[Bug target/88497] Improve Accumulation in Auto-Vectorized Code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88497 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/88497] Improve Accumulation in Auto-Vectorized Code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88497 --- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin --- As Kelvin mentioned in the last comment, there is some thing we teach reassoc to get the below code better, although it's in low priority. double foo (double accumulator, vector double arg2[], vector double

[Bug target/89411] RISC-V backend will generate wrong instruction for longlong type like lw a3,-2048(a5)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89411 Tao Wang changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wangtao42 at huawei dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug c/65403] -Wno-error= is an error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65403 --- Comment #11 from Alex Henrie --- Created attachment 45889 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45889=edit Proposed patches I fixed up the patch from comment 4 and added a second patch with tests. Now I'm just waiting to

[Bug c++/68975] Request: Provide alternate keyword for decltype in C++03

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68975 Eric Fiselier changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/86641] Regression: non-ODR used auto class data members fail to deduce.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86641 Eric Fiselier changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/89588] New: [8/9 Regression] ICE in unroll_loop_constant_iterations, at loop-unroll.c:498

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89588 Bug ID: 89588 Summary: [8/9 Regression] ICE in unroll_loop_constant_iterations, at loop-unroll.c:498 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug c++/45065] -fvisibility-inlines-hidden: Decl order in derived class affects visibility of inlines in base.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45065 --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3) > (In reply to Dean Edmonds from comment #0) > > Compiling with -fvisibility=hidden and -fvisibility-inlines-hidden. > > > > I have a Base class with default

[Bug target/66203] aarch64-none-elf does not automatically find librdimon

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66203 --- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #4) > The Arm builds that do not need anything from libgloss (and thus do not need > a specs file) while linking come from a configuration that hard codes the >

[Bug driver/89587] New: gcc's rs6000 configuration unconditionally sets MULTIARCH_DIRNAME, even when multiarch is disabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89587 Bug ID: 89587 Summary: gcc's rs6000 configuration unconditionally sets MULTIARCH_DIRNAME, even when multiarch is disabled Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/89566] [9 Regression] ICE on compilable C++ code: in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3166

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89566 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code CC|

[Bug middle-end/61112] Simple example triggers false-positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61112 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic CC|

[Bug target/68211] Free __m128d subreg of double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68211 --- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Steven Bosscher from comment #7) > __m128d y = { x, 0 }; > return _mm_cvtsd_f64(_mm_sqrt_round_sd(y, y, > _MM_FROUND_TO_POS_INF|_MM_FROUND_NO_EXC)); I don't necessarily advocate for

[Bug middle-end/89501] Odd lack of warning about missing initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501 --- Comment #13 from ncm at cantrip dot org --- What I am getting is that the compiler is leaving that permitted optimization -- eliminating the inode check -- on the table. It is doing that not so much because it would make Linus angry, but as

[Bug c++/89585] GCC 8.3: asm volatile no longer accepted at file scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585 --- Comment #5 from Harald van Dijk --- According to , the GCC 8 backport was not supposed to break existing code, it was supposed to warn about code that would become invalid in GCC 9.

[Bug c++/89585] GCC 8.3: asm volatile no longer accepted at file scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585 Harald van Dijk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/89579] -Wclobbered warning false positive when compiling with -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89579 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/89585] GCC 8.3: asm volatile no longer accepted at file scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/89443] toplevel inline-asm with volatile after the asm is not anymore support in C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89443 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl --- Comment

[Bug c++/84605] [7/8 Regression] internal compiler error: in xref_basetypes, at cp/decl.c:13818

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84605 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] internal |[7/8 Regression] internal

[Bug c++/84605] [7/8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: in xref_basetypes, at cp/decl.c:13818

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84605 --- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: paolo Date: Mon Mar 4 23:49:23 2019 New Revision: 269378 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269378=gcc=rev Log: /cp 2019-03-04 Paolo Carlini PR c++/84605 * parser.c

[Bug middle-end/89501] Odd lack of warning about missing initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501 --- Comment #12 from Linus Torvalds --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #11) > > More generally we have considered whether or not we could eliminate the > control dependent path which leads to undefined behavior. But you have to > be

[Bug middle-end/89501] Odd lack of warning about missing initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law --- WRT c#9. Linus is right. THe condition is dynamic and we don't want to remove it in this circumstance. More generally we have considered whether or not we could eliminate the control dependent path

[Bug c++/89585] GCC 8.3: asm volatile no longer accepted at file scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585 --- Comment #2 from Harald van Dijk --- This was intentionally(!) broken in a backport, https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision=267534, which specifically adds a test that this results not even in a user-friendly error message, but a bad

[Bug libobjc/89586] warning: cast between incompatible function types when building libobjc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89586 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de

[Bug libobjc/89586] New: warning: cast between incompatible function types when building libobjc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89586 Bug ID: 89586 Summary: warning: cast between incompatible function types when building libobjc Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/89585] GCC 8.3: asm volatile no longer accepted at file scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585 --- Comment #1 from Harald van Dijk --- (Sorry, to be clear, the comment about -Wasm-ignored-qualifier is about a warning clang emits for this construct, not a GCC warning.)

