[Bug tree-optimization/85935] New: [8/9 Regression] [graphite] ICE in extract_affine, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:287

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85935 Bug ID: 85935 Summary: [8/9 Regression] [graphite] ICE in extract_affine, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:287 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/71144] [6/7/8/9 Regression] isl_aff.c:1001: position out of bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71144 --- Comment #9 from Arseny Solokha --- I can reproduce ICEs w/ C testcases from comments 0 and 2 only w/ gcc 6.3. I believe the issue is fixed on 7 and all newer branches.

[Bug tree-optimization/85934] New: [8/9 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: type mismatch in vector pack expression)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85934 Bug ID: 85934 Summary: [8/9 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: type mismatch in vector pack expression) Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/85786] [8/9 Regression] Segfault in associated intrinsic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85786 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/85786] [8/9 Regression] Segfault in associated intrinsic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85786 --- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 22:06:57 2018 New Revision: 260784 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260784=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug target/85915] -mfunction-return=thunk causes multiple definition of `__x86_return_thunk'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85915 --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis from comment #5) > Do you know numbers of relevant revisions which I could locally backport to > GCC 7.3.0? You should use GCC 7 branch.

[Bug fortran/85786] [8/9 Regression] Segfault in associated intrinsic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85786 --- Comment #13 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 21:57:24 2018 New Revision: 260783 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260783=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 --- Comment #4 from Nick Desaulniers --- Thanks for the clarification.

[Bug libfortran/85906] Conditional jump depends on uninitialized value in write_decimal / write_integer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85906 --- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle --- After checking for possible other execution paths, it looks like the proposed patch will work fine. It is more obvious then that, the fnode is a local declaration. I will commit this one as "obvious" after

[Bug target/85915] -mfunction-return=thunk causes multiple definition of `__x86_return_thunk'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85915 --- Comment #5 from Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis --- Do you know numbers of relevant revisions which I could locally backport to GCC 7.3.0?

[Bug libstdc++/85930] Misaligned reference created in shared_ptr_base.h with -fno-rtti

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85930 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Maybe the easiest fix is to mark __tag as aligned to alignof (type_info). static constexpr _Sp_make_shared_tag __tag;

[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I don't see the issue with the ud2 instruction here. The only valid thing is for basic inline-asm statements in the functions which have the naked attribute. It is undefined if using anything besides basic

[Bug middle-end/85933] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/sso/p8.c -O3 -finline-functions (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85933 Bug ID: 85933 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/sso/p8.c -O3 -finline-functions (internal compiler error) Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/85932] New: GCC incorrectly rejects mismatch of types, instead of retrying after type deduction.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85932 Bug ID: 85932 Summary: GCC incorrectly rejects mismatch of types, instead of retrying after type deduction. Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/57627] -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess should make an exception for character types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57627 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug target/85900] [9 Regression] ICEs after revision r260547 on darwin.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85900 --- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > A patch is posted at > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-05/msg01495.html This patch fixes the ICE and related problems I have spotted. Full testing in progress. Thanks.

[Bug c/85931] -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess for strncpy with size of source

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85931 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic See Also|

[Bug c++/85815] [7/8/9 Regression] incorrect "invalid use of incomplete type" in a lambda on valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85815 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Fri May 25 21:03:07 2018 New Revision: 260782 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260782=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/85815 - reference to member of enclosing template. *

[Bug c/85931] New: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess for strncpy with size of source

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85931 Bug ID: 85931 Summary: -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess for strncpy with size of source Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/85896] ICE in gfc_convert_constant(): Unexpected type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85896 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/85929] _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS, subscript type mismatch, and std::vector bounds check elimination

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85929 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- With size_type = unsigned long, the bounds check turns out to be exactly the same test as the loop exit check, and FRE3 gets rid of it. With size_type = unsigned int, it is harder. We have roughly long int

[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 --- Comment #2 from Nick Desaulniers --- Sorry, probably: __attribute__((naked)) unsigned long save_flags4(void) { asm volatile("pushf; pop %rax;ret;"); } is a better example: : 0: 9c pushfq

[Bug libstdc++/85930] New: Misaligned reference created in shared_ptr_base.h with -fno-rtti

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85930 Bug ID: 85930 Summary: Misaligned reference created in shared_ptr_base.h with -fno-rtti Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/85895] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3518

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85895 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/85895] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3518

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85895 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 20:02:05 2018 New Revision: 260778 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260778=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug fortran/85543] ICE in update_current_proc_array_outer_dependency, at fortran/resolve.c:3060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85543 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/85780] ICE in resolve_fl_procedure, at fortran/resolve.c:12504

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/85779] ICE in gfc_typename, at fortran/misc.c:156

