

[Bug c/84054] New: seems -fno-bounds-checking no longer supported

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84054 Bug ID: 84054 Summary: seems -fno-bounds-checking no longer supported Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug testsuite/83881] FAIL: c-c++-common/Wrestrict.c -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)

++) with the following results: Running /ssd/src/gcc/git/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/dg.exp ... === g++ Summary === # of expected passes465 # of expected failures 18 /ssd/build/hppa-unknown-linux-gnu/gcc-git/gcc/xg++ version 8.0.1 20180125 (experimental) (GCC) Can you please try

[Bug c++/83911] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE with target attribute on constructor in gimplify_expr at gimplify.c:11321

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83911 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Known to work|

[Bug c/84052] Using Randomizing structure layout plugin in linux kernel compilation doesn't generate proper debuginfo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84052 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/84053] [5//6/7 Regression] missing -Warray-bounds accessing a struct array member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84053 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/84053] New: missing -Warray-bounds accessing a struct array member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84053 Bug ID: 84053 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds accessing a struct array member Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/84052] New: Using Randomizing structure layout plugin in linux kernel compilation doesn't generate proper debuginfo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84052 Bug ID: 84052 Summary: Using Randomizing structure layout plugin in linux kernel compilation doesn't generate proper debuginfo Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status:

[Bug tree-optimization/84051] [6/7/8 Regression] missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds access via an array pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84051 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/84051] New: missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds access via an array pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84051 Bug ID: 84051 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds access via an array pointer Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/56010] Powerpc, -mcpu=native and -mtune=native use the wrong name for target 7450

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56010 --- Comment #9 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #8) >> This kernel AT_PLATFORM name should strip the '+' off: >> .platform = "power7+", -> "power7" > > We probably should have a -mcpu=power7+, we have power5+

[Bug tree-optimization/84050] [6/7/8 Regression] missing -Warray-bounds accessing a struct array member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84050 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/84050] New: missing -Warray-bounds accessing a struct array member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84050 Bug ID: 84050 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds accessing a struct array member Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #39 from Mike Lothian --- I can confirm it fixes things for me too. Is that the final patch in Comment 36? If so I'll try and get the Gentoo devs to include it in the GCC ebuilds Will this be added to GCC 8.1 and 7.4? Thanks

[Bug tree-optimization/83776] [6/7/8 Regression] missing -Warray-bounds indexing past the end of a string literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83776 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor

[Bug testsuite/84049] New: libgomp.c++/for-[56].C and libgomp.c/for-[56].c take a long time to run

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84049 Bug ID: 84049 Summary: libgomp.c++/for-[56].C and libgomp.c/for-[56].c take a long time to run Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/84048] [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-ld.c -O0 -pie -fPIE execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84048 --- Comment #1 from John David Anglin --- r256935 was okay.

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #13 from Daniel Trebbien --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9) > Also, if boost::optional had a noexcept move constructor it would work fine. > This is a boost bug. > > The part of the patch addressing PR 83982 seems

[Bug libstdc++/83982] Exception guarantee of C++14 vector::resize(size_type) is not met

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83982 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Trebbien --- Created attachment 43247 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43247=edit Patch for PR 83982 alone

[Bug middle-end/84048] New: [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-ld.c -O0 -pie -fPIE execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84048 Bug ID: 84048 Summary: [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-ld.c -O0 -pie -fPIE execution test Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #12 from Daniel Trebbien --- https://wg21.link/lwg2158 looks relevant, particularly this part: "This requirement is not sufficient if an implementation is free to select copy constructor when !is_nothrow_move_constructible::value &&

[Bug c++/84045] ICE when is_nothrow_default_constructible is used before #include

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84045 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug target/84033] powerpc64le -moptimize-swaps bad code with vec_vbpermq

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84033 --- Comment #3 from Alan Modra --- Author: amodra Date: Thu Jan 25 23:57:18 2018 New Revision: 257070 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257070=gcc=rev Log: PR84033, powerpc64le -moptimize-swaps bad code with vec_vbpermq vbpermq produces its

[Bug tree-optimization/84047] [6/7/8 Regression] missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds index into an array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84047 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] missing |[6/7/8 Regression] missing

[Bug target/56010] Powerpc, -mcpu=native and -mtune=native use the wrong name for target 7450

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56010 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug libstdc++/83662] std::aligned_alloc() not available

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83662 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Adding this is simple, but I'm worried it will cause issues on Windows, where detection of that function doesn't seem to work properly (see PR 78565).

