[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Try -fsantitized=undefined to catch this error.

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- I should say the value that is stored in the bool variable can only be 0 or 1; anything else is undefined bahavior.

[Bug fortran/67431] ALLOCATE with SOURCE ignores overloaded assignment operator and uses intrinsic when copying values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67431 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/67430] reallocate lhs with overloaded assignment operators causes memory error and wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67430 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/67429] [5/6 Regression] Missing part of error messages.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429 --- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #10) > > Error: Expecting END BLOCK statement at (1) > > (null):0: confused by earlier errors, bailing out > > > Even if *I* cannot reproduce this,

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 xuejuncao changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|?: expresion returns|?: expression returns

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #3 from xuejuncao --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Bool can only be 0 or 1, any other value causes undefined behavior. but it seems like a trap, the below code will not work fine, and will make program abort.

[Bug libstdc++/67408] assumes that __gthread_mutex_t and__gthread_recursive_mutex_t are the same types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408 --- Comment #7 from Sebastian Huber --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > (In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #4) > > Sorry, I should have linked my patch: > > > >

[Bug fortran/67429] [5/6 Regression] Missing part of error messages.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429 --- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > > Created attachment 36283 [details] > > Patch for PR65045 that displays the problem > > Paul, > > Your patch for gcc/fortran/decl.c does not apply on trunk: > > if (state == COMP_BLOCK) > > is

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #8 from xuejuncao --- thanks, i get the below result with -fsanitize=undefined boolmagic.c:12:16: runtime error: load of value 255, which is not a valid value for type '_Bool' boolmagic.c:13:15: runtime error: load of value 255,

[Bug fortran/67429] [5/6 Regression] Missing part of error messages.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.3

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to xuejuncao from comment #4) > btw, the same code works fine on Mac: > > $gcc --version > Configured with: --prefix=/Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/usr >

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c/67433] New: ?: expresion returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable and it's value above 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 Bug ID: 67433 Summary: ?: expresion returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable and it's value above 1 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #4 from xuejuncao --- btw, the same code works fine on Mac: $gcc --version Configured with: --prefix=/Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/usr --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/4.2.1 Apple LLVM version 6.1.0 (clang-602.0.53)

[Bug fortran/67430] reallocate lhs with overloaded assignment operators causes memory error and wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67430 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|major |normal

[Bug c/67432] New: Improve error message on empty enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432 Bug ID: 67432 Summary: Improve error message on empty enum Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/67317] [x86] Silly code generation for _addcarry_u32/_addcarry_u64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67317 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/67437] New: [5/6 Regression] Template can't use const value of explicitly instantiated instance in a const expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437 Bug ID: 67437 Summary: [5/6 Regression] Template can't use const value of explicitly instantiated instance in a const expression Product: gcc Version: 5.2.1 Status:

[Bug c++/67437] [5/6 Regression] Template can't use const value of explicitly instantiated instance in a const expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393#c28 .

[Bug target/67317] [x86] Silly code generation for _addcarry_u32/_addcarry_u64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67317 --- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Wed Sep 2 15:06:56 2015 New Revision: 227405 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227405=gcc=rev Log: Backport from mainline: 2015-08-27 Uros Bizjak

[Bug middle-end/67438] New: [6 Regression] ~X op ~Y pattern relocation causes loop performance degradation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438 Bug ID: 67438 Summary: [6 Regression] ~X op ~Y pattern relocation causes loop performance degradation Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug middle-end/67438] [6 Regression] ~X op ~Y pattern relocation causes loop performance degradation on 32bit x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target|i686|i?86-*-* Summary|[6

[Bug middle-end/67438] [6 Regression] ~X op ~Y pattern relocation causes loop performance degradation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438 Alexander Fomin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||afomin.mailbox at gmail dot com ---

[Bug regression/67415] [5/6 Regression] -mcpu= breaks -print-file-name for ARM crosscompilers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67415 --- Comment #4 from Bernhard Rosenkränzer --- Relevant parameters are the same. Also, gcc-5.2/bin/arm-linux-androideabi-gcc -latomic does find libatomic -- so probably print-file-name=libatomic.a should reflect that... $

[Bug c++/67437] [5/6 Regression] Template can't use const value of explicitly instantiated instance in a const expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/67437] [5/6 Regression] Template can't use const value of explicitly instantiated instance in a const expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- -fpremissive might allow this code though.

[Bug middle-end/67438] [6 Regression] ~X op ~Y pattern relocation causes loop performance degradation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- THis just looks like increased register pressure. Maybe some :s should be used in match.pd or maybe not.

