[Bug c++/77563] New: explicit constructor breaks narrowing conversion overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77563 Bug ID: 77563 Summary: explicit constructor breaks narrowing conversion overload resolution Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/77563] explicit constructor breaks narrowing conversion overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77563 --- Comment #1 from Jacek Sieka --- gcc 5.3.0 gives a different error - looks odd though, no initializer list in sight: /opt/gcc53/bin/g++ -std=gnu++11 explicit.cpp explicit.cpp: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’: explicit.cpp:15:7: error:

[Bug libstdc++/77528] std::queue default constructor unnecessarily creates temporary of underlying Container

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77528 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to TC from comment #2) > This makes the default constructor implicit, Yes, that was intentional :-) > though that's probably how it > should be anyway. Yes, we missed the container adaptors

[Bug libgcc/68082] issue on 64 bit shift

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68082 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/67596] /usr/include/c++/4.7/bits/stl_list.h error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67596 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/77543] ARM: G++ generates redundant instructions at -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77543 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Yes try -fno-exceptions . This is all documented already and 99% of folks who do embedded that don't want exceptions already use that flag. You might also want to disable rtti too.

[Bug c++/77543] ARM: G++ generates redundant instructions at -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77543 --- Comment #4 from Michael Haben --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Yes try -fno-exceptions . This is all documented already and 99% of folks > who do embedded that don't want exceptions already use that flag. You might > also

[Bug tree-optimization/67612] Unable to vectorize DOT_PROD_EXPR (PMADDWD?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67612 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/67607] Failure to perform constant folding through type conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67607 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug c++/77543] ARM: G++ generates redundant instructions at -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77543 --- Comment #2 from Michael Haben --- "eh" being exception handling? Is there any command-line switch that will turn off generation of this "tree" thing in code that doesn't (and can't) use exceptions (e.g. ARM microcontroller code, for which

[Bug other/77421] Bugs found in GCC with the help of PVS-Studio

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77421 Bug 77421 depends on bug 77426, which changed state. Bug 77426 Summary: Duplicate condition in expmed.c https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77426 What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/77426] Duplicate condition in expmed.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77426 --- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Mon Sep 12 08:17:27 2016 New Revision: 240089 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240089=gcc=rev Log: [expmed.c] PR middle-end/77426 Delete duplicate condition in

[Bug libgcc/68082] issue on 64 bit shift

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68082 --- Comment #7 from angelo --- Hi Andrew, it is passed some time, i solved mainly the issue with a workaround. Yes i tested several binutils even last, but is more a matter of compiling the m68k/coldfire toolchain properly. Mainly, building

[Bug middle-end/77426] Duplicate condition in expmed.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77426 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/53479] Control flow analysis reports warnings in switch over an enum class even if all possible values have their branches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53479 --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #14) > (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #9) > > In summary, neither adding 'default' or 'return' are recommended to silence > > this warning if you

[Bug ipa/70582] [6/7 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70582 --- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka --- > Does this still reproduce? I have implemented the optimization that removes > weakrefs with definition provided in other unit so this may be

[Bug tree-optimization/63945] Missing vectorization optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63945 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug c++/53479] Control flow analysis reports warnings in switch over an enum class even if all possible values have their branches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53479 --- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to DB from comment #12) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11) > > Given enum E { E1 = 1, E3 = 3 } the values of the type are 0, 1, 2 and 3 and > > -fstrict-enums tells the compiler it

[Bug c++/77564] New: Code fails to link when compiled with -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77564 Bug ID: 77564 Summary: Code fails to link when compiled with -O0 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/53479] Control flow analysis reports warnings in switch over an enum class even if all possible values have their branches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53479 --- Comment #18 from DB --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #17) > (In reply to DB from comment #12) > > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11) > > > Given enum E { E1 = 1, E3 = 3 } the values of the type are 0, 1, 2 and 3 > >

[Bug c++/77565] New: `typdef int Int;` --> did you mean `typeof`?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77565 Bug ID: 77565 Summary: `typdef int Int;` --> did you mean `typeof`? Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/77564] Code fails to link when compiled with -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77564 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I suspect you need a definition of FHT::READ_TIMEOUT, not just a declaration of it.

