[Bug c++/90190] [8 regression] CTAD confuses with {one element} initializer_list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90190 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug c++/90190] [8 regression] CTAD confuses with {one element} initializer_list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90190 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/90227] [9 Regression] trunk rejects polymake since r269965

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90227 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug c++/90227] New: [9 Regression] trunk rejects polymake since r269965

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90227 Bug ID: 90227 Summary: [9 Regression] trunk rejects polymake since r269965 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug d/90079] SEGV in _aaKeys, _aaValues on 32-bit SPARC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90079 --- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #6 from Iain Buclaw --- > It ended up being a little more work, as the proposed patch had a bug in it. No wonder given that I just started with D ;-) > But it's now

[Bug c++/90201] -Werror=useless-cast in move constructir

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90201 --- Comment #2 from Dima Pro --- without -Werror=useless-cast no warning for this code at all.(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > N.B. This is a warning, not an error. Reporting that you get an error > because you turned it into an

[Bug c/85608] ubsan in cse.c:2194

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85608 --- Comment #4 from David Binderman --- Still going wrong in revision 270500. Here is a stack backtrace: ../../trunk/gcc/cse.c:2215:34: runtime error: signed integer overflow: 1 - -9223 372036854775807 cannot be represented in type 'long int'

[Bug d/90130] gdc.test/runnable/test12.d FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90130 --- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw --- > I think it should be done in r270485. Indeed. It works fine on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and sparc-sun-solaris2.11 with gas. I do get BUS errors in

[Bug c++/90173] [9 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in strip_declarator_types)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90173 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug middle-end/85164] poly-int.h:845:5: runtime error: signed integer overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85164 --- Comment #19 from David Binderman --- For ./c-c++-common/Warray-bounds-2.c ../../trunk/gcc/poly-int.h:1107:5: runtime error: signed integer overflow: 8 * -9223372036854775796 cannot be represented in type 'long int' #0 0x2ddd587 in

[Bug c++/90170] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in unify, at cp/pt.c:22209

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90170 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||error-recovery Priority|P3

[Bug translation/90149] diagnostics containing BIT_FIELD_REF don't conform to diagnostics guideline

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90149 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- IMNSHO the IL checker "errors" should continue to use GCC terms since they check the GIMPLE intermediate language. They also shouldn't necessarily be translated (though they may end up user-facing if they

[Bug libffi/90146] Add support for NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90146 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Note that libffi has a different upstream (but we've not updated since quite some time)

[Bug middle-end/85164] poly-int.h:845:5: runtime error: signed integer overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85164 --- Comment #18 from David Binderman --- (In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #14) > Yeah, the patch I committed fixed two separate instances of > undefined overflow, but I think there are a lot more left. Excellent results so far,

[Bug c++/90215] [8/9 Regression] ICE with lambda in fold expression over comma and assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90215 --- Comment #3 from Vittorio Romeo --- Changing the lambda to the following std::apply([](auto&... ys) { (xs.f([](auto y) { ys = y; }), ...); }, t); produces a different ICE: :20:9:

[Bug middle-end/90075] [7/8 Regression] [AArch64] ICE during RTL pass when member of union passed to copysignf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90075 --- Comment #6 from Richard Earnshaw --- (In reply to ramana.radhakrish...@arm.com from comment #5) > For the release branches, I think backporting your patch (and any followups > , do you remember any ?) should be fine and we should just do it

[Bug libstdc++/90222] Speculative execution data leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90222 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- I already said GCC 6.x is not supported in PR 88673

[Bug libstdc++/90223] Speculative execution data leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90223 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- I already said GCC 6.x is not supported in PR 88673

[Bug libstdc++/90225] Resource leak..

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90225 --- Comment #2 from Venkatesh Prabhu --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > This is the same nonsense as PR 90224, please stop. Sorry for the trouble. Thanks a lot for quicker response.

[Bug libstdc++/90225] Resource leak..

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90225 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/90222] Speculative execution data leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90222 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/90223] Speculative execution data leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90223 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/90224] Resource leak..

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90224 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/90225] New: Resource leak..

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90225 Bug ID: 90225 Summary: Resource leak.. Product: gcc Version: 6.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee:

[Bug target/90226] New: ICE in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7994

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90226 Bug ID: 90226 Summary: ICE in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7994 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/90220] std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- The first example compiles OK on trunk now, the second isn't fixed yet.

[Bug libstdc++/90224] New: Resource leak..