[Bug ipa/66271] -Os generates incorrect code on ARM possibly due to IPA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66271 Jim Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #9 from Jim Wilson

[Bug rtl-optimization/65932] [5 Regression] Linux-3.10.75 on arm926ej-s does not boot due to wrong code generation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65932 --- Comment #20 from Jim Wilson --- *** Bug 66271 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug fortran/67414] [5/6 Regression] Error message on failed allocate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67414 --- Comment #4 from Janne Blomqvist --- Author: jb Date: Wed Sep 2 15:13:35 2015 New Revision: 227406 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227406=gcc=rev Log: PR 67414 Handle newlocale failure 2015-09-02 Janne Blomqvist

[Bug fortran/67414] [5/6 Regression] Error message on failed allocate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67414 Janne Blomqvist changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/67439] New: ICE: unrecognizable insn compiling arm-fp16 testcases with -march=armv7-a and -mrestrict-it

-checking Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20150902 (experimental) [trunk revision 227416] (GCC) $ ./xgcc -B. ../../gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/arm-fp16-compile-assign.c -O0 -mfp16-format=ieee -S-o arm-fp16-compile-assign.s -O2 -march=armv7-a -mrestrict-it rmansfield@BB1543999644:~/gnu

[Bug libstdc++/67440] New: pretty-printing of a const set fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440 Bug ID: 67440 Summary: pretty-printing of a const set fails Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug libstdc++/67440] pretty-printing of a const set fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440 --- Comment #1 from Doug Evans --- Created attachment 36288 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36288=edit patch + testcase This could use another set of eyes.

[Bug middle-end/60586] [Cilk+] Parameters evaluation happens inside spawn worker

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60586 --- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: hjl Date: Wed Sep 2 23:59:21 2015 New Revision: 227423 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227423=gcc=rev Log: Fix spawned function with lambda function Make sure that the spawned

[Bug target/66620] bfin: bfin.c: (hwloop_optimize): gcc_assert (JUMP_P (insn)) fails.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66620 Chen Gang changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/65804] blackfin: Not support global frame pointer with -fno-omit-frame-pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65804 Chen Gang changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c/67435] Large performance drop on apparently unrelated changes (probable cause : strange inlining side-effect)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435 --- Comment #6 from Yann Collet --- The issue seems in fact related to _instruction alignment_. More precisely, to alignment of some critical loop. That's basically why adding some code in the file would just "pushes" some other code into

[Bug target/61578] [4.9 regression] Code size increase for ARM thumb compared to 4.8.x when compiling with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61578 --- Comment #23 from Fredrik Hederstierna --- Thanks for your patch, I tried it out, and it solves the small example fine, the code now is similar to GCC 4.8 for this particular example. Though when I

[Bug rtl-optimization/67441] New: Scheduler unable to disambiguate memory references in unrolled loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67441 Bug ID: 67441 Summary: Scheduler unable to disambiguate memory references in unrolled loop Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/67438] [6 Regression] ~X op ~Y pattern relocation causes loop performance degradation on 32bit x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438 Mikhail Maltsev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/67429] [5/6 Regression] Missing part of error messages.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429 --- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #14) > Do you want to commit or would you like me to do it? Please do, I'll have little time for gcc in the next weeks. Thanks.

[Bug fortran/67430] reallocate lhs with overloaded assignment operators causes memory error and wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67430 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Baldwin --- In 7.2.1.4 of my copy of the standard it states: "A subroutine defines the defined assignment x1 = x2 if" ... "(5) either (a) the ranks of x1 and x2 match those of d1 and d2 or (b) the subroutine

[Bug fortran/67429] [5/6 Regression] Missing part of error messages.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429 --- Comment #14 from Paul Thomas --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #13) > The patch in comment 9 restores the old (correct?) behavior without > regression. Indeed and it gets rid of the problems that I have been encountering.

[Bug c/67279] -fsanitize=undefined spurious error: initializer element is not constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c/67432] Improve error message on empty enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Wed Sep 2 21:00:38 2015 New Revision: 227421 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227421=gcc=rev Log: PR c/67432 * c-parser.c (c_parser_enum_specifier): Give a better

[Bug c/67432] Improve error message on empty enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libgcc/62097] t-hardfp requires GNU sed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62097 --- Comment #8 from Joel Sherrill --- (In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #7) > AIUI usual practice is not to assign stuff to people > without asking them first, otherwise it gives the > impression that someone is actively working on

[Bug tree-optimization/53852] [4.9/5/6 Regression] -ftree-loop-linear: large compile time / memory usage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53852 --- Comment #19 from Sebastian Pop --- Patch fixing the compile time problem with at least isl-0.15: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-09/msg00198.html isl-0.12 does not support the compute-out mechanism.

