[Bug other/68813] [openacc] lto1: internal compiler error: in input_varpool_node, at lto-cgraph.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68813 --- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to cesar from comment #3) > Tom is this problem specific to gomp-4_0-branch? I can't reproduce it in > trunk. Indeed, I ran into this on gomp-4_0-branch, forgot to mention that. I don't

[Bug tree-optimization/68707] [6 Regression] testcase gcc.dg/vect/O3-pr36098.c vectorized using VEC_PERM_EXPR rather than VEC_LOAD_LANES

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68707 --- Comment #21 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Here's the smallest testcase I could come up with (where SLP gets cancelled, but we end up with fewer st2's than before)...the key seems to be things being used in multiple places. #define N

[Bug target/68959] Test case ICEs with -mlra -mvsx-timode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68959 --- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner --- Just to be clear, does it still fail with the fix for PR 68805 installed?

[Bug target/68805] ICE while var-tracking in simplify_binary_operation_1 with -g and -mvsx-timode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68805 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/68968] New: Internal Compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68968 Bug ID: 68968 Summary: Internal Compiler error Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug c/68966] New: atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68966 Bug ID: 68966 Summary: atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug tree-optimization/68967] New: Build and test parloops on by default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68967 Bug ID: 68967 Summary: Build and test parloops on by default Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/68967] Build and test parloops on by default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68967 --- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37067 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37067=edit 0001-Set-ftree-parallelize-loops-2-by-default.patch

[Bug tree-optimization/68967] Build and test parloops on by default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68967 --- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37071 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37071=edit 0005-Compile-libgomp-with-ftree-parallelize-loops-0.patch

[Bug c++/68795] [6 Regression] Use of uninitialised value of size 8 in cp_parser_postfix_expression (parser.c:6831)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68795 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Comment on attachment 37066 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37066 Always set a location for the closing parenthesis in cp_parser_parenthesized_expression_list Bother; I have another

[Bug tree-optimization/68967] Build and test parloops on by default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68967 --- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37068 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37068=edit 0002-Update-GOMP_SELF_SPECS-and-LINK_COMMAND_SPEC.patch

[Bug tree-optimization/68967] Build and test parloops on by default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68967 --- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37069 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37069=edit 0003-compile-target-libgomp-before-configuring-other-libs.patch

[Bug tree-optimization/68967] Build and test parloops on by default

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68967 --- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37070 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37070=edit 0004-Compile-libgcc-with-ftree-parallelize-loops-0.patch

[Bug target/68959] Test case ICEs with -mlra -mvsx-timode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68959 --- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #2) > Just to be clear, does it still fail with the fix for PR 68805 installed? Yes, my compiler has that fix.

[Bug tree-optimization/68961] Test case pr60203.c fails since r231674

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68961 --- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt --- Is this little-endian only?

[Bug c++/67550] [5/6 regression] Initialization of local struct array with elements of global array yields zeros instead of initializer values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67550 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/68961] [6 regression] Test case gcc.target/powerpc/pr60203.c fails since r231674

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68961 --- Comment #2 from Bill Seurer --- No, it fails on big endian, too.

[Bug ipa/68419] ICE segfault in determine_locally_known_aggregate_parts / ipa_compute_jump_functions_for_edge

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68419 Lauri Kasanen changed: What|Removed |Added Version|5.2.0 |5.3.0 --- Comment #4 from Lauri Kasanen

[Bug testsuite/68969] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr66636.c and gcc.dg/vect/pr68305.c have the wrong condition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68969 Bug ID: 68969 Summary: gcc.dg/vect/pr66636.c and gcc.dg/vect/pr68305.c have the wrong condition Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/68968] Internal Compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68968 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #2) > (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > > (In reply to Fred Krogh from comment #0) > > > Created attachment 37073 [details] > > > Compile this as indicated in

[Bug c++/68965] [5/6 Regression] `-Wunused-parameter` is reported in variadic lambda or function using sizeof...(xs)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68965 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/68305] [6 regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: tree check: expected class ‘expression’, have ‘exceptional’ (ssa_name) in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3436

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68305 --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu --- gcc.dg/vect/pr68305.c has /* { dg-do compile } */ /* { dg-additional-options "-O3" } */ /* { dg-additional-options "-mavx2" { target avx_runtime } } */ It is a compile test. Why does it need AVX run-time

[Bug fortran/68968] Internal Compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68968 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/58587] Bootstrap error with ada with -mcpu=power7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58587 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/21182] [4.9/5/6 Regression] gcc can use registers but uses stack instead

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21182 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #18

[Bug target/61397] [4.9/5/6 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/p8vector-ldst.c scan-assembler lxsdx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61397 --- Comment #17 from Michael Meissner --- No, it does not appear the patch went upstream (either on trunk or gcc 5).

