[Bug tree-optimization/80620] [7/8 Regression] gcc produces wrong code with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80620 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target

[Bug tree-optimization/80618] [8 regression] test case gcc.dg/pr50310-2.c fails with ICE starting with 247544

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80618 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/80620] [7/8 Regression] gcc produces wrong code with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80620 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Simplified testcase (for -O3): long long int a = -465274079317386463LL; int b = 856872806; int c = -1940894202; int d = 1718449211; int e = -392681565; unsigned long long int f = 13521452247506316486ULL; int

[Bug tree-optimization/80620] gcc produces wrong code with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80620 --- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak --- For some reason func.c, compiled with -O3 is missing a couple of insns vs -O2: $ diff -u func-O2.s func-O3.s --- func-O2.s 2017-05-04 08:24:33.0 +0200 +++ func-O3.s 2017-05-04 08:23:26.0

[Bug tree-optimization/80620] gcc produces wrong code with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80620 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/80622] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/80614] [7/8 Regression] Bad mangling for noexcept abominable function types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80614 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ABI Priority|P3

[Bug c++/80613] [8 Regression] ICE in is_gimple_reg_type with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Hmm, cddce leaves us with free (_11) and the def of _11 removed. _11 was Deleting LHS of call: _11 = strdup (); so caused by 2017-04-29 Prathamesh Kulkarni PR

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu May 4 07:54:59 2017 New Revision: 247579 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247579=gcc=rev Log: Replace absolute line numbers in gcc.target/i386 2017-05-04 Tom de Vries

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Thu May 4 07:55:11 2017 New Revision: 247580 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247580=gcc=rev Log: Replace absolute line numbers in g++.dg/warn 2017-05-04 Tom de Vries

[Bug c++/80613] [8 Regression] ICE in is_gimple_reg_type with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613 --- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Sorry for the breakage, I will take a look. Regards, Prathamesh

[Bug c++/80613] [8 Regression] ICE in is_gimple_reg_type with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Version|7.0

[Bug tree-optimization/80622] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug tree-optimization/80621] [8 regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80621 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/80620] [8 Regression] gcc produces wrong code with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80620 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Version|7.0.1

[Bug c++/80613] ice in is_gimple_reg_type with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/80621] [8 regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80621 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/80622] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/69460] ARM Cortex M0 produces suboptimal code vs Cortex M3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69460 --- Comment #6 from strntydog at gmail dot com --- I have built GCC 7.1.0 and have tested this optimization bug against that. It persists. Further, the new target cortx-m23 is affected by the bug, exactly the same as Cortex M0/M0+ and M1 The

[Bug tree-optimization/31130] [5/6/7/8 Regression] VRP no longer derives range for division after negation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31130 --- Comment #28 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 4 07:29:55 2017 New Revision: 247578 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247578=gcc=rev Log: 2017-05-04 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/80622] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yes, it is a regression in between r247445 and r247508, I strongly suspect r247497.

[Bug c++/80613] 8ice in is_gimple_reg_type with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/80613] [8 Regression] ICE in is_gimple_reg_type with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|8ice in is_gimple_reg_type |[8 Regression] ICE in

[Bug tree-optimization/80620] [8 Regression] gcc produces wrong code with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80620 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Ugh. This is really another latent issue with PRE and range-info. When PHI-translating {bit_and_expr,a.12_17,4081116982543369} when valueizing a.12_17 we end up with a leader for a.12_17 as

[Bug c++/80593] [7/8 Regression] GCC 7, aligned_storage and “dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules”

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80593 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- The set1 == 0 stuff has been added in r136679.

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries --- 106 testcases remaining. [ Or 94, if we ignore i386/avx-* (see PR80606). ]

[Bug tree-optimization/80612] [7/8 Regression] ICE in get_range_info, at tree-ssanames.c:375

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80612 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c/80622] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug tree-optimization/80617] [missed optimization] Storing constant in two possibly-aliased locations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80617 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug testsuite/80611] [8 regression] test case gfortran.dg/coarray_lock_7.f90 fails starting with r247495

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80611 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/80627] New: The Dart is crashing when glibc is compiled with arch armv7-a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80627 Bug ID: 80627 Summary: The Dart is crashing when glibc is compiled with arch armv7-a Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/80625] gcc fails to notice strdup does not modify it's argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80625 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- s might be a global variable, that foo modifies.