[Bug c/89585] New: GCC 8.3: asm volatile no longer accepted at file scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89585 Bug ID: 89585 Summary: GCC 8.3: asm volatile no longer accepted at file scope Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/89538] [7.3.0] GCC miscompiling LLVM because of wrong vectorization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89538 --- Comment #5 from Taewook Oh --- The name of the function is "void llvm::SmallVectorTemplateBase >::grow(size_t) [with T = std::pair, const llvm::DICompositeType*>; bool = false]". I tried with GCC 7.4.0, and seems that GCC 7.4.0 doesn't

[Bug ipa/89584] New: CPU2000 degradations with r268448 (172.mgrid -22%, 252.eon -8%)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89584 Bug ID: 89584 Summary: CPU2000 degradations with r268448 (172.mgrid -22%, 252.eon -8%) Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/89544] Argument marshalling incorrectly assumes stack slots are naturally aligned.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89544 --- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger --- Created attachment 45888 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45888=edit untested patch This is an update of my previous patch, avoids the unaligned mem:DI in about the same way how a

[Bug fortran/71203] ICE in add_init_expr_to_sym, at fortran/decl.c:1512 and :1564

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71203 --- Comment #8 from Harald Anlauf --- The following obvious patch fixes the character-related issues (z1,z2,z3,z3a,z3b): Index: expr.c === --- expr.c (revision 269357) +++

[Bug libstdc++/88996] Implement P0439R0 - Make std::memory_order a scoped enumeration.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88996 --- Comment #7 from emsr at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: emsr Date: Mon Mar 4 20:11:14 2019 New Revision: 269372 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269372=gcc=rev Log: 2019-03-04 Edward Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net> PR

[Bug middle-end/89501] Odd lack of warning about missing initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501 --- Comment #10 from Linus Torvalds --- (In reply to ncm from comment #9) > What I don't understand is why it doesn't optimize away the check on > (somecondition), since it is assuming the code in the dependent block always > runs. No, it very

[Bug c++/71446] Incorrect overload resolution when using designated initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71446 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/89501] Odd lack of warning about missing initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501 ncm at cantrip dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ncm at cantrip dot org ---

[Bug c++/71446] Incorrect overload resolution when using designated initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71446 --- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Mar 4 18:57:13 2019 New Revision: 269371 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269371=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/71446 * call.c (field_in_pset): New function.

[Bug c++/89561] feature request: undefined behaviour compile-time configuration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89561 --- Comment #8 from bugsthecode at mail dot ru --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #7) > It's not possible to detect all instances of undefined behavior and emit > some "reasonable" or "safe" code (whatever that might mean in each >

[Bug c++/89550] [8/9 Regression] Spurious array-bounds warning when using __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ as a string_view

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89550 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/89561] feature request: undefined behaviour compile-time configuration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89561 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- It's not possible to detect all instances of undefined behavior and emit some "reasonable" or "safe" code (whatever that might mean in each instance), certainly not without compromising efficiency. Timing a

[Bug libstdc++/86655] std::assoc_legendre should not constrain the value of m

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86655 --- Comment #6 from emsr at gcc dot gnu.org --- Also, the legendre functions should not be onstrained on the argument x either. They are just polynomials. The recursions are numerically good in this range (|x| > 1) also.

[Bug ipa/89139] GCC emits code for static functions that aren't used by the optimized code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89139 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug debug/89498] [8/9 Regression] ICE in AT_loc_list, at dwarf2out.c:4871

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89498 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/21982] GCC should combine adjacent stdio calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21982 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug debug/89498] [8/9 Regression] ICE in AT_loc_list, at dwarf2out.c:4871

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89498 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug fortran/89574] [7/8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: in conv_function_val, at fortran/trans-expr.c:3792

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89574 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug c++/89561] feature request: undefined behaviour compile-time configuration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89561 bugsthecode at mail dot ru changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Bug c++/89579] -Wclobbered warning false positive when compiling with -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89579 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com

