[Bug driver/69805] [6 Regression] ICE in greater_than_spec_func, at gcc.c:9722

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69805 --- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > (In reply to vries from comment #3) > > This changes the semantics of greater_than_spec_func slightly. Strictly > > speaking not necessary to fix the

[Bug fortran/69815] Don't always use BLOCKS for front-end optimization variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69815 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/69834] Collision in derived type hashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/69835] [6 Regression] -Wnonnull diagnoses parameter comparisons with NULL even when those could have changed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69835 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 37703 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37703=edit gcc6-pr69835.patch Untested fix, which moves the warning from the FE to early uninit pass (i.e. shortly after going

[Bug c++/69837] New: compilation error with constexpr in template types with redeclared methods

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69837 Bug ID: 69837 Summary: compilation error with constexpr in template types with redeclared methods Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/69363] ICE when doing a pragma simd reduction with max

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69363 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- IMHO for consistency you should change the C FE too.

[Bug c++/69836] New: compilation error with constexpr in template types with redeclared methods

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69836 Bug ID: 69836 Summary: compilation error with constexpr in template types with redeclared methods Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/69363] ICE when doing a pragma simd reduction with max

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69363 iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3

[Bug driver/69805] [6 Regression] ICE in greater_than_spec_func, at gcc.c:9722

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69805 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to vries from comment #3) > This changes the semantics of greater_than_spec_func slightly. Strictly > speaking not necessary to fix the ICE. But the new semantics will perhaps be > easier to

[Bug bootstrap/69791] ICE in ultimate_transparent_alias_target, at varasm.c:1263

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69791 --- Comment #2 from Дилян Палаузов --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > How did you configure and call make? FLAGS as mentioned. /git/gcc/configure --enable-host-shared --enable-threads=posix --with-arch=haswell

[Bug driver/69805] [6 Regression] ICE in greater_than_spec_func, at gcc.c:9722

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69805 --- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Created attachment 37698 [details] > gcc6-pr69805.patch > > Untested fix. > As author of the patch that introduces the problem, let me do a review.

[Bug c/69835] [6 Regression] -Wnonnull diagnoses parameter comparisons with NULL even when those could have changed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69835 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/69835] New: [6 Regression] -Wnonnull diagnoses parameter comparisons with NULL even when those could have changed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69835 Bug ID: 69835 Summary: [6 Regression] -Wnonnull diagnoses parameter comparisons with NULL even when those could have changed Product: gcc Version: 6.0

[Bug c++/64500] push_to_top_level() shows up high during Chromium build.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64500 --- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- And it immediately jumps back up again: │6cc: mov0x10(%rbx),%rbx │ test %rbx,%rbx │ ↑ jnec0

[Bug target/69833] Warning during bootstrap of --with-build-config=bootstrap-asan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69833 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/64500] push_to_top_level() shows up high during Chromium build.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64500 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- sassembly of section .text: │ │ 00ddaba0 : │ _Z17push_to_top_levelv(): 0.00 │ push %r15 0.03 │ push %r14 │ mov

[Bug fortran/69834] Collision in derived type hashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834 --- Comment #2 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- Thanks Thomas! Sorry that I missed your PR. I wonder what, if anything, we should do about it? Cheers Paul On 16 February 2016 at 11:54, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/69834] Collision in derived type hashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/69829] [OOP] Case label overlaps for unlimited polymorphic select type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69829 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/69291] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O1 for ruby-2.3.0/regcomp.c:985:compile_length_quantifier_node()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69291 --- Comment #14 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Feb 16 10:53:08 2016 New Revision: 233448 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233448=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-16 Richard Biener PR

[Bug fortran/69834] New: Collision in derived type hashes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834 Bug ID: 69834 Summary: Collision in derived type hashes Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug target/69833] Warning during bootstrap of --with-build-config=bootstrap-asan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69833 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Erm. How can valid load/store motion do this? Is asan instrumentation / optimization for TREE_TYPE (lhs) misoptimized?

[Bug tree-optimization/69776] [4.9/5 Regression] Wrong optimization with aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69776 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --- Looks like the fix was too constrained. I have a patch to fix it some more.

[Bug fortran/69741] Bad error in formal with array scalar loop counters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69741 --- Comment #8 from Nick --- That is much more informative. However, how are gcc policies on progressive errors? I mean the later errors are due to this non-scalar counter. Should they be silenced in that case? In any case I think this is much

[Bug lto/67709] ICE: in estimate_function_body_sizes, at ipa-inline-analysis.c:2489 on x86_64-apple-darwin*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67709 --- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Asked about 4.9/5 backport: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01054.html

[Bug target/69833] Warning during bootstrap of --with-build-config=bootstrap-asan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69833 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Created attachment 37700 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37700=edit Candidate patch

[Bug target/69833] New: Warning during bootstrap of --with-build-config=bootstrap-asan

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69833 Bug ID: 69833 Summary: Warning during bootstrap of --with-build-config=bootstrap-asan Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug lto/67709] ICE: in estimate_function_body_sizes, at ipa-inline-analysis.c:2489 on x86_64-apple-darwin*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67709 --- Comment #11 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: vries Date: Tue Feb 16 09:23:09 2016 New Revision: 233447 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233447=gcc=rev Log: Don't call call_cgraph_insertion_hooks in simd_clone_create 2016-02-16

[Bug target/69827] sincos not done

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69827 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/69827] [5 Regression] sincos not done

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69827 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- cygwin probably runs into the target hooks querying libc functionality switch (gimple_call_combined_fn (stmt)) { CASE_CFN_COS: CASE_CFN_SIN:

[Bug c++/69832] New: internal compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69832 Bug ID: 69832 Summary: internal compiler error Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee:

[Bug tree-optimization/69802] [4.9/5/6 Regression] gcc ICE at -O1 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu with “seg fault”

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69802 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Feb 16 09:12:37 2016 New Revision: 233446 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233446=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/69802 * tree-ssa-reassoc.c

[Bug tree-optimization/69801] [6 Regression] gcc ICE on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "operand_equal_p"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69801 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/69630] [6 Regression] LTO ICE in types_same_for_odr at ipa-devirt.c:402

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69630 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3) > should fix the testcase. Will test the patch ASAP. That patch works for the big program :-) I am looking forward for the committed fix.

[Bug driver/69805] [6 Regression] ICE in greater_than_spec_func, at gcc.c:9722

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69805 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug testsuite/69586] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-21.c for target defaulting to short enum

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69586 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Feb 16 09:00:32 2016 New Revision: 233445 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233445=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-16 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/69801] [6 Regression] gcc ICE on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "operand_equal_p"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69801 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Feb 16 08:39:22 2016 New Revision: 233444 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233444=gcc=rev Log: 2016-02-16 Richard Biener PR middle-end/69801

[Bug tree-optimization/69740] [5/6 Regression] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "verify_loop_structure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- So, in *.mergephi1 we have: : b.0_4 = b; if (b.0_4 != 0) goto ; else goto ; : c[0] = 0; l1: c ={v} {CLOBBER}; : a.1_7 = a; if (a.1_7 != 0) goto (l1); else goto ;

[Bug c++/69831] Issue with passing a reference_wrapper to a placeholder when using a pointer to member function in bind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69831 sniderdj at umich dot edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/69831] Issue with passing a reference_wrapper to a placeholder when using a pointer to member function in bind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69831 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Works for me on the trunk: GNU C++14 (GCC) version 6.0.0 20160215 (experimental) [trunk revision 233436] (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) compiled by GNU C version 6.0.0 20160215 (experimental) [trunk

<    1   2