[Bug libstdc++/24537] Non-uglified names inside namespace __gnu_cxx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24537 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- char_traits shouldn't need to be uglified, because it's a reserved name anyway, due to std::char_traits. That means users can't define macros with that name. If they get ambiguities due to "using namespace

[Bug tree-optimization/84047] [6/7/8 Regression] missing -Warray-bounds on a negative offset into a string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84047 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/84047] New: missing -Warray-bounds on a negative offset into a string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84047 Bug ID: 84047 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on a negative offset into a string Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/84046] New: global zero-sized objects may have same address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84046 Bug ID: 84046 Summary: global zero-sized objects may have same address Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/83985] [8 Regression] Compile time hog for 32-bit BE powerpc targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83985 --- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool --- Ah, #c6 made me think you wanted to do something else. I didn't look close enough, sorry. That patch looks good.

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #11 from Daniel Krügler --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10) > Perhaps Daniel can comment, since he wrote the resolution of lwg 2033. > > Daniel, if the intent was that vector::resize(size_type) must only move, > even

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > I don't think your patch is correct. The whole point of the "move if > noexcept" utilities is that they handle this correctly. If the type is > nothrow

[Bug c/71501] missing warning on printf %s with a non-nul terminated string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71501 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug lto/84044] Spurious -Wodr warning with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84044 --- Comment #2 from Geoffrey Allott --- Or even simply A a;

[Bug middle-end/83959] Missing buffer overflow warning on printf %s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83959 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/84044] Spurious -Wodr warning with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84044 --- Comment #1 from Geoffrey Allott --- I discovered that in b.cpp a free function A get() { return A(); } also triggers the error. Struct B is not necessary.

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- Also, if boost::optional had a noexcept move constructor it would work fine. This is a boost bug. The part of the patch addressing PR 83982 seems right.

[Bug rtl-optimization/83985] [8 Regression] Compile time hog for 32-bit BE powerpc targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83985 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yes, I do, see #c5. Successfully bootstrapped/regtested (without go which seems to be broken right now) on powerpc64le-linux and bootstrapped on powerpc64-linux, will post once regtest (-m64/-m32) on the

[Bug c++/84045] New: ICE when is_nothrow_default_constructible is used before #include

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84045 Bug ID: 84045 Summary: ICE when is_nothrow_default_constructible is used before #include Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- I don't think your patch is correct. The whole point of the "move if noexcept" utilities is that they handle this correctly. If the type is nothrow movable, then move. Otherwise if it is copyable, then

[Bug lto/84044] New: Spurious -Wodr warning with -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84044 Bug ID: 84044 Summary: Spurious -Wodr warning with -flto Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto

[Bug debug/83758] ICE building gccgo on powerpc64le --with-cpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83758 --- Comment #25 from boger at us dot ibm.com --- A few other variations that enable it to work even with a power8 configuration: Compiling with -fdisable-ipa-cp prevents the ICE. OR Using the //go:nosplit directive before the function

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- My bisect script cannot find the commit that introduced the problem with -fno-vect-cost-model, because the build was broken for quite some time. The regression seems to have been introduced between r197671

[Bug rtl-optimization/83985] [8 Regression] Compile time hog for 32-bit BE powerpc targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83985 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #38 from Manuel Lauss --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #36) Your patch does fix my llvm issue. Thank you!

