[Bug c/86768] gcc wrongly decides that variable is <=1 after "while (x>1 && blah)" construct.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86768 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/79688] ICE with a RTL test-case and -O1 provided

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79688 --- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1) > Confirmed that gcc ICEs, although is 'c' really the right component? (thank you Marek for changing it to rtl-optimization in response to this)

[Bug c++/86769] g++ destroys condition variable in for statement too early

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86769 --- Comment #1 from Richard Smith --- For easy reproduction: https://godbolt.org/g/dfZFxz This does not appear to be a regression: this example appears to be miscompiled by every version of GCC back to at least 4.1.

[Bug debug/48886] VTA issues with > word size integers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48886 --- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva --- FWIW, I've just tried the testcase in the description with trunk, with -g alone and with -O2, and got a full pass on x86_64- and i686-linux-gnu.

[Bug c++/86769] New: g++ destroys condition variable in for statement too early

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86769 Bug ID: 86769 Summary: g++ destroys condition variable in for statement too early Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/86763] [8/9 Regression] Wrong code comparing member of copy of a 237 byte object with nontrivial default constructor on x86-64 arch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86763 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,

[Bug c++/86761] Code corruption with missing pointer return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761 --- Comment #5 from Hans de Jong --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3) > You can use -fsanitize-undefined-trap-on-error if you don't want to link > libubsan. Thanks, this has been very useful. I see the sanitizer doubles the

[Bug libstdc++/86751] [6/7/8 Regression] Ambiguous operator= overload for std::pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86751 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[6/7/8/9 Regression]|[6/7/8 Regression]

[Bug libstdc++/86751] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Ambiguous operator= overload for std::pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86751 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Tue Jul 31 22:31:20 2018 New Revision: 263185 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263185=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/86751 default assignment operators for std::pair The solution for PR

[Bug libstdc++/77537] [6 Regression] pair constructors do not properly SFINAE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77537 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Tue Jul 31 22:31:20 2018 New Revision: 263185 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263185=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/86751 default assignment operators for std::pair The solution for

[Bug c/86768] New: gcc wrongly decides that variable is <=1 after "while (x>1 && blah)" construct.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86768 Bug ID: 86768 Summary: gcc wrongly decides that variable is <=1 after "while (x>1 && blah)" construct. Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/86767] continue statements in constexpr functions causes unbounded looping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86767 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug c++/86767] New: continue statements in constexpr functions causes unbounded looping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86767 Bug ID: 86767 Summary: continue statements in constexpr functions causes unbounded looping Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug testsuite/86766] New: new test case c-c++-common/spec-barrier-1.c introduced in r263168 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86766 Bug ID: 86766 Summary: new test case c-c++-common/spec-barrier-1.c introduced in r263168 fails Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/59253] Python pretty printer should be improved for unique_ptr, shared_ptr and map

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59253 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Is it possible you were using a really old version of GDB that doesn't understand the display hint? def display_hint (self): return 'map' That causes GDB to display: $1 = std::map with 3

[Bug target/86763] [8/9 Regression] Wrong code comparing member of copy of a 237 byte object with nontrivial default constructor on x86-64 arch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86763 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/59253] Python pretty printer should be improved for unique_ptr, shared_ptr and map

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59253 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/86761] Code corruption with missing pointer return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Hans de Jong from comment #0) > Code runs fine on GCC, despite the warning. In C the behaviour of a non-void function that fails to return anything is only undefined if the return value is

[Bug c/86765] New: invalid -Wmisleading-indentation for double macro expansion with pragmas

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86765 Bug ID: 86765 Summary: invalid -Wmisleading-indentation for double macro expansion with pragmas Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/86764] New: missing -Wstringop-truncation writing to the last array member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86764 Bug ID: 86764 Summary: missing -Wstringop-truncation writing to the last array member Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/86763] New: Wrong code comparing member of copy of a 237 byte object with nontrivial default constructor on x86-64 arch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86763 Bug ID: 86763 Summary: Wrong code comparing member of copy of a 237 byte object with nontrivial default constructor on x86-64 arch Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0

[Bug c++/86761] Code corruption with missing pointer return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/86761] Code corruption with missing pointer return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761 --- Comment #2 from Hans de Jong --- Unfortunately option -fsanitize=undefined does not link while using the arm-none-eabi cross compiler, since a typical embedded target does not have enough memory for such run-time libraries. In order to

[Bug target/86762] New: Using -fstack-protector-all causes SIGSEV with gcc-8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86762 Bug ID: 86762 Summary: Using -fstack-protector-all causes SIGSEV with gcc-8 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug target/86758] [9 Regression] ICE in replace_stmt compiling gcc.target/i386/pr84309.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86758 --- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Testing a fix.

