[Bug target/70830] [6/7 Regression] ARM interrupt attribute: push/pop do not support {reglist}^

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70830 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/69232] floop-unroll-and-jam, at graphite_transform_loops with isl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69232 Nick changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/71062] [7 regression] r235622 and restrict pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71062 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/71050] [7 regression] test case gcc.target/powerpc/lhs-1.c fails starting with r236066

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Apart from this testcase do you see any negative impact in real-world code? That said, the positive impact on real-world code will likely be detecting some more byte-shuffling code plus lowpart-subregs plus

[Bug tree-optimization/71084] [7 Regression] ICE in compute_dominance_frontiers_1 (cfganal.c:1302)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71084 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- fwprop_init calcuates dominator info so it's likely df that runs cfg-cleanup and doesn't expect it to wreck dominator info. Probably rightfully so.

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek --- Did we forget to unshare_expr somewhere?

[Bug tree-optimization/71050] [7 regression] test case gcc.target/powerpc/lhs-1.c fails starting with r236066

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050 --- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt --- Even this test case isn't truly horrible for real-world code (it looks nastier than it is, as stack stores tend to have minimal real cost). This is an issue only on "older" processors; it's just that a lot

[Bug tree-optimization/71084] [7 Regression] ICE in compute_dominance_frontiers_1 (cfganal.c:1302)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71084 --- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich --- This is still CSE invalidating dominance info. Calls to cleanup_cfg don't affect cse_cfg_altered. If I replace cfg_cleanup calls with cse_cfg_altered |= cleanup_cfg (..) then testcase passes.

[Bug tree-optimization/71084] [7 Regression] ICE in compute_dominance_frontiers_1 (cfganal.c:1302)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71084 --- Comment #5 from Ilya Enkovich --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > fwprop_init calcuates dominator info so it's likely df that runs cfg-cleanup > and doesn't expect it to wreck dominator info. > > Probably rightfully so. So

[Bug fortran/70856] [6/7 Regression] ICE with -fopenacc in get_constraint_for_ssa_var, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2952

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70856 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug tree-optimization/71006] [6 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: type mismatch in conditional expression) w/ -O1 -ftree-loop-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71006 --- Comment #7 from Ilya Enkovich --- Author: ienkovich Date: Thu May 12 14:07:13 2016 New Revision: 236176 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236176=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ Backport from mainline r236171. 2016-05-12 Ilya Enkovich

[Bug hsa/70857] [6/7 Regression] ICE with -fopenmp -fopenacc in insert_vi_for_tree, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2813

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70857 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- This bug is a consequence of false sharing of a RESULT_DECL between the CPU-intended OpenMP outlined function and the HSA-intended outlined (kernel) one. How come -fopenacc is necessary to trigger it, I

[Bug debug/70935] [6 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 9 does not dominate use in block 12) w/ -O3 -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70935 --- Comment #7 from Arseny Solokha --- Can this PR be closed as RESOLVED FIXED now, or are there still parts missing?

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- I'm bisecting this.

[Bug target/71088] New: [i386, AVX-512, Perf] vpermi2ps instead of vpermps emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71088 Bug ID: 71088 Summary: [i386, AVX-512, Perf] vpermi2ps instead of vpermps emitted Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/71059] [7 Regression] gcc ICE at -O3 on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "vn_nary_op_insert_into"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71059 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug hsa/70857] [6/7 Regression] ICE with -fopenmp -fopenacc in insert_vi_for_tree, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2813

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70857 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||openacc CC|

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Created attachment 38476 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38476=edit libgcov-driver.i $ ./cc1 -quiet libgcov-driver.i /home/marek/src/gcc/libgcc/libgcov-driver.c: In function

[Bug libstdc++/71081] experimental/memory_resource/1.cc run for targets without atomics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71081 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Thu May 12 14:08:45 2016 New Revision: 236177 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236177=gcc=rev Log: Add dg-require-atomic-builtins to test PR libstdc++/71081 *

[Bug fortran/71085] ICE with some intrinsic functions specifying array function result dimension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71085 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- commit 6fcaaf9b931078f979a0282d396e78647ea37999 Author: rguenth Date: Wed May 11 10:24:11 2016 + 2016-05-11 Richard Biener

[Bug libstdc++/71081] experimental/memory_resource/1.cc run for targets without atomics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71081 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug inline-asm/71086] New: miscompiled inline-asm + alternative constraints + __builtin_expect + always_inline

