[Bug debug/83758] ICE building gccgo on powerpc64le --with-cpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83758 --- Comment #13 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org --- one more interesting piece ... Copying gcc/libbackend.a and gcc/*.o from willow2 (working build) to genoa and linking go1 does not result in a working go1 binary. But, also copying over

[Bug debug/83728] [8 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr68037-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83728 --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu --- *** Bug 81570 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug debug/81570] create_pseudo_cfg assumes that INCOMING_FRAME_SP_OFFSET is a constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81570 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/79793] Incorrect stack alignment for interrupt handler in 64-bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79793 Bug 79793 depends on bug 81570, which changed state. Bug 81570 Summary: create_pseudo_cfg assumes that INCOMING_FRAME_SP_OFFSET is a constant https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81570 What|Removed

[Bug fortran/80768] NULL pointer dereferenced in gfc_check_num_images at fortran/check.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80768 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #5

[Bug c++/83912] [constexpr] struct with a pointer to one of its members, returned by a function, is not a constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83912 --- Comment #3 from Giuseppe Campana --- The snippet showed by DR2022 (http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#2022) works fine with gcc, but it fails to compile if the object passes through a function. As pointed out by Jakub,

[Bug c++/83921] [7/8 Regression] GCC rejects constexpr initialization of empty aggregate.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83921 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug ada/83935] New: DWARF for a variant part is incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83935 Bug ID: 83935 Summary: DWARF for a variant part is incorrect Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada

[Bug c++/83714] [8 Regression] ICE in build_address, at cp/typeck.c:5733

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83714 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Thu Jan 18 22:15:32 2018 New Revision: 256866 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256866=gcc=rev Log: Fix template/inherit4.C. PR c++/83714 * search.c

[Bug c++/82249] [8 Regression] wrong mismatched argument pack lengths

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82249 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug translation/80188] calls.c: reason argument to maybe_complain_about_tail_call must be marked for translation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80188 --- Comment #5 from nik --- On 2018-01-17 02:15 AM, egallager at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80188 > > --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager --- > (In reply to nik from comment #3) >> Created attachment

[Bug libstdc++/83938] Speed up inplace_merge() algorithm & fix inefficient logic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83938 --- Comment #1 from WeiChungChang --- Created attachment 43182 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43182=edit report report in detail

[Bug translation/80188] calls.c: reason argument to maybe_complain_about_tail_call must be marked for translation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80188 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager

[Bug libstdc++/83938] Speed up inplace_merge() algorithm & fix inefficient logic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83938 WeiChungChang changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://drive.google.com/op

[Bug preprocessor/47047] Support for path translation in __FILE__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47047 Boris Kolpackov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||boris at kolpackov dot net ---

[Bug libstdc++/83938] New: Speed up inplace_merge() algorithm & fix inefficient logic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83938 Bug ID: 83938 Summary: Speed up inplace_merge() algorithm & fix inefficient logic Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/83921] [7/8 Regression] GCC rejects constexpr initialization of empty aggregate.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83921 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/83922] [8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in contains_struct_check)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83922 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/61240] [6/7/8 Regression] Incorrect warning "integer overflow in expression" on pointer-pointer subtraction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61240 --- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Jan 18 08:29:14 2018 New Revision: 256838 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256838=gcc=rev Log: PR c/61240 * match.pd ((P + A) - P, P - (P + A), (P + A) - (P +

[Bug ipa/83051] [8 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3: in edge_badness, at ipa-inline.c:1024

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83051 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/81601] [7/8 Regression] incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- Sure, for working on GIMPLE the code needs to be adjusted. On the other side, the advantage is that it will then be able to handle even cases that it couldn't before. Like right now it can handle: struct S

[Bug c++/83921] [7/8 Regression] GCC rejects constexpr initialization of empty aggregate.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83921 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Priority|P3

[Bug c++/83916] [7/8 Regression] Internal compiler error on valid template code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83916 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug c++/83919] [8 regression] spurious -Wignored-qualifiers warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83919 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Priority|P3

[Bug c/61240] [6/7 Regression] Incorrect warning "integer overflow in expression" on pointer-pointer subtraction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61240 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] |[6/7 Regression] Incorrect

[Bug c++/83918] [8 Regression][c++17] ICE on constexpr eval of datatype involving function and variadic template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83918 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- For the record, there is another possible fix. Quoted loop nest from gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr81303.f: do j=1,ny jm1=mod(j+ny-2,ny)+1 jp1=mod(j,ny)+1

[Bug c++/83918] [8 Regression][c++17] ICE on constexpr eval of datatype involving function and variadic template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83918 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug sanitizer/81601] [7/8 Regression] incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek --- Note, it isn't just optimize_bit_field_compare, but also fold_truth_andor_1 that creates this stuff. Doing this at gimple might have best framework in the reassoc pass, because you need to look through

[Bug target/65578] FAIL: gcc.target/arm/builtin-bswap-1.c (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65578 --- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Thu Jan 18 09:30:58 2018 New Revision: 256840 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256840=gcc=rev Log: [arm] PR target/65578: Fix builtin-bswap16-1.c and