[Bug c++/89579] -Wclobbered warning false positive when compiling with -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89579 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/89579] -Wclobbered warning false positive when compiling with -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89579 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ada/89583] New: GNAT.Sockets.Bind_Socket fails with IPv4 address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89583 Bug ID: 89583 Summary: GNAT.Sockets.Bind_Socket fails with IPv4 address Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/89581] Unneeded stack alignment on windows x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89581 --- Comment #1 from Yichao Yu --- The problem is still there when compiled with -O2 ``` f: pushq %rbp vmovq (%r8), %xmm1 movq%rcx, %rax vmovq 8(%r8), %xmm0 vaddsd (%rdx), %xmm1, %xmm1

[Bug target/89582] New: Suboptimal code generated for floating point struct in -O3 compare to -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89582 Bug ID: 89582 Summary: Suboptimal code generated for floating point struct in -O3 compare to -O2 Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/89581] New: Unneeded stack alignment on windows x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89581 Bug ID: 89581 Summary: Unneeded stack alignment on windows x86 Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug target/88530] [8 Regression] AArch64 Unsupported options passed to assemblers when it doesn't need to.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88530 --- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina --- Author: tnfchris Date: Mon Mar 4 15:48:49 2019 New Revision: 269366 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269366=gcc=rev Log: AArch64: Make test options_set_10.c not run on native. The test

[Bug bootstrap/89560] [9 regression] ICE In function 'rtx_def* gen_vec_extract_lo_v64qi(rtx, rtx)'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89560 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 45885 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45885=edit gcc9-pr89560.patch Fix the buffer overflow. Unlike most other trees, CALL_EXPR has variable size, on 64-bit targets

[Bug bootstrap/89560] [9 regression] ICE In function 'rtx_def* gen_vec_extract_lo_v64qi(rtx, rtx)'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89560 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/89580] New: overload resolution for pointers fails to consider conversion operator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89580 Bug ID: 89580 Summary: overload resolution for pointers fails to consider conversion operator Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/89579] New: -Wclobbered warning false positive when compiling with -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89579 Bug ID: 89579 Summary: -Wclobbered warning false positive when compiling with -Og Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic,

[Bug target/89578] [9 Regression] 5% runtime regression for 481.wrf at -Ofast -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89578 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/68211] Free __m128d subreg of double

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68211 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|NEW Last reconfirmed|2016-04-19

[Bug target/89578] [9 Regression] 5% runtime regression for 481.wrf at -Ofast -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89578 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/89578] [9 Regression] 5% runtime regression for 481.wrf at -Ofast -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89578 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection

[Bug c++/89538] [7.3.0] GCC miscompiling LLVM because of wrong vectorization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89538 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- > > So I investigated further to figure out which instruction actually sets > "0x0" to the new location, and found that instruction 202aef4 below is the > one > > 202aed0: 48 c7 00 00 00 00 00 movq

[Bug target/89578] New: [9 Regression] 5% runtime regression for 481.wrf at -Ofast -flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89578 Bug ID: 89578 Summary: [9 Regression] 5% runtime regression for 481.wrf at -Ofast -flto Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/17217] not removing removal of nested structs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17217 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug tree-optimization/89437] [9 regression] incorrect result for sinl (atanl (x))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89437 Wilco changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gcov-profile/89577] In the manual, replace -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage by the simpler --coverage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89577 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/17217] not removing removal of nested structs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17217 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|WAITING --- Comment #6 from Steven

[Bug ipa/89567] [missed-optimization] Should not be initializing unused struct parameter members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89567 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #4) > > In the first excample, the interproceudral constant propagation pass > > (IPA-CP) found that foo1 is so small that copying all of it might be > > worth not

[Bug target/40072] Nonoptimal code - CMOVxx %eax,%edi; mov %edi,%eax; retq

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40072 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|NEW Last reconfirmed|2009-05-08

[Bug target/86011] Inefficient code generated for ldivmod with constant value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86011 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/83352] Missed optimization in math expression: sqrt(sqrt(a)) == pow(a, 1/4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83352 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/89569] line number is not accurate on large file gcc compared to clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89569 --- Comment #1 from David Malcolm --- I don't think the word "accurate" is right here: both gcc and clang print the wrong line number - they're just getting it wrong in different ways.