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85779 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/85780] ICE in resolve_fl_procedure, at fortran/resolve.c:12504

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 19:54:51 2018 New Revision: 260777 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260777=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug fortran/85779] ICE in gfc_typename, at fortran/misc.c:156

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85779 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 19:45:57 2018 New Revision: 260776 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260776=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug middle-end/85929] New: _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS, subscript type mismatch, and std::vector bounds check elimination

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85929 Bug ID: 85929 Summary: _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS, subscript type mismatch, and std::vector bounds check elimination Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/85543] ICE in update_current_proc_array_outer_dependency, at fortran/resolve.c:3060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85543 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 19:38:11 2018 New Revision: 260775 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260775=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug target/85915] -mfunction-return=thunk causes multiple definition of `__x86_return_thunk'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85915 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis from comment #3) > If you claim that it is a bug in GCC 7.3.0, then please try to fix it in GCC > 7.4.0, preferably without breaking ABI compatilibity... Please

[Bug fortran/85543] ICE in update_current_proc_array_outer_dependency, at fortran/resolve.c:3060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85543 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 19:24:06 2018 New Revision: 260774 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260774=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug target/85915] -mfunction-return=thunk causes multiple definition of `__x86_return_thunk'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85915 --- Comment #3 from Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis --- If you claim that it is a bug in GCC 7.3.0, then please try to fix it in GCC 7.4.0, preferably without breaking ABI compatilibity...

[Bug target/85915] -mfunction-return=thunk causes multiple definition of `__x86_return_thunk'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85915 --- Comment #2 from Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis --- I have firstly rebuilt glibc with GCC 8.1.0 without -mfunction-return=thunk and at that time GCC 7.3.0 and 8.1.0 were working. Next I have rebuilt glibc with GCC 8.1.0 with

[Bug tree-optimization/85712] [8/9 Regression] ICE in all_phi_incrs_profitable_1 at gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c:3479

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85712 --- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt --- Patch from c#6 corrects a problem discovered when backporting to GCC 6. With the two patches, no regressions are seen in trunk, 8, 7, or 6.

[Bug fortran/85779] ICE in gfc_typename, at fortran/misc.c:156

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85779 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 19:13:50 2018 New Revision: 260773 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260773=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug tree-optimization/85712] [8/9 Regression] ICE in all_phi_incrs_profitable_1 at gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c:3479

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85712 --- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt --- Author: wschmidt Date: Fri May 25 19:12:16 2018 New Revision: 260772 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260772=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Bill Schmidt PR

[Bug fortran/85780] ICE in resolve_fl_procedure, at fortran/resolve.c:12504

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 19:05:52 2018 New Revision: 260771 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260771=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug target/85918] Conversions to/from [unsigned] long long are not vectorized for AVX512DQ target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85918 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/85895] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3518

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85895 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 18:57:04 2018 New Revision: 260770 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260770=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug fortran/85895] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:3518

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85895 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 18:40:13 2018 New Revision: 260769 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260769=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug fortran/85780] ICE in resolve_fl_procedure, at fortran/resolve.c:12504

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 18:28:51 2018 New Revision: 260768 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260768=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug fortran/85779] ICE in gfc_typename, at fortran/misc.c:156

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85779 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 18:17:35 2018 New Revision: 260767 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260767=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug other/85928] New: Misplaced references to some options in info page in Option Index

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85928 Bug ID: 85928 Summary: Misplaced references to some options in info page in Option Index Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug web/85916] GCC 8 Changes page has outdated mention of -mibt, -mcet and maybe -mshstk

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85916 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis from comment #2) > A space is missing between "-fcf-protection" and "option" in this sentence: > """ > GCC now supports the Intel Control-flow Enforcement

[Bug web/85916] GCC 8 Changes page has outdated mention of -mibt, -mcet and maybe -mshstk

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85916 --- Comment #2 from Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis --- A space is missing between "-fcf-protection" and "option" in this sentence: """ GCC now supports the Intel Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) extension through

[Bug fortran/85543] ICE in update_current_proc_array_outer_dependency, at fortran/resolve.c:3060

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85543 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Fri May 25 18:04:42 2018 New Revision: 260766 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260766=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug libfortran/85906] Conditional jump depends on uninitialized value in write_decimal / write_integer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85906 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/85927] New: ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 Bug ID: 85927 Summary: ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug bootstrap/85922] bootstrapping fails with -O3 because gcc 8.1.0 generates unknown instruction pshufb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85922 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Fri, 25 May 2018, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Beyond that, #defining macros that match known attributes to something else > seems like asking for trouble. It even came up at the