[Bug c++/68948] G++ voluntarily removes a function call with terrible side effects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68948 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- Created attachment 37074 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37074=edit Reduced a lot This is a much more reduced testcase though most likely it can be reduced further.

[Bug target/61397] [4.9/5/6 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/p8vector-ldst.c scan-assembler lxsdx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61397 --- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt --- Mike, did your patch go upstream, or is there more work to do here?

[Bug target/61030] PowerPC 128 bit integer divide

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61030 --- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn --- *** Bug 68822 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/68822] Enable PowerPC divde instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68822 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/61981] PPC64 Linux Split-Stack Support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61981 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/68970] New: Missing "expected ; after class" message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68970 Bug ID: 68970 Summary: Missing "expected ; after class" message Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug target/60137] Code fails with -mcpu=power8 -O3 -mno-vsx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60137 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug testsuite/68776] [6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-widen-mult-const-[su]16.c failures since r226675

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68776 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On December 17, 2015 4:19:00 PM GMT+01:00, "wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68776 > >--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt

[Bug c/68971] New: -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 Bug ID: 68971 Summary: -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow Product: gcc Version: 5.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/68927] Code aborts in deallocate statement with a stat= specified

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68927 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/68973] New: [6 regression] Internal compiler error on power for gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67211.C

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68973 Bug ID: 68973 Summary: [6 regression] Internal compiler error on power for gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67211.C Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/68909] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Component|debug

[Bug target/68972] New: g++.dg/cpp1y/vla-initlist1.C test case fails on power

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68972 Bug ID: 68972 Summary: g++.dg/cpp1y/vla-initlist1.C test case fails on power Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/68819] Invalid "-Wmisleading-indentation" warning if location_t >=LINE_MAP_MAX_LOCATION_WITH_COLS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819 --- Comment #9 from David Malcolm --- Created attachment 37075 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37075=edit Updated patch, which adds a "sorry" when the problem first occurs Here's a new patch. Unfortunately, with this new

[Bug c++/68954] [5/6 Regression] -Wdeprecated-declarations -Werror errors for system header templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68954 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #0) > std::auto_ptr is marked as deprecated in > libstdc++-v3/include/backward/auto_ptr.h > and > > #include > > int main() > { > int i; > std::auto_ptr

[Bug rtl-optimization/68910] [5/6 regression] huge stack frame and poor code with instruction scheduling at -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68910 --- Comment #9 from Sebastian Huber --- In case I revert (e.g. double revert) to enable the LRA for SPARC commit a28f6dc56909fc35dd83d4364bc68c69e2450a51 Author: davem

[Bug tree-optimization/68977] [gomp4] FAIL: c-c++-common/goacc/loop-2.c -std=c++11 (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68977 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/68895] [ARM] ICE with target attributes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68895 chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code ---

[Bug tree-optimization/68977] New: [gomp4] FAIL: c-c++-common/goacc/loop-2.c -std=c++11 (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68977 Bug ID: 68977 Summary: [gomp4] FAIL: c-c++-common/goacc/loop-2.c -std=c++11 (internal compiler error) Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/68674] ARM/AARCH64 attribute target neon internal compiler error: in copy_to_mode_reg, at explow.c:595

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68674 chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |diagnostic,

[Bug rtl-optimization/68974] New: inline assembly blocks getting re-ordered on x86_64 and aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68974 Bug ID: 68974 Summary: inline assembly blocks getting re-ordered on x86_64 and aarch64 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/68954] [5/6 Regression] -Wdeprecated-declarations -Werror errors for system header templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68954 --- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > Breakpoint 1, diagnostic_classify_diagnostic ( > context=0x2467de0 , option_index=213, > new_kind=DK_IGNORED, where=1550920) > at

[Bug c++/68948] G++ voluntarily removes a function call with terrible side effects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68948 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/68974] inline assembly blocks getting re-ordered on x86_64 and aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68974 --- Comment #1 from mdaniels at qnx dot com --- Forgot system type. I am testing using a x86_64 Linux machine running Ubuntu 14.04.