[Bug tree-optimization/80625] gcc fails to notice strdup does not modify it's argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80625 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/80612] [7/8 Regression] ICE in get_range_info, at tree-ssanames.c:375

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80612 --- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Thu May 4 10:35:58 2017 New Revision: 247586 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247586=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/80612 * calls.c (get_size_range): Check for

[Bug tree-optimization/80612] [7 Regression] ICE in get_range_info, at tree-ssanames.c:375

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80612 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[7/8 Regression] ICE in |[7 Regression] ICE in

[Bug c++/80614] [7/8 Regression] Bad mangling for noexcept abominable function types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80614 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2) > Bisection points to r241958 but that is nonsense, so I suspect r241944. Yes that would have been my guess.

[Bug tree-optimization/80625] New: gcc fails to notice strdup does not modify it's argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80625 Bug ID: 80625 Summary: gcc fails to notice strdup does not modify it's argument Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug ada/80626] New: Ada x32 multilib build failure for a-cfinve.ads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80626 Bug ID: 80626 Summary: Ada x32 multilib build failure for a-cfinve.ads Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug ada/80626] Ada x32 multilib build failure for a-cfinve.ads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80626 --- Comment #1 from Steven Noonan --- I configured with these flags, if they're needed for repro: --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib --libexecdir=/usr/lib

[Bug tree-optimization/80617] [missed optimization] Storing constant in two possibly-aliased locations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80617 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener

[Bug libstdc++/80624] char_traits::eof() doesn't meet requirements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80624 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/80617] [missed optimization] Storing constant in two possibly-aliased locations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80617 --- Comment #3 from S. Davis Herring --- Created attachment 41314 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41314=edit bad assembly test case

[Bug ada/80626] Ada x32 multilib build failure for a-cfinve.ads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80626 --- Comment #2 from Steven Noonan --- It looks like this is just the first of several files with that build issue. If I build with 'make -k' I see several others fail with the same warning, e.g.:

[Bug tree-optimization/80622] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor --- The simplest fix is the following, but I'll move the whole test a bit earlier in a patch to the mailing list: diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c index 1606573aead..79ca1666c15 100644 ---

[Bug tree-optimization/80617] [missed optimization] Storing constant in two possibly-aliased locations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80617 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- MEM[(void * &)a_2(D)] = 0B; MEM[(void * &)b_3(D)] = 0B; _7 = MEM[(void * &)a_2(D)]; Indeed.

[Bug tree-optimization/80617] [missed optimization] Storing constant in two possibly-aliased locations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80617 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- C testcase: int foo (int *p, int *q) { *p = 1; *q = 1; return *p; }

[Bug tree-optimization/80625] gcc fails to notice strdup does not modify it's argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80625 --- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Ah indeed, sorry for the noise.

[Bug debug/80628] New: gcc 7.1.0 produces duplicate entries in .debug_gnu_pubtypes table

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80628 Bug ID: 80628 Summary: gcc 7.1.0 produces duplicate entries in .debug_gnu_pubtypes table Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug debug/80629] Missing .loc for a function in the presence of -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80629 --- Comment #1 from Matt Godbolt --- This bug is noticeable in Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/g/scFj7A for example; the function is not colourised as CE uses the .locs to track how the source lines map to asm. One can also see how the

[Bug fortran/80554] [f08] variable redefinition in submodule

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80554 --- Comment #3 from Tamas Bela Feher --- Dear Dominique, Thank you for looking into the problem. > Why do you want to use such constructs? I was refactoring and splitting large modules into submodules when I accidentally run into this

[Bug target/80600] hidden symbol `__cpu_model' is referenced by DSO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80600 --- Comment #10 from coypu --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #9) > > This may break Linux. You may want to investigate if this approach: > > commit 6e6c7fc1e15525a10f48d4f5ac2edd853e2f5cb7 > Author: nsz

[Bug c/80638] -ansi suppresses -Wstringop-overflow for mempcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80638 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- >Calls to known library functions that overflow should be diagnosed regardless >of -ansi. No, because mempcpy is not included in the ISO standard. Basically -ansi is the same as doing -fstd=c11.

[Bug c/80638] -ansi suppresses -Wstringop-overflow for mempcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80638 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/80638] -ansi suppresses -Wstringop-overflow for mempcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80638 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- If you had used __builtin_mempcpy you would have got the warning.