[Bug libstdc++/85768] [9 Regression] FreeBSD bootstrap fails due to undefined reference to 'backtrace'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85768 --- Comment #6 from Gerald Pfeifer --- (In reply to François Dumont from comment #4) > I wonder if this patch could fix the bootstrap ? I try to avoid the usage of > backtrace during bootstrap. The problem will then be limited to usage of >

[Bug c++/80485] rejects-valid: constexpr static_cast of pointer-to-member-function to bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80485 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Fri May 25 16:44:55 2018 New Revision: 260762 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260762=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/80485 - inline function non-zero address. * symtab.c

[Bug libstdc++/85768] [9 Regression] FreeBSD bootstrap fails due to undefined reference to 'backtrace'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85768 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Fri May 25 16:40:55 2018 New Revision: 260761 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260761=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 François Dumont PR libstdc++/85768

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/85873] [8/9 regression] GCC omits array constant in .rodata causing a segmentation fault.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85873 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|wrong-code |missed-optimization Depends on|

[Bug c++/85790] c++17 - Access control issue with template argument deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85790 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #14 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Fri, 25 May 2018, gcc at mailinator dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/install/ doesn't say anything about make headers_install. That's because it's not part of installing GCC, it's

[Bug libstdc++/85768] [9 Regression] FreeBSD bootstrap fails due to undefined reference to 'backtrace'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85768 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- Created attachment 44187 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44187=edit Remove backtrace usage during bootstrap. I wonder if this patch could fix the bootstrap ? I try to avoid the usage

[Bug libfortran/85906] Conditional jump depends on uninitialized value in write_decimal / write_integer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85906 --- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle --- (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > I've added Jerry to the CC as he's probably the most familiar with > this area of the library. Jerry, does this one-line patch look > correct or are there deeper issues

[Bug web/85917] GCC 8 Changes page fails to mention change of default mode for C

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85917 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- The difference between -std=gnu11 and -std=gnu17 is not meant to be significant, since apart from the __STDC_VERSION__ change C17 is purely a bug-fix version and so there are no other

[Bug sanitizer/85924] [6 Regression] ASAN: segfault in __interceptor_clock_gettime ( because 'asan_linux.o' for libasan.a built with -DPIC )

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85924 --- Comment #1 from Jason Vas Dias --- Aha! Sorry, it appears that when run from command line, just the -fPIC option appears, not the -DPIC, but in my make.log for the original GCC build, I do see: checking for shl_load in -ldld... libtool:

[Bug c++/85278] [concepts] Garbled diagnostic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85278 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/85901] Error message contains "#'offset_type' not supported by simple_type_specifier#)#'offset_type' not supported by direct_abstract_declarator#"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85901 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/85840] Memory leak in write.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85840 --- Comment #9 from Joshua Cogliati --- Looking at write.c, there are multiple places where things like the pattern: result = select_string (dtp, f, str_buf, _len, kind); ... get_float_string (dtp, f, source , kind, 0, buffer,

[Bug c++/85842] [8/9 Regression] Bogus -Wreturn-type with generic lambda and constexpr if

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85842 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/85840] Memory leak in write.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85840 --- Comment #8 from Joshua Cogliati --- Created attachment 44186 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44186=edit Patch by keeping original length This patches the problem by storing the allocated length in a separate variable.

[Bug fortran/85840] Memory leak in write.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85840 --- Comment #7 from Joshua Cogliati --- Created attachment 44185 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44185=edit Patch by checking against original buffer This is one possible patch for this problem, it just checks if the buffer

[Bug rtl-optimization/83628] [8 Regression] performance regression when accessing arrays on alpha

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83628 --- Comment #12 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Fri May 25 13:56:16 2018 New Revision: 260760 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260760=gcc=rev Log: PR target/83628 * config/alpha/alpha.md (ashlsi3): New

[Bug c++/85926] New: feature request: more fine-grained Wno-ignored-attributes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85926 Bug ID: 85926 Summary: feature request: more fine-grained Wno-ignored-attributes Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/85903] [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512dq-vcvtuqq2pd-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85903 --- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Fri May 25 13:39:55 2018 New Revision: 260759 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260759=gcc=rev Log: * config/i386/sse.md (cvtusi264): Add {q} suffix to insn

[Bug target/85903] [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512dq-vcvtuqq2pd-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85903 --- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Fri May 25 13:38:13 2018 New Revision: 260758 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260758=gcc=rev Log: * config/i386/sse.md (cvtusi264): Add {q} suffix to insn

[Bug c/85923] invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 --- Comment #7 from Sami Kantoluoto --- Yes, that seems to fix it: .skipblk: .LFB0: movq_ctype_tab_ptr(%rip), %r8 xorl%eax, %eax .L2: movq(%rdi), %rdx movq(%r8), %rsi movzbl (%rdx), %ecx