[Bug rtl-optimization/68974] inline assembly blocks getting re-ordered on x86_64 and aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68974 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68975 Bug ID: 68975 Summary: Request: Provide alternate keyword for decltype in C++03 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement

[Bug fortran/54070] [4.9/5/6 Regression] Wrong code with allocatable deferred-length (array) function results

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070 --- Comment #27 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- ...so ragged in fact that it fails at all levels of optimization I have not had time these last days to come back to it and understand why. Something for the holidays! Paul On

[Bug c++/68949] [5/6 Regression] Implicit initialization of array member silently miscompiling.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68949 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug tree-optimization/68951] [6 Regression] ICE in vect_update_misalignment_for_peel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68951 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Dec 17 12:34:27 2015 New Revision: 231754 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231754=gcc=rev Log: 2015-12-17 Richard Biener PR

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 --- Comment #4 from Paul Eggert --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1) > constant expressions are evaluated during translation This is not a constant expression. Not that that should matter. For example: enum { a = (1 ? 0 : 1 / 0) };

[Bug tree-optimization/68976] New: [6 Regression] ICE w/ -O2 (and above) -fgraphite-identity (or -floop-nest-optimize)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976 Bug ID: 68976 Summary: [6 Regression] ICE w/ -O2 (and above) -fgraphite-identity (or -floop-nest-optimize) Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- This is a valid constant expression because 1 is and GCC doesn't warn on the division by zero: 1 ? 0 : 1 / 0 This is not a constant expression because rand() isn't, and so GCC warns about the division

[Bug c/68966] atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68966 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c/68966] atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68966 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid

[Bug c/68966] atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68966 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #37077|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/66660] [ia64] Speculative load not checked before use, leading to a NaT Consumption Vector interruption

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jermar --- Thanks for looking into this. Let me know if you need to verify the fix, when it's ready.

[Bug tree-optimization/68955] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86-64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68955 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code --- Comment #2 from Richard

[Bug tree-optimization/68955] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86-64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68955 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- It uses the wrong PHI arg value for the exit PHI of the unswitched loop It's unswitched on two conditions thus gets 4 loop copies but appearantly the m_lsm.28 exit PHI gets its arg from the PHI of the

[Bug target/66312] [SH] Regression: Bootstrap failure gcc/d/ctfeexpr.dmd.o differs with gcc-4.8/4.9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66312 --- Comment #24 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #23) > Ping? Doing a test build with gcc-5_-5.3.1-1 from unstable now with gdc enabled. Build should finish tomorrow (building on my fast qemu setup). Will

[Bug fortran/68893] [Coarray] Wrong result with -fcoarray=single and EVENTS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68893 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/68955] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86-64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68955 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > It uses the wrong PHI arg value for the exit PHI of the unswitched loop > It's unswitched on two conditions thus gets 4 loop copies but appearantly > the

[Bug tree-optimization/68955] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86-64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68955 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Ok, so disabling cunroll after unswitching fixes the testcase as well. Disabling IVOPTs fixes it also (we have a IVOPTs wrong-code bug elsewhere). IVOPTs would explain -m32 vs. -m64. Disabling DOM3 also

[Bug target/68937] i686: -fno-plt produces wrong code (maybe only with tailcall)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68937 --- Comment #9 from Zdenek Sojka --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #8) > Created attachment 37054 [details] > A patch > > I am testing this. It introduces ICE in cselib_invalidate_regno with -fPIC -fno-plt, for example: $ gcc -O2

[Bug target/67710] FAIL: gcc.dg/darwin-*version-*.c (test for excess errors) with Xcode 7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67710 --- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe --- The patch LGTM, tools (ar, nm etc, as well as the assembler) <= xcode 3.2.6 [darwin10] do not support the LC_VERSION_MIN_MACOSX load command, so we can't just set it as default. I'll give it a spin on

[Bug fortran/68927] Code aborts in deallocate statement with a stat= specified

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68927 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/68911] [6 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above on x86-64-linux-gnu (in 32- and 64-bit modes)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68911 --- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > This goes wrong during vrp1. > Analyzing # of iterations of loop 2 > exit condition [e_6, + , 1] <= 93 > bounds on difference of bases: -4294967202