[Bug c/67432] Improve error message on empty enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432 --- Comment #4 from Chengnian Sun --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3) > Done. This is very fast. Thanks, Marek.

[Bug libstdc++/65913] [5/6 Regression] Linking failure without -latomic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65913 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Richard's patch in comment 2 doesn't seem to help, the testcase with std::atomic::is_lock_free() still fails to link, as does the simplest case, std::atomic::is_lock_free()

[Bug regression/67415] [5/6 Regression] -mcpu= breaks -print-file-name for ARM crosscompilers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67415 --- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw --- Your GCC-4.9 is a Linaro build which contains some extensions of their own. It's possible that they've made some changes in the way search paths work. I'd start by asking them.

[Bug fortran/67430] reallocate lhs with overloaded assignment operators causes memory error and wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67430 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #3

[Bug libstdc++/60271] [DR2369] [C++1y] std::max(initializer_list) cannot use std::max_element

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/67434] New: std::chrono::duration acts like static even if instantiated every time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67434 Bug ID: 67434 Summary: std::chrono::duration acts like static even if instantiated every time Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/37475] [DR 382] codecvt::do_in/do_out functions return "ok" when the output sequence has zero length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37475 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Issue 382 is NAD http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2369

[Bug libstdc++/67434] std::chrono::duration acts like static even if instantiated every time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67434 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/67428] lto1: fatal error: test.elf.ltrans0.o: section is missing with -flto -fipa-pta

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67428 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/67428] lto1: fatal error: test.elf.ltrans0.o: section is missing with -flto -fipa-pta

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67428 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target|i386,avr|i386, avr, x86_64

[Bug ipa/66705] [5/6 Regression] section is missing linker error with -flto -fipa-pta

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66705 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug target/67405] ICE on invalid use of struct on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67405 Ilya Enkovich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/67408] assumes that __gthread_mutex_t and__gthread_recursive_mutex_t are the same types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408 --- Comment #9 from Sebastian Huber --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > There's no need to test on linux, I can do that myself. If it works on your > non-pthreads target I'll commit your patch.

[Bug fortran/61337] Wrong indexing and runtime crash with unlimited polymorphic array.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61337 --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Fuka --- The crash is at line 22: allocate(a(size(tmp)+1)%items(size(e)), source = e) ASAN:SIGSEGV = ==5902==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown

[Bug target/63653] [AArch64_be] vldX/vldX_lane tests fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63653 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Wed Sep 2 14:04:22 2015 New Revision: 227402 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227402=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64_be] Fix vldX/vstX AdvSIMD intrinsics. 2015-09-02 Christophe Lyon

[Bug target/63652] [AArch64_be] vzip/vuzp tests fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63652 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Wed Sep 2 14:04:22 2015 New Revision: 227402 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227402=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64_be] Fix vldX/vstX AdvSIMD intrinsics. 2015-09-02 Christophe Lyon

[Bug target/59810] [AArch64] LDn/STn implementations are not ABI-conformant for bigendian.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59810 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Wed Sep 2 14:04:22 2015 New Revision: 227402 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227402=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64_be] Fix vldX/vstX AdvSIMD intrinsics. 2015-09-02 Christophe Lyon

[Bug libgcc/62097] t-hardfp requires GNU sed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62097 --- Comment #5 from Joel Sherrill --- MIPS tools for RTEMS are unbuildable on *BSD due to this GNU sed dependency.

[Bug target/63653] [AArch64_be] vldX/vldX_lane tests fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63653 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/67435] Large performance drop on apparently unrelated changes (probable cause : strange inlining side-effect)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Gcc also tries to limit code growth for the unit also which might be something you are seeing. You can also try -Winline. Also -flto is becoming more prevalent and more popular. So you might want to give

[Bug c++/67436] [C++14] Generic lambda capture fails for thread_local variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67436 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|normal

[Bug libgcc/62097] t-hardfp requires GNU sed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62097 --- Comment #6 from Joel Sherrill --- git blame pins us down a bit on the change: 4b366ca9 (rsandifo 2014-02-07 07:46:34 + 74) hardfp_defines_for = \ 4b366ca9 (rsandifo 2014-02-07 07:46:34 + 75) $(shell echo $1 | \ 4b366ca9 (rsandifo

[Bug fortran/61337] Wrong indexing and runtime crash with unlimited polymorphic array.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61337 --- Comment #4 from graham.stott at btinternet dot com --- Original message From: "vladimir.fuka at gmail dot com" Date:02/09/2015 14:55 (GMT+00:00) To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug

[Bug c++/67436] New: [C++14] Generic lambda capture fails for thread_local variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67436 Bug ID: 67436 Summary: [C++14] Generic lambda capture fails for thread_local variables Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical

[Bug c/67435] Large performance drop on apparently unrelated changes (probable cause : strange inlining side-effect)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c/67435] Large performance drop on apparently unrelated changes (probable cause : strange inlining side-effect)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- And you can use -fdump-ipa-inline to look at gcc's inline decisions in detail.

