[Bug target/54589] struct offset add should be folded into address calculation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54589 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug demangler/85452] Stack-Overflow in nm-new / C++ name demangler (binuitils-2.30-15ubuntu1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85452 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug demangler/85373] Ice in demangler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85373 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/87861] [9 regression] ICE in output_constructor_regular_field, at varasm.c:5165

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87861 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45178|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/88304] [9 Regression] ICE in use_pointer_in_frame, at tree-nested.c:267

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/88398] vectorization failure for a small loop to do byte comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398 Wilco changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from

[Bug target/86753] [9 Regression] gcc.target/aarch64/sve/vcond_[45].c fail after recent combine patch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86753 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/54589] struct offset add should be folded into address calculation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54589 Jaydeep Chauhan changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jaydeepchauhan1494 at gmail dot co

[Bug middle-end/63184] [7/8/9 Regression] Fails to simplify comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63184 --- Comment #21 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 45180 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45180=edit reassoc patch The reassoc patch, not solving the issue in its own.

[Bug middle-end/63184] [7/8/9 Regression] Fails to simplify comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63184 --- Comment #20 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 45179 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45179=edit patch This patch fixes the testcases but it comes at a cost without much visible benefit (trying 258098 expansions

[Bug fortran/88304] [9 Regression] ICE in use_pointer_in_frame, at tree-nested.c:267

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304 --- Comment #15 from Harald Anlauf --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14) > Author: jakub > Date: Thu Dec 6 10:28:31 2018 > New Revision: 266847 > > URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266847=gcc=rev This fixes the original

[Bug c++/87335] The stack overflow in function cplus_demangle_type in cp-demangle.c:2565 (c++filt -t)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87335 --- Comment #12 from Nick Clifton --- Author: nickc Date: Fri Dec 7 10:33:30 2018 New Revision: 266886 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266886=gcc=rev Log: Add a recursion limit to libiberty's demangling code. The limit is enabled by

[Bug demangler/87681] Recursive Stack Overflow within function d_name, d_encoding, and d_local_name in cp-demangle.c, as demonstrated by "nm -C"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87681 --- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton --- Author: nickc Date: Fri Dec 7 10:33:30 2018 New Revision: 266886 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266886=gcc=rev Log: Add a recursion limit to libiberty's demangling code. The limit is enabled by

[Bug c++/87636] Infinite Recursive Stack Frames in cp-demangle.c in libiberty(function cplus_demangle_type, d_bare_function_type, d_function_type)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87636 --- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton --- Author: nickc Date: Fri Dec 7 10:33:30 2018 New Revision: 266886 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266886=gcc=rev Log: Add a recursion limit to libiberty's demangling code. The limit is enabled by

[Bug demangler/87675] Stack Overflow in function next_is_type_qual() in cp-demangle.c, as demonstrated by "nm -C"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87675 --- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton --- Author: nickc Date: Fri Dec 7 10:33:30 2018 New Revision: 266886 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266886=gcc=rev Log: Add a recursion limit to libiberty's demangling code. The limit is enabled by

[Bug c++/87350] NULL-Pointer problem in cplus-dem.c when executing program c++filt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87350 --- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton --- Author: nickc Date: Fri Dec 7 10:33:30 2018 New Revision: 266886 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266886=gcc=rev Log: Add a recursion limit to libiberty's demangling code. The limit is enabled by

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 --- Comment #16 from Valeriy E. Ushakov --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #15) > (In reply to Valeriy E. Ushakov from comment #11) > > Created attachment 44668 [details] > > Diff against gcc-6.4.0 > > > > This is essentially the same

[Bug middle-end/88401] New: -Wshift-overflow only works for const variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88401 Bug ID: 88401 Summary: -Wshift-overflow only works for const variables Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/88390] [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88390 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/88390] [9 regression] g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88390 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/87861] [9 regression] ICE in output_constructor_regular_field, at varasm.c:5165

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87861 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 45178 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45178=edit gcc9-ia64-constexpr-virtual.patch Here is untested patch to fix all g++.dg/cpp2a/constexpr-virtual*.C failures, not

[Bug tree-optimization/88398] vectorization failure for a small loop to do byte comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- No, because that has different behavior. In particular, it reads all bytes from 0 to max - 1 from both arrays, rather than stopping at the first one. If both pointers are aligned the same modulo simd size,

[Bug tree-optimization/88398] vectorization failure for a small loop to do byte comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/88400] address-sanitizer on the cpu with only one core, may deadlock

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88400 --- Comment #4 from hhj --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Also this seems like it is an upstream issue too. This is how we handle it. When the parent's sched_priority isn't sam as the children's 1 If the parent's

[Bug c/88391] Request - attribute for adding tags to functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88391 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug sanitizer/88400] address-sanitizer on the cpu with only one core, may deadlock

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88400 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Also this seems like it is an upstream issue too.

[Bug c/88392] Incorrect error message when using bitfields in void *pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88392 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug fortran/88393] [7/8/9 Regression] [OOP] Segfault with type-bound assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88393 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/88398] vectorization failure for a small loop to do byte comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug sanitizer/88400] address-sanitizer on the cpu with only one core, may deadlock

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88400 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Please provide a testcase to reproduce the issue. Also note that GCC 6 is no longer supported. This sounds like an issue in the libsanitizer interceptor to me, the pthread_create interceptor does //

[Bug c++/87861] [9 regression] ICE in output_constructor_regular_field, at varasm.c:5165

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87861 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug sanitizer/88400] address-sanitizer on the cpu with only one core, may deadlock

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88400 hhj changed: What|Removed |Added CC||He.Hongjun at zte dot com.cn --- Comment #1 from

[Bug sanitizer/88400] New: address-sanitizer on the cpu with only one core, may deadlock

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88400 Bug ID: 88400 Summary: address-sanitizer on the cpu with only one core, may deadlock Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/88399] New: program segmentation faults when out-of-memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88399 Bug ID: 88399 Summary: program segmentation faults when out-of-memory Product: gcc Version: 5.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/39222] out of memory bootstrapping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39222 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/88397] attribute malloc ignored on function pointers when alloc_size is accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88397 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug target/55523] gencondmd C++ conversion breaks peephole2 predicates use of get_attr_*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55523 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/88398] vectorization failure for a small loop to do byte comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398 --- Comment #4 from Jiangning Liu --- I expect "gcc -O3 -flto" could work.

[Bug tree-optimization/88398] vectorization failure for a small loop to do byte comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

<    1   2