[Bug c++/86761] Code corruption with missing pointer return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/86761] New: Code corruption with missing pointer return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761 Bug ID: 86761 Summary: Code corruption with missing pointer return Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug target/86758] [9 Regression] ICE in replace_stmt compiling gcc.target/i386/pr84309.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86758 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/57160] short-circuit IF only with -ffrontend-optimize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57160 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid --- Comment

[Bug target/86758] [9 Regression] ICE in replace_stmt compiling gcc.target/i386/pr84309.c

Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth --- Indeed: I'm seeing the same on i386-pc-solaris2.11, happened between 20180730 (r263069) and 20180731 (r263163). Obviously caused by Richard Sandiford's recent patch series.

[Bug middle-end/86705] [7/8/9 Regression] pr45678-2.c ICE with msp430-elf -mlarge

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86705 --- Comment #2 from jozefl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: jozefl Date: Tue Jul 31 18:17:00 2018 New Revision: 263177 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263177=gcc=rev Log: PR middle-end/86705 * gcc/cfgexpand.c (set_parm_rtl):

[Bug fortran/86760] [8/9 Regression] FORTRAN: polymorphic arrays inside a user-defined type generate segmentation faults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86760 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/86760] [8/9 Regression] FORTRAN: polymorphic arrays inside a user-defined type generate segmentation faults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86760 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/86760] New: FORTRAN: polymorphic arrays inside a user-defined type generate segmentation faults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86760 Bug ID: 86760 Summary: FORTRAN: polymorphic arrays inside a user-defined type generate segmentation faults Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug sanitizer/86759] New: ThreadSanitizer: unsupported VMA range on ppc64le

--disable-libgomp --disable-libcc1 --disable-libstdcxx-pch --disable-libssp --disable-isl --disable-libmpx Thread model: posix gcc version 9.0.0 20180731 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug target/86758] [9 Regression] ICE in replace_stmt compiling gcc.target/i386/pr84309.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86758 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Target|

[Bug target/86758] New: [9 Regression] ICE in replace_stmt compiling gcc.target/i386/pr84309.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86758 Bug ID: 86758 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in replace_stmt compiling gcc.target/i386/pr84309.c Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/86741] [9 Regression] ICE in vrp_prop::check_mem_ref building glibc for i686-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86741 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 86741, which changed state. Bug 86741 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in vrp_prop::check_mem_ref building glibc for i686-gnu https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86741 What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/86757] New: [og8,nvptx] gangprivate related regressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86757 Bug ID: 86757 Summary: [og8,nvptx] gangprivate related regressions Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug libstdc++/86597] directory_entry::exist et al forget to clear the error_code.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86597 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/86756] Don't define __cpp_lib_filesystem unless --enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86756 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/86756] New: Don't define __cpp_lib_filesystem unless --enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86756 Bug ID: 86756 Summary: Don't define __cpp_lib_filesystem unless --enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/86741] [9 Regression] ICE in vrp_prop::check_mem_ref building glibc for i686-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86741 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Tue Jul 31 16:47:39 2018 New Revision: 263166 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263166=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/86741 - ICE in -Warray-bounds indexing into an object of

[Bug tree-optimization/86749] [9 Regression] Gcc miscompiles at -O3 with sse4 on valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86749 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug sanitizer/86755] New: [ASAN] Libasan failed to be build for arm with -mthumb and -fno-omit-frame-pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86755 Bug ID: 86755 Summary: [ASAN] Libasan failed to be build for arm with -mthumb and -fno-omit-frame-pointer Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/77328] incorrect caret location in -Wformat calling printf via a macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77328 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||7.3.0, 8.2.0, 9.0 --- Comment #3 from

[Bug debug/86687] Wrong debug information for string types passed as parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86687 --- Comment #10 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Tue Jul 31 15:37:11 2018 New Revision: 263164 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263164=gcc=rev Log: [c++] Fix DECL_BY_REFERENCE of clone parms Consider test.C compiled at -O0 -g: ...