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90224 Bug ID: 90224 Summary: Resource leak.. Product: gcc Version: 6.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee:

[Bug libstdc++/90221] Resource leak in object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90221 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/90223] New: Speculative execution data leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90223 Bug ID: 90223 Summary: Speculative execution data leak Product: gcc Version: 6.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug libstdc++/90220] std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Wed Apr 24 09:46:07 2019 New Revision: 270538 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270538=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/90220 Fix std::any_cast for function pointers PR

[Bug libstdc++/90222] New: Speculative execution data leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90222 Bug ID: 90222 Summary: Speculative execution data leak Product: gcc Version: 6.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug target/90187] [8 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2304 x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90187 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE in |[8 Regression] ICE in

[Bug libstdc++/90221] New: Resource leak in object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90221 Bug ID: 90221 Summary: Resource leak in object Product: gcc Version: 6.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug libstdc++/90220] std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/90220] New: std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90220 Bug ID: 90220 Summary: std::any_cast misbehaves for function and array types Product: gcc Version: 8.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rejects-valid Severity: normal

[Bug target/90187] [8/9 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2304 x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90187 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 24 09:27:14 2019 New Revision: 270537 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270537=gcc=rev Log: PR target/90187 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_sse_fp_minmax):

[Bug c/90167] invalid example in GCC documentation wrt. effective type rules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90167 --- Comment #4 from Laszlo Ersek (RH) --- So one way to define the behavior for the original example (from the gcc docs) would be: int f(void) { double d = 3.0; union a_union u = *(union a_union *) return u.i; } Thanks.

[Bug middle-end/90075] [7/8 Regression] [AArch64] ICE during RTL pass when member of union passed to copysignf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90075 --- Comment #5 from ramana.radhakrishnan at arm dot com --- The main reason for the ICE is this bit of code here. GCC-8 and earlier have this bit of code in the expansion for copysignsf3 .. rtx op2 = lowpart_subreg (V2SFmode, operands[2],

[Bug target/89093] [9 Regression] C++ exception handling clobbers d8 VFP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89093 --- Comment #81 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for Ada as well, only Go left to do.

[Bug tree-optimization/90211] [8 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have real_cst in first_readonly_imm_use, at ssa-iterators.h:351

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90211 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE: tree |[8 Regression] ICE: tree

[Bug tree-optimization/90208] [7/8 Regression] error: EH landing pad label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90208 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||9.0 Summary|[7/8/9

[Bug target/89093] [9 Regression] C++ exception handling clobbers d8 VFP register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89093 --- Comment #80 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 24 08:16:07 2019 New Revision: 270535 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270535=gcc=rev Log: PR target/89093 * raise-gcc.c (TARGET_ATTRIBUTE): Define.

[Bug tree-optimization/90208] [7/8/9 Regression] error: EH landing pad label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90208 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 24 08:14:50 2019 New Revision: 270534 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270534=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/90208 * tree-cfg.c (remove_bb): Move forced

[Bug tree-optimization/90211] [8/9 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have real_cst in first_readonly_imm_use, at ssa-iterators.h:351

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90211 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Apr 24 08:13:29 2019 New Revision: 270533 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270533=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/90211 * tree-parloops.c

[Bug c/90219] Wrong source location for "cannot convert to a pointer type" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90219 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Timm Bäder from comment #0) > Using gcc 8.3.1 and the following sample code: > > static int use_float(float *f) { > return (int)*f; > } > > // Type your code here, or load an example. >

[Bug c/90219] Wrong source location for "cannot convert to a pointer type" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90219 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug c/90219] New: Wrong source location for "cannot convert to a pointer type" warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90219 Bug ID: 90219 Summary: Wrong source location for "cannot convert to a pointer type" warning Product: gcc Version: 8.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/87127] External function not recognised from within an associate block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87127 --- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Wed Apr 24 07:27:42 2019 New Revision: 270532 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270532=gcc=rev Log: 2019-04-24 Paul Thomas PR fortran/87127 * resolve.c

[Bug c++/90217] Greater optimization of C++ Code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90217 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- Please always attach your testcases to bugzilla. I took a look at the .optimized dump. First issue is that we fail to simplify MEM[(union ._1 *)] = 1; _3 = apart.D.2494.contam_level; Second issue is

[Bug rtl-optimization/90174] Bad register spill due to top-down allocation order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90174 --- Comment #3 from Feng Xue --- Created attachment 46237 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46237=edit test case for aarch64 Add another case composed for aarch64.

<    1   2