[Bug c++/77566] New: Warnings (-Wextra) disappear for a public reference to the this pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77566 Bug ID: 77566 Summary: Warnings (-Wextra) disappear for a public reference to the this pointer Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/67488] Incorrect error message on call of nested functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67488 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- A similar fix would be good for: void g() { void f(void); } void k() {int f(int); f(1);} Saying f was declared in a different scope too. Note I don't have access to clang so I can't say what it shows.

[Bug ipa/61159] __builtin_constant_p gives incorrect results with aliases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61159 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from

[Bug c/67488] Incorrect error message on call of nested functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67488 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug c++/67466] Project segfaulting, working with other compilers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67466 morandidodo at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||6.2.1 Known to fail|

[Bug c++/77565] `typdef int Int;` --> did you mean `typeof`?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77565 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/77564] Code fails to link when compiled with -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77564 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/60016] gcc-nm does not report static symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60016 --- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen --- This is needed for example to generate backtraces, if the symbol table should be built in instead of read from the binary. The Linux kernel cannot read its own binary, so the symbol table has to built in.

[Bug c++/67466] Project segfaulting, working with other compilers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67466 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Have you figured out what is going on? Or is your code still broken with GCC 5.x? Does it work at -O0?

[Bug c/71199] Support overloadable attribute in GNU C front-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71199 --- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt --- (In reply to Yu Xuanchi from comment #6) > So I think in short term. We just reject those code. Because our aim is to > support this feature like clang. If there is no any problem. I'll go impl it. Agreed,

[Bug c/67488] Improve diagnostic on call of declared function in a different scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67488 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Incorrect error message on |Improve diagnostic on call

[Bug c++/77543] ARM: G++ generates redundant instructions at -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77543 --- Comment #5 from Michael Haben --- (In reply to Michael Haben from comment #4) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > > Yes try -fno-exceptions . This is all documented already and 99% of folks > > who do embedded that don't want

[Bug middle-end/77568] [7 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target

[Bug middle-end/77568] [7 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568 --- Comment #5 from Wilco --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Note there are two different issues here. Well they are 3 examples of the same underlying issue - don't do a CSE when it's not profitable. How they are resolved might

[Bug target/71399] [5/6/7 Regression] 5.3.0 bootstrap comparison failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399 --- Comment #12 from Ludovic Courtès --- (In reply to Ludovic Courtès from comment #10) > In fact, the revert only needs to be done on the initial > pseudo-cross-compiler that is used to build the native compiler (I'm > attaching a PDF of the

[Bug middle-end/77568] New: [7 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568 Bug ID: 77568 Summary: [7 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libgcc/67336] Verify pointers during stack unwind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67336 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/77567] ASAN: Bugus error "alloc-dealloc-mismatch (malloc vs operator delete [])" with C++17's over-aligned types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77567 --- Comment #2 from Kostya Serebryany --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > I guess libasan needs to add the new C++17 aligned new operator entrypoints. > Dmitry, are you going to add this upstream yourself, or should I cook a >

[Bug middle-end/77568] [7 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568 --- Comment #3 from Wilco --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I think this is just a pass ordering issue. We create fmas after PRE. > Maybe we should do it both before and after ... > Or enhance the pass which produces FMA to

[Bug middle-end/77568] [7 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- For floating point they are definitely created on the gimple level. For ints they are not though. Maybe extend that same pass to do ints too for aarch64 and other targets which have a multiple add (mips).