[Bug c++/86738] [8/9 Regression] gcc 8.2: Internal compiler error memcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86738 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug libstdc++/67791] Crash using std::thread and iostream with dynamic loading of a shared library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67791 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Link your main executable with libpthread.so

[Bug target/86735] [8/9 Regression] Bad wrong-code bug with "-march=skylake-avx512 -Ofast"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86735 --- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #11) > Thanks for the explanation. Note that > > % gfcp pr86735.f90 -Ofast -march=skylake -Wall -Wextra -fcheck=all That probably just means that

[Bug libstdc++/67791] Crash using std::thread and iostream with dynamic loading of a shared library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67791 Andreas G changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andreas.go...@tu-dresden.de --- Comment #5

[Bug debug/77589] [6/7 Regression] fortran: Missing DW_AT_byte_stride for an array record field selection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77589 --- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > AFAIK Kevin Buettner has the GDB support for it pretty much written but not > yet submitted. Mentioned this at

[Bug target/86735] [8/9 Regression] Bad wrong-code bug with "-march=skylake-avx512 -Ofast"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86735 --- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > If you build for haswell or skylake architecture, that executable will > not run on ivybridge, of course. Thanks for the explanation. Note that % gfcp pr86735.f90 -Ofast -march=skylake -Wall

[Bug target/86735] [8/9 Regression] Bad wrong-code bug with "-march=skylake-avx512 -Ofast"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86735 --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #8) > On x86_64-apple-darwin17 without access to avx512, I see > >[..] > > Is this the same bug or should I file a new one? That is not a bug at

[Bug target/86735] [8/9 Regression] Bad wrong-code bug with "-march=skylake-avx512 -Ofast"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86735 --- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #8) > On x86_64-apple-darwin17 without access to avx512, I see > > Is this the same bug or should I file a new one? Please file a new one.

[Bug target/86735] [8/9 Regression] Bad wrong-code bug with "-march=skylake-avx512 -Ofast"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86735 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres --- On x86_64-apple-darwin17 without access to avx512, I see % gfcp pr86735.f90 -Ofast -march=skylake % ./a.out 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

[Bug target/86640] [8/9 regression] ICE in combine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86640 --- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Tue Jul 31 14:01:29 2018 New Revision: 263114 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263114=gcc=rev Log: arm: Testcase for PR86640 gcc/testsuite/ PR target/86640 *

[Bug fortran/86754] [meta-bug] Memory leaks at run time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86754 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/86754] New: [meta-bug] Memory leaks at run time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86754 Bug ID: 86754 Summary: [meta-bug] Memory leaks at run time Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug target/86753] gcc.target/aarch64/sve/vcond_[45].c fail after recent combine patch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86753 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||aarch64-linux-gnu

[Bug target/50077] large model (-mcmodel=large) is broken on *86*-apple-darwin*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50077 --- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #2) > clang seems to support -mcmodel=large - at least at 3.1 - so any necessary > ld64/dyld support is available. That's an incorrect assumption on my part, although

[Bug target/86753] New: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/vcond_[45.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86753 Bug ID: 86753 Summary: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/vcond_[45.c Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug target/86752] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-cvt-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86752 Bug ID: 86752 Summary: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-cvt-2.c Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug libstdc++/86751] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Ambiguous operator= overload for std::pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86751 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug fortran/25829] [F03] Asynchronous IO support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/86749] [9 Regression] Gcc miscompiles at -O3 with sse4 on valid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86749 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target|

[Bug c++/86747] [8/9 Regression] rejects-valid with redundant friend declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86747 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Priority|P3

[Bug libstdc++/86751] New: Ambiguous operator= overload for std::pair

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86751 Bug ID: 86751 Summary: Ambiguous operator= overload for std::pair Product: gcc Version: 7.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/86730] use of deleted copy constructor (I am not using it)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86730 --- Comment #2 from Asif --- Hi, thanks for the quick update, I will consider this issue resolved. "if a converting constructor was used, is then used to direct-initialize the object" (I am using this in my code, thought that this was getting

[Bug target/81733] stage1 libgcc_s.dylib fails to link on Darwin 11/x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81733 --- Comment #17 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe --- [...] > I am going to suggest that this is dup-ed to 81033 (and please try the revised > patch there - I already checked it's OK on x86-64-linux

[Bug gcov-profile/83200] Unable to manipulate (prefix, strip) coverage/profile data file (.gcda) paths at compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83200 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85338] [GCOV] Type conversion leads to incorrect coverage in printf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85338 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85372] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with setjmp and longjmp function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85372 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85350] [GCOV] wrong coverage when using constant variable in struct declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85350 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/83813] [GCOV] unsigned char in a union lead to incorrect coverage in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83813 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 Bug 63426 depends on bug 86653, which changed state. Bug 86653 Summary: UBSAN error: cp/parser.c:11760:19: runtime error: load of value 10, which is not a valid value for type 'bool' https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86653

