[Bug tree-optimization/51301] Compiler ICE in vect_is_simple_use_1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51301 Ira Rosen irar at il dot ibm.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/51343] compile GCC4.6.2 in apple OS X 10.6.8, error found. and also in 4.6.1 4.5.0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51343 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc

[Bug middle-end/50074] [4.7 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-6.c execution test on x86_64 with -fPIC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50074 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 08:48:47 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Nov 29 08:48:41 2011 New Revision: 181800 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181800 Log: PR middle-end/50074

[Bug target/51330] Compiling issue that seems specific to i586 with gcc 4.6

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51330 --- Comment #4 from Rémy remy.garrigue at gmail dot com 2011-11-29 09:38:52 UTC --- I tried but I'm unable to produce the preprocessed files. So... well, I'll try to package my stuff using gcc 4.5 later. Regarding 4.6, I can't afford to spend

[Bug tree-optimization/50622] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed for std::complexdouble

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622 --- Comment #6 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-11-29 09:42:31 UTC --- This ICE is still present with revision 181800. It does block our tests and validation of 4.7

[Bug middle-end/51323] g++ confuses this with function argument in optimized call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323 --- Comment #7 from David Kastrup dak at gnu dot org 2011-11-29 09:43:44 UTC --- I agree that the real fix is to force an upgrade of the compiler to a fixed version. However, Ubuntu 11.10 has been released and is in circulation, so we can't

[Bug tree-optimization/51315] gcc 4.6.2 miscompilation with -ftree-sra (included in -O2) on Debian/sparc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51315 Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot

[Bug tree-optimization/50374] Support vectorization of min/max location pattern

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374 --- Comment #21 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-11-29 09:54:49 UTC --- My understanding is that we cannot count to see a min/max location pattern vectorization in 4.7, isn't it?

[Bug fortran/51306] MOVE_ALLOC: Make more middle end friendlier

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51306 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 09:57:45 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Tue Nov 29 09:57:40 2011 New Revision: 181801 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181801 Log: 2011-11-29 Tobias Burnus

[Bug fortran/48700] memory leak with MOVE_ALLOC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48700 --- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 09:57:45 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Tue Nov 29 09:57:40 2011 New Revision: 181801 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181801 Log: 2011-11-29 Tobias Burnus

[Bug tree-optimization/50374] Support vectorization of min/max location pattern

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374 --- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 09:58:40 UTC --- I gave up on it, because it still needed lots of changes in the generic vectorizer. Guess I can update the patch so that it at least applies, but there is

[Bug fortran/48700] memory leak with MOVE_ALLOC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48700 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/51306] MOVE_ALLOC: Make more middle end friendlier

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51306 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/51331] bad code generated when explicitly calling auto-generated constructor of virtual base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51331 Andrew Zhezherun zhezherun at yandex dot ru changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug rtl-optimization/51044] [4.7 Regression]: gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_class_2.f90 gfortran.dg/widechar_intrinsics_10.f90 -O1 ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51044 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/50074] [4.7 Regression] gcc.dg/sibcall-6.c execution test on x86_64 with -fPIC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50074 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/49719] [4.7 Regression] test gcc.target/arm/sibcall-1.c fails for ARM

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49719 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/50374] Support vectorization of min/max location pattern

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374 --- Comment #23 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-11-29 10:10:06 UTC --- a working patch could be useful to check performance and quality of the generated ASM w.r.t. manually crafted soutions

[Bug c++/51336] [C++11] is_abstract and sfinae

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-11-29 10:11:34 UTC --- The issue with type_traits intrinsics vs instantiation came up recently, when I fixed an actual bug affecting __is_base_of. Note, if isn't clear

[Bug tree-optimization/51315] gcc 4.6.2 miscompilation with -ftree-sra (included in -O2) on Debian/sparc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51315 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-11-29 10:18:00 UTC --- I suspect it's a dupe of PR50569 or PR50444. (And if you hate alignment bugs like me you might also want to know about the 4.5-only PR46483.)