[Bug debug/83917] [8 Regression] with -mcall-ms2sysv-xlogues, stepping into x86 tail-call restore stub gives bad backtrace

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83917 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-debug Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/83918] [8 Regression][c++17] ICE on constexpr eval of datatype involving function and variadic template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83918 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug sanitizer/81601] [7/8 Regression] incorrect Warray-bounds warning with -fsanitize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601 --- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek --- Testcase where in f1/f3/f5 this optimization is done early (already in *.original dump), but in f2/f4/f6 is not. struct S { unsigned a:5; unsigned b:3; unsigned c:2; }; void bar (void); void f1 (struct S

[Bug c++/83923] New: No destructor called for constructor argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83923 Bug ID: 83923 Summary: No destructor called for constructor argument Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/83919] [8 regression] spurious -Wignored-qualifiers warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83919 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/83922] [8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in contains_struct_check)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83922 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 > > --- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- > For the record, there is

[Bug c++/83937] [REGRESSION] C++17 binds braced init of a type T to default arg of a ctor instead of using T's own default ctor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83937 --- Comment #1 from Raphael S. Carvalho --- another interesting example which shows the bug: https://godbolt.org/g/nMdPBF

[Bug fortran/78797] It is time perhaps to implement -std=f2015

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78797 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #8

[Bug c++/83936] New: [feature request] Allow constexpr char* as target argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83936 Bug ID: 83936 Summary: [feature request] Allow constexpr char* as target argument Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/49363] [feature request] multiple target attribute (and runtime dispatching based on cpuid)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49363 Roland Schulz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||roland at rschulz dot eu --- Comment

[Bug c++/83936] [feature request] Allow constexpr char* as target argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83936 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #1 from Andrew

[Bug fortran/80768] NULL pointer dereferenced in gfc_check_num_images at fortran/check.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80768 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/83936] [feature request] Allow constexpr char* as target argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83936 --- Comment #2 from Roland Schulz --- Do you mean for the target attribute or for all attributes in general? The following example suggests that for the alloc_align attribute it works to have the argument depend on a template argument. template

[Bug ipa/83619] [8 Regression] ICE in inliner: caller edge count does not match BB count

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83619 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Jan 18 23:39:26 2018 New Revision: 256867 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256867=gcc=rev Log: PR ipa/83619 PR testsuite/83934 * g++.dg/torture/pr83619.C

[Bug testsuite/83934] [8 regression] new test case g++.dg/torture/pr83619.C fails starting with its introduction in r256850

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83934 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Jan 18 23:39:26 2018 New Revision: 256867 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256867=gcc=rev Log: PR ipa/83619 PR testsuite/83934 * g++.dg/torture/pr83619.C

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 > > --- Comment #16 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- > I hope it's possible to break

[Bug c++/83924] New: ICE: Error reporting routines re-entered with -Wduplicated-branches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83924 Bug ID: 83924 Summary: ICE: Error reporting routines re-entered with -Wduplicated-branches Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/80488] Erroneous error "lambda-expression in template argument"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80488 Andreas Reischuck changed: What|Removed |Added CC||arbmind at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/83924] ICE: Error reporting routines re-entered with -Wduplicated-branches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83924 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/83160] [8 regression] lvalue required as unary ‘&’ operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83160 --- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell --- Author: nathan Date: Thu Jan 18 11:53:50 2018 New Revision: 256842 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256842=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/83160] local ref to capture

[Bug c++/83160] [8 regression] lvalue required as unary ‘&’ operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83160 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/83927] Type-Bound Procedure on element of Derived Type PARAMETER Array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83927 --- Comment #2 from Adam Hirst --- I don't think this is a duplicate of pr59298 because, unlike pr59298, this doesn't cause an ICE.

[Bug testsuite/83934] [8 regression] new test case g++.dg/torture/pr83619.C fails starting with its introduction in r256850

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83934 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13) > On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 > > > > --- Comment #12 from

[Bug fortran/83866] [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_release_symbol, at fortran/symbol.c:3087

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83866 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/83887] [8 Regression] [graphite] ICE in verify_dominators, at dominance.c:1184 (error: dominator of 3 should be 21, not 18)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83887 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #16 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- I hope it's possible to break the dependence by reordering passes so that graphite/parallelization could be moved earlier. There are several issues like this IIRC.

[Bug fortran/83865] ICE in wide_int_to_tree_1, at tree.c:1567

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83865 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/83919] [8 regression] spurious -Wignored-qualifiers warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83919 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #11) > On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > I think the zeroing stmt can be distributed into a separate loop nest > (up to

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 > > --- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de

[Bug target/65578] FAIL: gcc.target/arm/builtin-bswap-1.c (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65578 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/82560] [7/8 Regression] Temporary object created as a default argument not destructed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82560 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mszyszkowski93 at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/83923] No destructor called for constructor argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83923 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/83920] [nvptx] bad predicate reset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83920 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/83887] [8 Regression] [graphite] ICE in verify_dominators, at dominance.c:1184 (error: dominator of 3 should be 21, not 18)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83887 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Jan 18 10:59:33 2018 New Revision: 256841 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256841=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-18 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 > > --- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de

<    1   2