[Bug target/63652] [AArch64_be] vzip/vuzp tests fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63652 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/61337] Wrong indexing and runtime crash with unlimited polymorphic array.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61337 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Fuka --- The first is fixed on trunk apparently by https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-07/msg00038.html The modification call add_item(a_list, [1, 2]) call add_item(a_list, [1, 2]) do i = 1, size(a_list)

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to xuejuncao from comment #10) > when bool value read from unpacked stream or file, wen can not ensure it's 1 > or 0; > so maybe the best solution is compile with "-D_Bool=char" for now :-/ You

[Bug libstdc++/67408] assumes that __gthread_mutex_t and__gthread_recursive_mutex_t are the same types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Wed Sep 2 10:51:14 2015 New Revision: 227400 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227400=gcc=rev Log: 2015-09-02 Sebastian Huber PR

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #12 from xuejuncao --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11) > (In reply to xuejuncao from comment #10) > > when bool value read from unpacked stream or file, wen can not ensure it's 1 > > or 0; > > so maybe the best solution

[Bug target/67424] libcilkcrts fails to build on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67424 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-unknown-netbsd*

[Bug libstdc++/67408] assumes that __gthread_mutex_t and__gthread_recursive_mutex_t are the same types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- There's no need to test on linux, I can do that myself. If it works on your non-pthreads target I'll commit your patch.

[Bug middle-end/67421] gcc.dg/wide-shift-64.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67421 --- Comment #1 from Jiong Wang --- (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0) > Created attachment 36275 [details] > wide-shift-64.c.219r.combine > > The new gcc.dg/wide-shift-64.c testcase FAILs on SPARC for the 64-bit > multilib > only: > >

[Bug libstdc++/67408] assumes that __gthread_mutex_t and__gthread_recursive_mutex_t are the same types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/66705] [5/6 Regression] section is missing linker error with -flto -fipa-pta

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66705 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c/67410] c/c-typeck.c references out of bounds array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67410 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/67424] libcilkcrts fails to build on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67424 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Created attachment 36286 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36286=edit support netbsd in libcilkrts/runtime/os-unix.c I'm testing this

[Bug fortran/58043] [OOP] Incorrect behaviour of polymorphic array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58043 Vladimir Fuka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vladimir.fuka at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c/67433] ?: expression returns unexpected value when condition is a bool variable which memory is not true/false

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433 --- Comment #10 from xuejuncao --- when bool value read from unpacked stream or file, wen can not ensure it's 1 or 0; so maybe the best solution is compile with "-D_Bool=char" for now :-/

[Bug fortran/67429] [5/6 Regression] Missing part of error messages.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429 --- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres --- The patch in comment 9 restores the old (correct?) behavior without regression.

[Bug target/63653] [AArch64_be] vldX/vldX_lane tests fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63653 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- vldX pass since r219958.

[Bug target/67424] libcilkcrts fails to build on NetBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67424 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- That allows the bootstrap to complete, but all the cilk+ tests fail: /home/jwakely/gcc/5/x86_64-unknown-netbsd5.1/bin/ld: ./reduction-3.exe: hidden symbol `__cpu_model' in

[Bug fortran/50541] gfortran should not accept a pointer as a generic-name (r178939)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50541 --- Comment #5 from Vittorio Zecca --- Bug still there in 5.2.0

[Bug fortran/58233] null pointer cm in gfc_conv_structure at fortran/trans-expr.c:6132

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58233 --- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca --- Still there on 5.2.0

[Bug c/67435] New: Large performance drop on apparently unrelated changes (probable cause : strange inlining side-effect)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435 Bug ID: 67435 Summary: Large performance drop on apparently unrelated changes (probable cause : strange inlining side-effect) Product: gcc Version: 4.8.4 Status:

[Bug target/64456] [AArch64] pr64252.c fail on aarch64_be

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64456 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/50410] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE in record_reference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 --- Comment #19 from Vittorio Zecca --- ICE still there in 5.2.0

[Bug fortran/50402] ICE in gfc_conv_expr_descriptor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50402 --- Comment #2 from Vittorio Zecca --- ! gfortran ICE in gfc_conv_expr_descriptor at fortran/trans-array.c interface function f() pointer f end end interface type t real,pointer :: p(:) end

  1   2   >