[Bug target/77571] __clear_cache is broken on platforms that report different cache line sizes across CPUs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77571 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target|arm64 |aarch64*-*-*

[Bug target/77570] [msp430-elf] Wrong assembly in delay_cycles_32x insn declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77570 --- Comment #1 from dj at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: dj Date: Mon Sep 12 21:27:48 2016 New Revision: 240101 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240101=gcc=rev Log: 2016-09-12 Orlando Arias PR target/77570 *

[Bug c++/77496] ICE in instantiate_type, at cp/class.c:8270

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77496 --- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger --- Author: edlinger Date: Mon Sep 12 20:18:16 2016 New Revision: 240098 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240098=gcc=rev Log: gcc/c-family: 2016-09-12 Bernd Edlinger

[Bug c++/77496] ICE in instantiate_type, at cp/class.c:8270

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77496 Bernd Edlinger changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/77571] __clear_cache is broken on arm64 for big.little where the cache line sizes are different between cores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77571 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- really there needs to be no caching at all because the code could migrate between the cores.

[Bug target/77571] __clear_cache is broken on arm64 for big.little where the cache line sizes are different between cores

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77571 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- That is even reverting the patch can still cause issues. Really this code should just hard code 4 as the smallest size. Or change the loop to get the sizes through the whole loop.

[Bug target/77570] [msp430-elf] Wrong assembly in delay_cycles_32x insn declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77570 DJ Delorie changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/77572] New: wrong value for extended ASCII characters in diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77572 Bug ID: 77572 Summary: wrong value for extended ASCII characters in diagnostics Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug target/77570] New: [msp430-elf] Wrong assembly in delay_cycles_32x insn declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77570 Bug ID: 77570 Summary: [msp430-elf] Wrong assembly in delay_cycles_32x insn declaration Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libgcc/77571] New: __clear_cache is broken on platforms that report different cache line sizes across CPUs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77571 Bug ID: 77571 Summary: __clear_cache is broken on platforms that report different cache line sizes across CPUs Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug lto/77576] gcc-ar doesn't work if all options are read from file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77576 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|major |normal --- Comment #1 from Andrew

[Bug c/72858] incorrect fixit hints in -Wformat diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72858 --- Comment #3 from David Malcolm --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #2) > Author: dmalcolm > Date: Mon Sep 12 16:01:02 2016 > New Revision: 240095 The above commit fixes many of these issues; Martin identified some further

[Bug sanitizer/67899] build failure in the sanitizer libs on sparc-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67899 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson --- Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg00647.html

[Bug sanitizer/77567] ASAN: Bugus error "alloc-dealloc-mismatch (malloc vs operator delete [])" with C++17's over-aligned types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77567 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- I guess libasan needs to add the new C++17 aligned new operator entrypoints. Dmitry, are you going to add this upstream yourself, or should I cook a patch?

[Bug middle-end/77568] [7 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug lto/77576] New: gcc-ar doesn't work if all options are read from file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77576 Bug ID: 77576 Summary: gcc-ar doesn't work if all options are read from file Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/77420] [5/6/7 Regression] gfortran and equivalence produces internal compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77420 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Bug c++/77573] New: bogus wide string literals in diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77573 Bug ID: 77573 Summary: bogus wide string literals in diagnostics Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/77575] New: Bogus error when alias template yielding a reference type used as template template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77575 Bug ID: 77575 Summary: Bogus error when alias template yielding a reference type used as template template argument Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/77574] New: Wrong if condition in predict.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77574 Bug ID: 77574 Summary: Wrong if condition in predict.c Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug tree-optimization/67328] range test rather than single bit test for code testing enum values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67328 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug sanitizer/77567] New: ASAN: Bugus error "alloc-dealloc-mismatch (malloc vs operator delete [])" with C++17's over-aligned types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77567 Bug ID: 77567 Summary: ASAN: Bugus error "alloc-dealloc-mismatch (malloc vs operator delete [])" with C++17's over-aligned types Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status:

[Bug c/72858] incorrect fixit hints in -Wformat diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72858 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Mon Sep 12 16:01:02 2016 New Revision: 240095 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240095=gcc=rev Log: Fix suggestions for non-trivial Wformat type cases (PR c/72858)