[Bug sanitizer/84043] -fsanitize=alignment leads to massive compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84043 --- Comment #2 from Johan Alfredsson --- bash> g++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/usr/local/products/gcc/7.2.0/bin/g++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/products/gcc/7.2.0/lib/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/7.2.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-suse-linux

[Bug sanitizer/84043] -fsanitize=alignment leads to massive compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84043 --- Comment #1 from Johan Alfredsson --- Created attachment 43245 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43245=edit Preprocessed source

[Bug sanitizer/84043] New: -fsanitize=alignment leads to massive compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84043 Bug ID: 84043 Summary: -fsanitize=alignment leads to massive compile time Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/84038] [7/8 Regression] powerpc-linux-gcc gets stuck building linux kernel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84038 Arnd Bergmann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/83985] [8 Regression] Compile time hog for 32-bit BE powerpc targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83985 --- Comment #7 from Arnd Bergmann --- *** Bug 84038 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug libstdc++/81122] [DR 2381] parsing f stopped after '0' when reading std::hexfloat >> f;

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81122 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |SUSPENDED Summary|parsing

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #37 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #33) > and it should work. The last case would be right now: > SI:N+1 = SI:N &~ SI:N+2; SI:N+2 = SI:N+1 &~ SI:N+3; > and is again wrong, but we could again swap: >

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #36 from Jakub Jelinek --- Ah, bmi, not bmi2. And the =r <- (r, r) alternative might be best first. --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2018-01-16 09:28:19.721432394 +0100 +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2018-01-25 20:58:18.382378827

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #35 from Jakub Jelinek --- So, what about following? --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2018-01-16 09:28:19.721432394 +0100 +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2018-01-25 20:58:18.382378827 +0100 @@ -9250,14 +9250,14 @@ (define_split })

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #34 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #33) > At least with a smarter splitter we don't really need to avoid no overlap at > all for the r <- (r, r) bmi case, we can choose which of the two 32-bit > andn's

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #31) > (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #30) > > So, I'll bootstrap: > > Maybe we can also allow <- (r,r) for BMI, to be safe (c.f. comment #23): > >

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #32 from Manuel Lauss --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #31) > (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #30) > > So, I'll bootstrap: > > Maybe we can also allow <- (r,r) for BMI, to be safe (c.f. comment #23): > >

[Bug jit/81672] trunk/gcc/jit/jit-recording.c:2852: possible missing initialiser

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81672 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug debug/83758] ICE building gccgo on powerpc64le --with-cpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83758 Bill Seurer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---

[Bug jit/81672] trunk/gcc/jit/jit-recording.c:2852: possible missing initialiser

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81672 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Thu Jan 25 19:19:29 2018 New Revision: 257066 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257066=gcc=rev Log: jit: remove some unused fields from recording::union_ (PR jit/81672)

[Bug fortran/83999] [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at fortran/trans-expr.c:10233

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83999 --- Comment #5 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- Hi Jakub, Thanks for the OK and the help in getting the padding sorted out. Committed as Committed revision 257065. Paul On 24 January 2018 at 20:26, Paul Richard Thomas

[Bug fortran/37577] [meta-bug] change internal array descriptor format for better syntax, C interop TR, rank 15

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37577 --- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Jan 25 19:09:40 2018 New Revision: 257065 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257065=gcc=rev Log: 2018-25-01 Paul Thomas PR fortran/37577 *

[Bug middle-end/84040] [8 regression] compilation time of gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-blockid.c is 50x slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84040 James Greenhalgh changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #31 from Uroš Bizjak ---

[Bug middle-end/84040] [8 regression] compilation time of gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-blockid.c is 50x slower

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84040 nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #30 from Uroš Bizjak --- So, I'll bootstrap: (define_insn "*andndi3_doubleword" [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=r,") (and:DI (not:DI (match_operand:DI 1 "register_operand" "0,r"))

[Bug tree-optimization/83819] [meta-bug] missing strlen optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83819 Bug 83819 depends on bug 71304, which changed state. Bug 71304 Summary: missing strlen optimizations after string truncation by assigning NUL https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71304 What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/71304] missing strlen optimizations after string truncation by assigning NUL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71304 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #29 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #25) > I believe for double-word pseudos the RA will not do that, CCing Vlad about > it. I start to worry about it due to allocated: 0x080a96c3 <+1347>: andn

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #28 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #23) > (The earlyclobber of non-BMI case is needed due to separate not insn). It is not needed. I have added earlyclobber in r243202 without much thought.