[Bug c++/86653] UBSAN error: cp/parser.c:11760:19: runtime error: load of value 10, which is not a valid value for type 'bool'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86653 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85217] [GCOV] A no side effect statement between a break statement and a continue statement will lead to incorrect code coverage in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85217 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/84758] Wrong coverage for quite simple CFG

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84758 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85370] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with the target_clones attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85370 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85332] [GCOV] wrong coverage with do-while in switch-case statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85332 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/85350] [GCOV] wrong coverage when using constant variable in struct declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85350 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:34:36 2018 New Revision: 263113 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263113=gcc=rev Log: GCOV: add cache for streamed locations. 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/85372] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with setjmp and longjmp function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85372 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:34:36 2018 New Revision: 263113 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263113=gcc=rev Log: GCOV: add cache for streamed locations. 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/85338] [GCOV] Type conversion leads to incorrect coverage in printf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85338 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:34:36 2018 New Revision: 263113 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263113=gcc=rev Log: GCOV: add cache for streamed locations. 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/85332] [GCOV] wrong coverage with do-while in switch-case statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85332 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:33:21 2018 New Revision: 263111 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263111=gcc=rev Log: Fix GCOV CFG related issues. 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/85370] [GCOV] Wrong coverage with the target_clones attribute

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85370 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:34:02 2018 New Revision: 263112 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263112=gcc=rev Log: Fix target clones (PR gcov-profile/85370). 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/84758] Wrong coverage for quite simple CFG

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84758 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:33:21 2018 New Revision: 263111 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263111=gcc=rev Log: Fix GCOV CFG related issues. 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/83813] [GCOV] unsigned char in a union lead to incorrect coverage in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83813 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:33:21 2018 New Revision: 263111 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263111=gcc=rev Log: Fix GCOV CFG related issues. 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug gcov-profile/85217] [GCOV] A no side effect statement between a break statement and a continue statement will lead to incorrect code coverage in gcov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85217 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:33:21 2018 New Revision: 263111 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263111=gcc=rev Log: Fix GCOV CFG related issues. 2018-07-31 Martin Liska PR

[Bug c++/86740] [8/9 Regression] ICE with hana and nested lambdas (likely a regression, tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15325)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86740 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, |

[Bug c++/86653] UBSAN error: cp/parser.c:11760:19: runtime error: load of value 10, which is not a valid value for type 'bool'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86653 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue Jul 31 10:32:13 2018 New Revision: 263110 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263110=gcc=rev Log: Fix an UBSAN error in cp/parse.c (PR c++/86653). 2018-07-31 Martin Liska

[Bug libstdc++/60555] std::system_category().default_error_condition() doesn't map system errno values to std::generic_category()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60555 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/60555] std::system_category().default_error_condition() doesn't map system errno values to std::generic_category()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60555 --- Comment #9 from Niall Douglas --- Transferring over from #86750: --- cut --- Got bitten by this yet again today in Boost.Outcome and the P1031 LLFIO reference implementation, so despite it being already reported at #60555, I'd like to get

[Bug debug/77589] [6/7 Regression] fortran: Missing DW_AT_byte_stride for an array record field selection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77589 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yes, since r251949, because gfortran changed ABI. That doesn't mean DW_OP_GNU_variable_value isn't emitted in other cases, and AFAIK Kevin Buettner has the GDB support for it pretty much written but not yet

[Bug libstdc++/86750] libstdc++ std::system_category() does not map onto std::generic_category()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86750 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/60555] std::system_category().default_error_condition() doesn't map system errno values to std::generic_category()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60555 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- *** Bug 86750 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug debug/77589] [6/7 Regression] fortran: Missing DW_AT_byte_stride for an array record field selection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77589 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9

[Bug libstdc++/60555] std::system_category().default_error_condition() doesn't map system errno values to std::generic_category()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60555 Niall Douglas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||s_gccbugzilla at nedprod dot com ---

[Bug libstdc++/86750] New: libstdc++ std::system_category() does not map onto std::generic_category()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86750 Bug ID: 86750 Summary: libstdc++ std::system_category() does not map onto std::generic_category() Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

  1   2   >