[Bug tree-optimization/65964] [meta] Operand Shortening

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65964 Bug 65964 depends on bug 14844, which changed state. Bug 14844 Summary: [tree-ssa] narrow types if wide result is not needed for unsigned types or when wrapping is true https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14844 What

[Bug middle-end/19986] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations (compared to RTL)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19986 Bug 19986 depends on bug 14844, which changed state. Bug 14844 Summary: [tree-ssa] narrow types if wide result is not needed for unsigned types or when wrapping is true https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14844 What

[Bug tree-optimization/14844] [tree-ssa] narrow types if wide result is not needed for unsigned types or when wrapping is true

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14844 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/89394] libiberty :stack overflow in nm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89394 --- Comment #5 from Cheng Wen --- So many similar cases and repetitive CVEs. This problem has been fixed before, but it has not been completely fixed. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85122

[Bug middle-end/78824] multiple add should in my opinion be optimized to multiplication

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/89576] [8/9 Regression] constexpr not working if implicitly captured in a lambda in a function template (gcc 8.3+)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89576 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug other/89394] libiberty :stack overflow in nm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89394 Cheng Wen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wcventure at 126 dot com --- Comment #4

[Bug tree-optimization/14455] Structs that cannot alias are not SRA'd

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14455 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/89577] New: In the manual, replace -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage by the simpler --coverage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89577 Bug ID: 89577 Summary: In the manual, replace -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage by the simpler --coverage Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/21982] GCC should combine adjacent stdio calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21982 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING Last reconfirmed|2006-02-05

[Bug rtl-optimization/37516] ~(-2 - a) is not being optimized into a + 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37516 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- A match.pd rule should be reasonably easy to write. Beware that ~a is not undefined but -a - 1 might be if it overflows. That is (simplify (bit_not (minus INTEGER_CST@0 @1)) (plus @1 (minus (negate

[Bug tree-optimization/63864] Missed late memory CSE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63864 --- Comment #4 from Steven Bosscher --- Code looks pretty much the same for "test_ok" and "test_slow" since GCC 6 for x86-64, and since GCC 7 for i686. GCC 6.3 x86-64: test_ok(float (*) [3], float, float, float, float, float): mulss

[Bug ipa/89567] [missed-optimization] Should not be initializing unused struct parameter members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89567 --- Comment #4 from Eyal Rozenberg --- > In the first excample, the interproceudral constant propagation pass > (IPA-CP) found that foo1 is so small that copying all of it might be > worth not passing the unused argument and so it does, that is

[Bug tree-optimization/41320] XFAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-12.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41320 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Actually reconstructing array-refs is dangerous so I think the testcase looks for something unwanted...

[Bug tree-optimization/15241] [tree-ssa] Convert a <= 7 && b <= 7 into (a | b) <= 7.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15241 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/19987] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987 Bug 19987 depends on bug 15241, which changed state. Bug 15241 Summary: [tree-ssa] Convert a <= 7 && b <= 7 into (a | b) <= 7. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15241 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/89437] [9 regression] incorrect result for sinl (atanl (x))

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89437 --- Comment #1 from Wilco --- Author: wilco Date: Mon Mar 4 12:36:04 2019 New Revision: 269364 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269364=gcc=rev Log: Fix PR89437 Fix PR89437. Fix the sinatan-1.c testcase to not run without a C99 target

[Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45144 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/89576] New: constexpr not working if implicitly captured in a lambda in a function template (gcc 8.3+)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89576 Bug ID: 89576 Summary: constexpr not working if implicitly captured in a lambda in a function template (gcc 8.3+) Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/89572] [7/8 Regression] ICE in dyn_cast(gimple*) / get_loop_exit_condition(loop const*)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89572 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Mar 4 12:23:17 2019 New Revision: 269363 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269363=gcc=rev Log: 2019-03-04 Richard Biener PR middle-end/89572 *

[Bug tree-optimization/89572] [7/8 Regression] ICE in dyn_cast(gimple*) / get_loop_exit_condition(loop const*)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89572 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Known to work|

[Bug ipa/89567] [missed-optimization] Should not be initializing unused struct parameter members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89567 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/89570] [9 Regression] ICE in prepare_cmp_insn, at optabs.c:4001

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89570 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 4 Mar 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89570 > > Jakub Jelinek changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug rtl-optimization/89575] LRA for msp430 - Max. number of generated reload insns - frame pointer subreg simplification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89575 --- Comment #2 from Jozef Lawrynowicz --- Created attachment 45883 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45883=edit reload dump

[Bug rtl-optimization/89575] LRA for msp430 - Max. number of generated reload insns - frame pointer subreg simplification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89575 --- Comment #1 from Jozef Lawrynowicz --- Created attachment 45882 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45882=edit ira dump

[Bug rtl-optimization/89575] New: LRA for msp430 - Max. number of generated reload insns - frame pointer subreg simplification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89575 Bug ID: 89575 Summary: LRA for msp430 - Max. number of generated reload insns - frame pointer subreg simplification Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

  1   2   >