[Bug c/80632] New: error: invalid PHI argument with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80632 Bug ID: 80632 Summary: error: invalid PHI argument with -O2 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c/80632] error: invalid PHI argument with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80632 --- Comment #2 from David Binderman --- Reduced code: a; b() { int c; if (d()) { e(); switch (a) { case 0: c = 1; break; case 1: c = 0; break; case 2: c = 0; break; case 3: c

[Bug middle-end/79223] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a memmove overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79223 --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu May 4 20:54:43 2017 New Revision: 247618 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247618=gcc=rev Log: PR preprocessor/79214 - -Wno-system-header defeats strncat buffer overflow

[Bug preprocessor/79214] -Wno-system-header defeats strncat buffer overflow warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79214 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu May 4 20:54:43 2017 New Revision: 247618 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247618=gcc=rev Log: PR preprocessor/79214 - -Wno-system-header defeats strncat buffer overflow

[Bug middle-end/79222] missing -Wstringop-overflow= on a stpcpy overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79222 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu May 4 20:54:43 2017 New Revision: 247618 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247618=gcc=rev Log: PR preprocessor/79214 - -Wno-system-header defeats strncat buffer overflow

[Bug libstdc++/54924] Warn for std::string constructor with wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54924 Bug 54924 depends on bug 79214, which changed state. Bug 79214 Summary: -Wno-system-header defeats strncat buffer overflow warnings https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79214 What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/79223] missing -Wstringop-overflow on a memmove overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79223 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/80632] [8 Regression] error: invalid PHI argument with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80632 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug other/80634] strangely missed vectorization optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80634 --- Comment #1 from Steven Noonan --- Created attachment 41323 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41323=edit icc 17.0.1 outputs for ELEMS=1 through ELEMS=32

[Bug other/80634] New: strangely missed vectorization optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80634 Bug ID: 80634 Summary: strangely missed vectorization optimizations Product: gcc Version: 6.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/80635] New: std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-uninitilized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635 Bug ID: 80635 Summary: std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-uninitilized Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/80635] std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-uninitilized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635 --- Comment #1 from Pedro Alves --- If you uncomment the lines to use std::optional instead, you get: $ /opt/gcc/bin/g++ optional.cc -g3 -O2 -Wall -std=gnu++17 -c optional.cc: In function ‘void func()’: optional.cc:28:15: warning:

[Bug tree-optimization/80632] [8 Regression] error: invalid PHI argument with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80632 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/80564] bind on SFINAE unfriendly generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80564 --- Comment #7 from Robert Haberlach --- Oh, damn. "Submit only my new comment" does not what I thought it does. :-)

[Bug c/80631] [6/7/8 Regression] Compiling with -O3 -mavx2 gives wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/80564] bind on SFINAE unfriendly generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80564 TC changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com --- Comment #4 from TC

[Bug libstdc++/80564] bind on SFINAE unfriendly generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80564 --- Comment #5 from r.hl at gmx dot net --- See also the discussion on Phabricator: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32824 I agree; AFAICS [func.bind.bind] is clear on this: the type of the Func object used to call the member operator() is non-const.

[Bug c/80632] error: invalid PHI argument with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80632 --- Comment #1 from David Binderman --- This bugs seems to have appeared between revision 247534 and 247578. I'll have a go at reducing it.

[Bug libstdc++/80564] bind on SFINAE unfriendly generic lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80564 --- Comment #6 from Robert Haberlach --- (In reply to TC from comment #4) > (In reply to Eric Fiselier from comment #3) > > Here is an example of why `_Bind::operator()(...) const` must be considered > > during overload

[Bug c++/80633] New: [7/8 Regression] -Wstrict-aliasing false positive

: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: Casey at Carter dot net Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 41321 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41321=edit Repro (sorry, not library-free) gcc 7.1.1 20170504 and 8.0.0 20170504 - but not

[Bug preprocessor/79214] -Wno-system-header defeats strncat buffer overflow warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79214 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug middle-end/79222] missing -Wstringop-overflow= on a stpcpy overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79222 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug c++/80614] [7/8 Regression] Bad mangling for noexcept abominable function types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80614 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/80617] [missed optimization] Storing constant in two possibly-aliased locations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80617 --- Comment #2 from S. Davis Herring --- So sorry. For whatever reason, copy/paste works for me thence... #include #include #include struct A { // vaguely unique_ptr-like void *p; A(A &) : p(a.release()) {} ~A()

[Bug target/80627] The Dart is crashing when glibc is compiled with arch armv7-a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80627 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID

[Bug target/80627] The Dart is crashing when glibc is compiled with arch armv7-a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80627 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/80627] The Dart is crashing when glibc is compiled with arch armv7-a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80627 tomas_paukrt at conel dot cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/80627] The Dart is crashing when glibc is compiled with arch armv7-a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80627 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/80622] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 --- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor --- Author: jamborm Date: Thu May 4 16:19:20 2017 New Revision: 247604 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247604=gcc=rev Log: [PR 80622] Treat const pools as initialized in SRA 2017-05-04 Martin Jambor

[Bug c++/67650] undef reference with -fdevirtualize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67650 --- Comment #15 from Vincent --- Still there in 7.1.0.

[Bug tree-optimization/80457] vectorizable_condition does not update the vectorizer cost model

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80457 --- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt --- OK, will do (probably next week after things hopefully unstack a bit). Thanks!

[Bug tree-optimization/80617] [missed optimization] Storing constant in two possibly-aliased locations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80617 --- Comment #7 from S. Davis Herring --- We can extend the C test case (thanks for that) with a shared, non-constant value (and more savings by having dead code as in the original C++ example): void foo(int *p,int *q,int x) { *q=*p=x;

[Bug tree-optimization/80620] [8 Regression] gcc produces wrong code with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80620 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Now needs sth before r247596 to reproduce. The whole PRE_EXPR_NARY (expr) = newnary; constant = fully_constant_expression (expr); PRE_EXPR_NARY (expr) = nary;

[Bug tree-optimization/80574] GCC fail to optimize nested ternary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80574 SztfG at yandex dot ru changed: What|Removed |Added CC||SztfG at yandex dot ru ---

[Bug tree-optimization/80618] [8 regression] test case gcc.dg/pr50310-2.c fails with ICE starting with 247544

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80618 --- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- Yup, you were right. Compiling with r247543: seurer@genoa:~/gcc/build/gcc-test$ /home/seurer/gcc/build/gcc-test/gcc/xgcc -B/home/seurer/gcc/build/gcc-test/gcc/

[Bug tree-optimization/80622] [8 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80622 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #6) > The simplest fix is the following, but I'll move the whole test a bit > earlier in a patch to the mailing list: Which is now posted at

[Bug c++/80587] Incorrect type from outer scope inside lambda under some conditions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80587 --- Comment #1 from jas...@3db-labs.com --- I neglected to include the preprocessed source file. It is too large to attach here, so I posted it at: https://gist.github.com/otherjason/9f50d3f36207ea4b40bb805f6c710304

[Bug fortran/70071] ICE on wrong usage of a subscript triplet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70071 --- Comment #4 from Harald Anlauf --- (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #3) The patch in comment #3 regtests cleanly on i686-pc-linux-gnu and has been posted here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2017-05/msg00010.html

[Bug c++/80635] std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635 --- Comment #2 from Pedro Alves --- Looks like a regression at some point: There are no warnings with g++ 5.3.1, either reduced testcase, or with the obvious change to use std::experimental::optional instead of std::optional. Also no warnings

[Bug middle-end/79234] warn on past the end reads by library functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79234 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/54924] Warn for std::string constructor with wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54924 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu May 4 23:50:21 2017 New Revision: 247622 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247622=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/54924 - Warn for std::string constructor with wrong size PR

[Bug c/80638] New: -ansi suppresses -Wstringop-overflow for mempcpy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80638 Bug ID: 80638 Summary: -ansi suppresses -Wstringop-overflow for mempcpy Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/80600] hidden symbol `__cpu_model' is referenced by DSO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80600 --- Comment #8 from coypu --- Created attachment 41317 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41317=edit Unbreak NetBSD following r243219 This patch works for me.

[Bug translation/80280] Missing closing quote (%>) c/semantics.c and c/c-typeck.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80280 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu May 4 17:40:05 2017 New Revision: 247607 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247607=gcc=rev Log: PR translation/80280 - Missing closing quote (%>) c/semantics.c and c/c-typeck.c

[Bug c++/80630] New: gcc fails to compile constexpr with -O0/-O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80630 Bug ID: 80630 Summary: gcc fails to compile constexpr with -O0/-O1 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug libstdc++/54924] Warn for std::string constructor with wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54924 --- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor --- Sadly, even with pr79214 fixed and pr79234 implemented, -Wno-system-headers still somehow defeats the warning.

  1   2   >