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71086 Bug ID: 71086 Summary: miscompiled inline-asm + alternative constraints + __builtin_expect + always_inline Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/71087] New: scipy amos crash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71087 Bug ID: 71087 Summary: scipy amos crash Product: gcc Version: 6.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee:

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/71084] [7 Regression] ICE in compute_dominance_frontiers_1 (cfganal.c:1302)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71084 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Ilya Enkovich from comment #5) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > fwprop_init calcuates dominator info so it's likely df that runs cfg-cleanup > > and doesn't expect it to wreck

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69741 Nick changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/71062] [7 regression] r235622 and restrict pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71062 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 12 13:05:13 2016 New Revision: 236174 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236174=gcc=rev Log: 2016-05-12 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/71050] [7 regression] test case gcc.target/powerpc/lhs-1.c fails starting with r236066

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050 --- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt --- Yes, I see your point -- even if you query the RTX cost of the subreg, we're just going to tell you it's one insn since the true expense doesn't show up until reload. Seems like some invention will be

[Bug middle-end/29756] SSE intrinsics hard to use without redundant temporaries appearing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29756 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- So I have it down to a x86 combine issue: ;; v_28 = BIT_FIELD_INSERT ; (insn 7 6 8 (set (reg:SF 116) (vec_select:SF (reg/v:V4SF 115 [ v ]) (parallel [

[Bug tree-optimization/71059] [7 Regression] gcc ICE at -O3 on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "vn_nary_op_insert_into"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71059 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 12 13:46:26 2016 New Revision: 236175 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236175=gcc=rev Log: 2016-05-12 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/71006] [6 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: type mismatch in conditional expression) w/ -O1 -ftree-loop-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71006 Ilya Enkovich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/69840] two ASAN help nits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69840 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Well, it looks llvm folk are not convinced about the behavior: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17566 Do we want to do it in the GCC anyway or not? Martin

[Bug debug/70935] [6 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 9 does not dominate use in block 12) w/ -O3 -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70935 Ilya Enkovich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/60760] arithmetic on null pointers should not be allowed in constant expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60760 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0 Known to fail|5.0, 6.0

[Bug c++/70869] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault on array of pointer to function members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #38472|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug rtl-optimization/70904] ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90) with -fno-split-wide-types @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70904 --- Comment #4 from Jiong Wang --- Author: jiwang Date: Thu May 12 17:00:52 2016 New Revision: 236181 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236181=gcc=rev Log: [LRA] PR70904, relax the restriction on subreg reload for wide mode 2016-05-12

[Bug lto/71089] New: [7 Regression] Failed to build 483.xalancbmk in SPEC CPU 2006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71089 Bug ID: 71089 Summary: [7 Regression] Failed to build 483.xalancbmk in SPEC CPU 2006 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 --- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek --- So, we're trying to fold the "a.dumped != 0" condition. "a.dumped" is a COMPONENT_REF with VAR_DECL "a", and while folding we change the alias set of the VAR_DECL "a" from -1 to 1, so the fold checksum is

[Bug tree-optimization/71050] [7 regression] test case gcc.target/powerpc/lhs-1.c fails starting with r236066

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050 --- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt --- Great, thanks, Pat! Let's hold off for now, as Segher is checking out some ideas.

[Bug c/70756] Wrong column number shown for "error: invalid use of flexible array member"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70756 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Thu May 12 15:28:08 2016 New Revision: 236180 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236180=gcc=rev Log: PR c/70756 * c-common.c (pointer_int_sum): Call

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/71050] [7 regression] test case gcc.target/powerpc/lhs-1.c fails starting with r236066

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050 --- Comment #9 from Pat Haugen --- (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #8) > The test is verifying that we force some nops in between a store and load > when we know they alias, to mitigate the cost of the stall while the load > tries to get

[Bug tree-optimization/69848] poor vectorization of a loop from SPEC2006 464.h264ref

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848 --- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to amker from comment #7) > (In reply to Jim Wilson from comment #6) > > Testing the vcond_mask* patch with make check gave 6 regressions for both > > armhf and aarch64. > > > > FAIL:

[Bug libstdc++/70722] include_next in cmath skips user-defined wrapper

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70722 guido at trentalancia dot net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||guido at trentalancia dot

[Bug target/71080] Segfault in ix86_in_large_data_p with -fpic -mcmodel={medium, large}

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71080 --- Comment #1 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- The obvious patch (returning false for exp == NULL_TREE in ix86_in_large_data_p) fixes the testcase above and survived x86_64-pc-linux-gnu bootstrap. A second make check with

[Bug target/70830] [6/7 Regression] ARM interrupt attribute: push/pop do not support {reglist}^

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70830 --- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Thu May 12 12:47:03 2016 New Revision: 236173 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236173=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR target/70830: Avoid POP-{reglist}^ when returning from

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- struct { unsigned dumped:1; } a; void fn1 () { if (a.dumped) ; }

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 --- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek --- And the place where we change the alias set? Since r236117 we call get_alias_set when building the ref in make_bit_field_ref, and that's what changes the alias set of "a".