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #27 from Manuel Lauss --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21) > Following patch should fix the problem: > > --cut here-- > Index: i386.md > === > --- i386.md

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #26 from Mike Lothian --- Is this the patch you want us to test then: diff -ur a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2018-01-16 11:17:49.509247000 + +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #7 from Daniel Trebbien --- So as not to break testsuite/23_containers/vector/capacity/resize/moveable2.cc for C++11, I decided that it would be best to keep the use of std::__uninitialized_move_if_noexcept_a() when compiling as

[Bug libstdc++/83981] vector::resize(size_type) should not require T to be CopyInsertable when std=c++14

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981 --- Comment #6 from Daniel Trebbien --- Created attachment 43243 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43243=edit Patch for PR 83981 and PR 83982

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #24 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #22) > Wonder though if it wouldn't give the RA more choices by also including > another > <- (r, m) alternative with bmi2 isa attribute. This would be worse than r

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #23 from Uroš Bizjak --- The above patch builds on the promise, that with (=r,r,r) alternative, the register allocator won't allocate (=r1,=r2) = ~(r0,r1) & (r2,r3). This would again clobber the r1 too early: r1 = ~r0 & r2 r2 = ~r1

[Bug tree-optimization/83821] local aggregate initialization defeats strlen optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83821 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to Leslie Zhai from comment #3) In the case of mips64 (and a number of other targets) the missing optimization is due to pr83543.

[Bug tree-optimization/84042] New: IVOPTS doesn't optimize int indexes on some PowerPC code.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84042 Bug ID: 84042 Summary: IVOPTS doesn't optimize int indexes on some PowerPC code. Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek --- Will do, for now I'm including it with my normal options bootstraps (testing other patches and need the same baseline), then will try some --with-arch/--with-tune). Wonder though if it wouldn't give the RA

[Bug middle-end/51677] don't suggest giving main() __attribute__((const))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51677 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- It should be easy to white-list the main function in the -Wsuggest-attribute= checker. At the same time, I'm not sure it's necessary or that the problem is unique to main. The reasons noted in comment #0

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #21 from Uroš Bizjak --- Following patch should fix the problem: --cut here-- Index: i386.md === --- i386.md (revision 256935) +++ i386.md (working copy) @@

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #20 from Manuel Lauss --- Created attachment 43242 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43242=edit preprocessed source preprocessed source of file that contains the function "llvm::TypeInfer::EnforceSmallerThan",

[Bug target/83862] powerpc: ICE in signbit testcase

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83862 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/83862] powerpc: ICE in signbit testcase

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83862 --- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Thu Jan 25 17:36:47 2018 New Revision: 257060 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257060=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2018-01-25 Michael Meissner

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 --- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek --- Haven't managed to reproduce it e.g. with long long foo (long long *p, int q, unsigned r1, unsigned r2) { int t, u; asm ("" : "+a" (p), "+b" (q), "+d" (r1), "+c" (r2), "=S" (t), "=D" (u)); unsigned

[Bug tree-optimization/83055] [8 Regression] ICE in operator>, at profile-count.h:834

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83055 --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka --- Author: hubicka Date: Thu Jan 25 17:24:06 2018 New Revision: 257059 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257059=gcc=rev Log: PR middle-end/83055 * predict.c (drop_profile): Do not push/pop

[Bug target/81763] Issues with BMI on 32bit x86 apps on GCC 7.1+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81763 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/83985] [8 Regression] Compile time hog for 32-bit BE powerpc targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83985 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- In the end this was really caused by r241060. Not deleting unmarked insn is a bad idea, because we might not have marked any instructions it needs, so instead we need to mark such instructions as not

[Bug rtl-optimization/83985] [8 Regression] Compile time hog for 32-bit BE powerpc targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83985 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

  1   2   3   4   >