[Bug tree-optimization/68955] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86-64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68955 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/68920] [6 Regression] Undesirable if-conversion for a rarely taken branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68920 --- Comment #6 from James Greenhalgh --- Rather than a target macro, I think I'd rather implement this as a parameter along the lines of "max-rtl-ifcvt-insns" - i386 backend could then set this to 1 and avoid the issue. I'll try to get to that

[Bug fortran/68950] [fortran] gfc_format_decoder cannot handle %qE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||openacc

[Bug fortran/68889] Fortran/DWARF: Possible bug in the handling of DW_AT_associated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68889 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/68950] [fortran] gfc_format_decoder cannot handle %qE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950 --- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #4) > Can you confirm that this is fixed when setting "omp declare target"'s > max_len to -1 in gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c? I don't understand the question.

[Bug fortran/68940] -Wno-error=compare-reals not working

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68940 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug rtl-optimization/68955] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86-64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68955 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |rtl-optimization --- Comment #6 from

[Bug fortran/68927] Code aborts in deallocate statement with a stat= specified

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68927 --- Comment #3 from Bill Long --- Possibly related to pr59796, bun not a duplicate. In this example, the pointer being deallocated is associated. The problem is that it is associated with a target that cannot be deallocated. The standard says

[Bug fortran/68968] Internal Compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68968 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > (In reply to Fred Krogh from comment #0) > > Created attachment 37073 [details] > > Compile this as indicated in the comments and get a segmentation fault in >

[Bug tree-optimization/67577] Trivial float-vectorization foiled by a loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67577 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- Trunk with -O3 -mavx generates: Z1xv: .cfi_startproc vmovaps b(%rip), %ymm1 vmovaps a(%rip), %ymm0 vbroadcastssscale(%rip), %ymm2 vsubps %ymm1, %ymm0, %ymm0

[Bug target/68191] s390x Linux Split Stacks support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68191 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/68103] Unnecessary copying due to order of evaluation with operator new

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68103 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/68831] [6 Regression] Superfluous -Waddress warning for C++ delete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68831 --- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka --- Author: ppalka Date: Fri Dec 18 02:25:39 2015 New Revision: 231798 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231798=gcc=rev Log: Fix PR c++/68831 (superfluous -Waddress warning for C++ delete) gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

[Bug c++/68831] [6 Regression] Superfluous -Waddress warning for C++ delete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68831 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/68008] Pessimization of simple non-tail-recursive functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68008 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Basically recursive inlining is faster than sibling calls optimization. Interesting.

[Bug c++/66506] Crash on compiling llvm plugin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66506 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/66279] Input/output asm operand is not loaded inside a constructor with a virtual base class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66279 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug target/68779] [5.3 Regression] HPPA/PARISC 32-bit Linux kernel build triggers multiple ICEs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68779 --- Comment #5 from John David Anglin --- Author: danglin Date: Fri Dec 18 00:40:55 2015 New Revision: 231795 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231795=gcc=rev Log: PR target/68779 * config/pa/pa.md (atomic_loaddi): Honor

[Bug target/67877] Split stack needs to be support for AARCH64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67877 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/66206] Address of stack memory associated with local variable returned to caller

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66206 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/67577] Trivial float-vectorization foiled by a loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67577 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|rtl-optimization|tree-optimization --- Comment #2 from

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Yes, the example in footnote is valid because the left operand of the OR expression is a constant expression with a non-zero value and so the right operand is not evaluated (even at translation time).

[Bug c/68971] -Woverflow false alarm in code unreachable after __builtin_mul_overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68971 --- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Thu, 17 Dec 2015, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Paul, the way I prefer to look at it is that the C standard says that constant > expressions are evaluated during translation and

[Bug ipa/67024] IPA SRA removes sibling-call opportunities

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67024 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- I can't reproduce this bug on aarch64-linux-gnu but that might be due to different IPA SRA choices than x86.

[Bug rtl-optimization/67449] Branch elimination problem on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67449 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- This works for me on the trunk of GCC on aarch64-linux-gnu but that might be because of different behavior with respect of conditional moves.

[Bug target/41557] gcc.exe: Internal error: (null) (program cc1plus)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41557 --- Comment #5 from Andris Pavenis --- I have just committed to SVN trunk very similar patch (but not identical)for djgpp-stdint.h (revision 231804)

<    1   2