[Bug fortran/70598] Fortran OpenACC host_data construct ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70598 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC|

[Bug c/70756] Wrong column number shown for "error: invalid use of flexible array member"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70756 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/70739] VALUE attribute interpretation in a non-interoperable procedure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70739 --- Comment #2 from zmi --- This was also my wish but I couldn't find it too and assume now as an Intel's interpretation of standard. Would be interesting to see if such interpretation confirmed by another vendors (I don't have access to actual

[Bug lto/71089] [7 Regression] Failed to build 483.xalancbmk in SPEC CPU 2006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71089 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug fortran/67497] data.c sanitizer runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67497 --- Comment #5 from Vittorio Zecca --- Still in trunk: ../../gcc7/gcc/fortran/data.c:191:32: runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null here: memcpy ([start], rvalue->value.character.string, len *

[Bug tree-optimization/70919] [6/7 Regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70919 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/70884] [6/7 regression] 2nd SRA pass confused by load from constant pool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70884 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||su at cs dot ucdavis.edu --- Comment #3

[Bug libstdc++/71090] #include cannot locate math.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71090 --- Comment #2 from Tommy McGuire --- Created attachment 38479 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38479=edit Preprocessed source file

[Bug libstdc++/71090] #include cannot locate math.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71090 --- Comment #1 from Tommy McGuire --- This may be related to Bug #70936 (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70936).

[Bug libstdc++/71090] New: #include cannot locate math.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71090 Bug ID: 71090 Summary: #include cannot locate math.h Product: gcc Version: 6.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug tree-optimization/70919] [6/7 Regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70919 --- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor --- The problem is that late SRA replaces scalar loads from constant pool by replacements but fails to add their initializations to the beginning of the function. The reason for the omission is that

[Bug tree-optimization/70919] [6/7 Regression] wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70919 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I suspect this is a dup of bug 70884.

[Bug tree-optimization/70986] [7 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in combine_blocks, at tree-if-conv.c:2219

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70986 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/70986] [7 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in combine_blocks, at tree-if-conv.c:2219

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70986 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 12 07:18:58 2016 New Revision: 236158 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236158=gcc=rev Log: 2016-05-12 Richard Biener PR

[Bug middle-end/71076] [6/7 Regression] error: missing PHI def

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71076 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Known to work|

[Bug bootstrap/71071] [7 regression] ICE --enable-checking=fold : fold check: original tree changed by fold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0

[Bug c++/70869] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault on array of pointer to function members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869 --- Comment #12 from John Ettedgui --- Well, I'll keep trying then. Thank you!

[Bug middle-end/71074] combine.c in simplify_comparison sanitizer detects left shift of negative value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71074 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70869] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault on array of pointer to function members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #38469|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/71077] [7 Regression] gcc -lto raises ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71077 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug middle-end/71062] [7 regression] r235622 and restrict pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71062 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug c++/70869] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault on array of pointer to function members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869 --- Comment #11 from Kai Tietz --- this doesn't seem to be related with my patch at all. It looks more like you are trying to re-use an old build tree. Patch is made against trunk. Nevertheless should work for 6.x branch, too. I build in

[Bug target/71019] AVX512BW instructions emitted even without AVX512BW

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71019 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu May 12 08:33:14 2016 New Revision: 236163 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236163=gcc=rev Log: PR target/71019 * config/i386/sse.md (_packssdw,

[Bug tree-optimization/71078] New: x/abs(x) -> sign(1.0,x)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71078 Bug ID: 71078 Summary: x/abs(x) -> sign(1.0,x) Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/71060] Compiler reports "loop vectorized" but actually it was not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71060 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|diagnostic | --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener

[Bug tree-optimization/71060] Compiler reports "loop vectorized" but actually it was not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71060 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 12 07:29:33 2016 New Revision: 236159 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236159=gcc=rev Log: 2016-05-12 Richard Biener PR