[Bug rtl-optimization/85925] [7/8/9 Regression] Mis-compilation at -02, masking with 257 goes wrong in combine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85925 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target|

[Bug c/85925] New: [ARM][7/8/9 Regression] Mis-compilation at -02, masking with 257 goes wrong in combine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85925 Bug ID: 85925 Summary: [ARM][7/8/9 Regression] Mis-compilation at -02, masking with 257 goes wrong in combine Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/85923] invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Does -fno-strict-aliasing fix this? I suspect the issue is the pointers types "char*" and "unsigned char*" are considered to be different aliasing groups (which is correct) and that is causing gcc to output

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 25 May 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 > > --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #11) > Maybe it was changed to this to make translation easier? No other code has similar wording of a translatable message, and for translators it is beneficial

[Bug target/85832] [AVX512] possible shorter code when comparing with vector of zeros

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85832 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri May 25 12:36:03 2018 New Revision: 260756 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260756=gcc=rev Log: PR target/85832 * config/i386/sse.md (_eq3_1): Add

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 25 May 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 > > --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- > Or just get rid of the bogus variable. >

[Bug c++/67259] list-initialization of a reference fails to initialize char array from string literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67259 Miguel Ojeda changed: What|Removed |Added CC||miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Or just get rid of the bogus variable. const char *noinline = "noinline"; if (DECL_DECLARED_INLINE_P (newdecl) && DECL_UNINLINABLE (olddecl) && lookup_attribute (noinline, DECL_ATTRIBUTES

[Bug c/85923] invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 --- Comment #5 from Sami Kantoluoto --- When compiled with $ gcc-arm-none-eabi-4_6-2012q4/bin/arm-none-eabi-gcc -v -save-temps -Wall -Werror -Os -c skipblk.c -o skipblk.o The following assembly is generated: skipblk: @ Function

[Bug target/85805] Improper code generation for 64 bit comparisons on avr-gcc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85805 --- Comment #4 from Sandor Zsuga --- I tried it with the package offered by Microchip, which has avr-gcc 5.4.0, the behavior is the same, bug is present.

[Bug c/85923] invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 --- Comment #4 from Sami Kantoluoto --- Created attachment 44184 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44184=edit generated arm asm code

[Bug c/85923] invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 --- Comment #3 from Sami Kantoluoto --- When compiled with: $ gcc-arm-none-eabi-7-2017-q4-major/bin/arm-none-eabi-gcc -v -save-temps -Wall -Werror -Os -c skipblk.c -o skipblk.o The following assembly is generated: skipblk: @ Function

[Bug sanitizer/85924] New: [6 Regression] ASAN: segfault in __interceptor_clock_gettime ( because 'asan_linux.o' for libasan.a built with -DPIC )

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85924 Bug ID: 85924 Summary: [6 Regression] ASAN: segfault in __interceptor_clock_gettime ( because 'asan_linux.o' for libasan.a built with -DPIC ) Product: gcc

[Bug c/85923] invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 --- Comment #2 from Sami Kantoluoto --- Created attachment 44183 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44183=edit generated x86 asm code

[Bug c/85923] invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 --- Comment #1 from Sami Kantoluoto --- Created attachment 44182 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44182=edit stripped preprocessed source

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug bootstrap/85922] bootstrapping fails with -O3 because gcc 8.1.0 generates unknown instruction pshufb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85922 John Simon changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |FIXED --- Comment #2 from John Simon ---

[Bug c/85923] New: invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85923 Bug ID: 85923 Summary: invalid code generation when incrementing pointer referenced by pointer Product: gcc Version: 7.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #8 from John Simon --- https://gcc.gnu.org/install/ doesn't say anything about make headers_install. How/Where to do this? If this is appropriate then it is much better than manually patching anything. In this case I'd still

[Bug target/85915] -mfunction-return=thunk causes multiple definition of `__x86_return_thunk'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85915 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug web/85916] GCC 8 Changes page has outdated mention of -mibt, -mcet and maybe -mshstk

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85916 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/85900] [9 Regression] ICEs after revision r260547 on darwin.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85900 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3) > Revision r260683 fixes the ICE for the test gcc.dg/torture/pr48044.c, but > not for the second one in comment 0: A patch is posted at

[Bug bootstrap/85921] /gcc/c-family/c-warn.c fails to build

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85921 --- Comment #7 from Andreas Schwab --- (In reply to John Simon from comment #3) > The include chain is: > > # 415 "../../gcc-8.1.0/gcc/system.h" > <-- "/usr/include/signal.h" > <-- "/usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h" >

  1   2   >