[Bug c++/71010] error: 'begin' was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71010 Ubikovich changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Ubikovich ---

[Bug middle-end/71078] x/abs(x) -> sign(1.0,x)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71078 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/71079] New: ICE on valid code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_gimple failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71079 Bug ID: 71079 Summary: ICE on valid code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_gimple failed Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libstdc++/71090] #include cannot locate math.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71090 --- Comment #3 from Tommy McGuire --- Pony bug 797: https://github.com/ponylang/ponyc/issues/797

[Bug libstdc++/71090] #include cannot locate math.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71090 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/67965] gcc (incorrectly) requires template keyword in non-dependent expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67965 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/71050] [7 regression] test case gcc.target/powerpc/lhs-1.c fails starting with r236066

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71050 --- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool --- No, please go ahead, I couldn't find an easy way out. The generic code is hell-bent on using a subreg of the DF reg. The backend won't necessarily use any nop here btw, but the testcase should be

[Bug other/71094] New: Documentation: -fivopts is enabled at all levels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71094 Bug ID: 71094 Summary: Documentation: -fivopts is enabled at all levels Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: trivial Priority: P3

[Bug c++/58541] [c++11] Bogus "error: redeclaration ... differs in ‘constexpr’"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58541 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/52966] ill-formed template constexpr functions are accepted?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52966 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/71092] [6/7 Regression] ICE: in cxx_eval_call_expression, at cp/constexpr.c:1449; only with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71092 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/71081] New: experimental/memory_resource/1.cc run for targets without atomics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71081 Bug ID: 71081 Summary: experimental/memory_resource/1.cc run for targets without atomics Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

GCC 6.1.0 ARM cross compiling xgcc error not producing output file from .S files

Hi, I am trying to cross compile the latest gcc 6.1.0 to arm architecture. At the end of libgcc compilation i am getting the error *"root/embeddedlinux/gcc/armcrosstool/arm-linux-gnueabi/bin/ar: _thumb1_case_sqi.o: No such file or directory"* *But when i cross checked libgcc compilation it has

[Bug target/71053] [6/7 Regression] Volatile read optimized into endless loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71053 Berni changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bseifert at gmx dot at --- Comment #3 from

[Bug c++/71082] Internal compiler error when create initializer list with pointers to members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71082 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/71082] New: Internal compiler error when create initializer list with pointers to members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71082 Bug ID: 71082 Summary: Internal compiler error when create initializer list with pointers to members Product: gcc Version: 6.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/71006] [6/7 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: type mismatch in conditional expression) w/ -O1 -ftree-loop-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71006 --- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich --- (In reply to Chengnian Sun from comment #3) > Hi, > > Can you help check whether the following test case is a duplicate? Thanks. This is definitely a separate issue.

[Bug target/71080] New: Segfault in ix86_in_large_data_p with -fpic -mcmodel={medium, large}

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71080 Bug ID: 71080 Summary: Segfault in ix86_in_large_data_p with -fpic -mcmodel={medium, large} Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/70869] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault on array of pointer to function members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869 --- Comment #14 from John Ettedgui --- It built fine with your latest patch. And it also fixed the segfault I had when I created my bug. Thank you!

Re: GCC 6.1.0 ARM cross compiling xgcc error not producing output file from .S files

Hi, On 12/05/16 10:46, RaghuShankar wrote: Hi, I am trying to cross compile the latest gcc 6.1.0 to arm architecture. At the end of libgcc compilation i am getting the error *"root/embeddedlinux/gcc/armcrosstool/arm-linux-gnueabi/bin/ar: _thumb1_case_sqi.o: No such file or directory"* *But

[Bug target/70830] [6/7 Regression] ARM interrupt attribute: push/pop do not support {reglist}^

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70830 --- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Thu May 12 09:56:46 2016 New Revision: 236169 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236169=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR target/70830: Avoid POP-{reglist}^ when returning from

[Bug c++/71082] Internal compiler error when create initializer list with pointers to members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71082 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/70876] ICE in chkp_find_bounds: Unexpected tree code with_size_expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70876 --- Comment #5 from Ilya Enkovich --- (In reply to Vittorio Zecca from comment #4) > Will you please check gcc 6.1 with your fix against bug 70877? > > I get an ICE, could it be a regression? GCC 6.1 is released and will not be fixed. PR70877

[Bug c/71083] New: Unaligned bit-field address when predictive commoning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71083 Bug ID: 71083 Summary: Unaligned bit-field address when predictive commoning Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3

  1   2   >