[Bug c++/51336] [C++11] is_abstract and sfinae

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336 --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org 2011-11-29 10:27:18 UTC --- All right, now the is_abstract behavior is settled, do you think the fixed code provided by Daniel in comment #1 should produce a warning, since the

[Bug middle-end/51323] [4.6/4.7 Regression] g++ confuses this with function argument in optimized call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug c++/51336] [C++11] is_abstract and sfinae

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336 Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug testsuite/50076] FAIL: c-c++-common/cxxbitfields-3.c scan-assembler movl.*, var on x86_64-apple-darwin10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50076 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2011-11-29 10:35:48 UTC --- I will be contributing a testing harness that is back-end agnostic, so it won't depend on scanning the assembly. Stay tuned. Any progress in this

[Bug libstdc++/1773] __cplusplus defined to 1, should be 199711L

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773 --- Comment #129 from Bruce Adams tortoise_74 at yahoo dot co.uk 2011-11-29 10:49:08 UTC --- doh! You are entirely right. It works just fine on the 2019 snapshot. Sorry for wasting time there. I was too fast on the email trigger. Mea culpa.

[Bug c++/51336] [C++11] is_abstract and sfinae

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336 --- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2011-11-29 10:50:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) All right, now the is_abstract behavior is settled, do you think the fixed code provided by Daniel in comment #1

AVR fails to build lto1

Hi Guys, I tried to build an avr-elf toolchain today from the current mainline GCC sources, but it fails building lto1 with: gcc/config/avr/avr.c:2591: undefined reference to `c_addr_space_name' Is there any chance that this can be fixed please ? (I am trying to investigate a

[Bug middle-end/51323] [4.6/4.7 Regression] g++ confuses this with function argument in optimized call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323 --- Comment #9 from David Kastrup dak at gnu dot org 2011-11-29 11:13:21 UTC --- Code review is at URL:http://codereview.appspot.com/5431088, the discussion of the bug is at URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1997. As you can

[Bug c++/51336] [C++11] is_abstract and sfinae

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336 Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/51336] [C++11] is_abstract and sfinae

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336 --- Comment #9 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2011-11-29 11:36:34 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) Looks interesting, although since we're talking about a future standard (at least I assume that's what you are talking

[Bug c++/51331] bad code generated when explicitly calling auto-generated constructor of virtual base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51331 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug c++/51344] New: cc1plus hangs when compiling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51344 Bug #: 51344 Summary: cc1plus hangs when compiling Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.5.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

RE: AVR fails to build lto1

Hi Nick, This was brought up 3 days ago on the gcc list: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-11/msg00463.html Eric Weddington -Original Message- From: Nick Clifton [mailto:ni...@redhat.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 3:51 AM To: cherty...@gmail.com; ae...@post.ru; Weddington, Eric

[Bug fortran/51268] [Regression] A subroutine can not know anymore its own interface

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51268 --- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 13:10:26 UTC --- Sebastien has now ask at c.l.f, cf. http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/ef3900ab261c5cd9 Suggested workaround/solution:

[Bug c++/51344] cc1plus hangs when compiling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51344 Keith Marshall keithmarshall at mailinator dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug target/51345] New: [avr] Devices with 8-bit SP need their own multilib(s)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51345 Bug #: 51345 Summary: [avr] Devices with 8-bit SP need their own multilib(s) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: FIXME,

[Bug target/51345] [avr] Devices with 8-bit SP need their own multilib(s)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51345 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug fortran/51268] [Regression] A subroutine can not know anymore its own interface

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51268 --- Comment #10 from Sebastien Bardeau bardeau at iram dot fr 2011-11-29 14:33:08 UTC --- Indeed this is a workaround that we will probably adopt. I would say that although I partially disagree the choices made in the Fortran Standards in this

[Bug fortran/49738] Compile errors on OSX darwin 11 (Lion)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49738 --- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-11-29 14:34:13 UTC --- This issue also impacts darwin10 users who have installed Xcode 4.2 since that release no longer includes Apple gcc-4.2 and now defaults the system

[Bug fortran/51268] [Regression] A subroutine can not know anymore its own interface

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51268 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/50374] Support vectorization of min/max location pattern

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374 --- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 14:46:59 UTC --- Created attachment 25945 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25945 gcc47-pr50374.patch This updated patch applies (had to remove various parts

[Bug preprocessor/51341] make cannot detect head file change by dependency file with gcc 4.6.1 on ubuntu 11.10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51341 --- Comment #3 from davidz dx_zhou at hotmail dot com 2011-11-29 14:56:41 UTC --- I am a little confused. -MT will create .d file. Then make command will include .d and re-compile if dependency file changes. The issue is that g++ 4.6.1 doesn't

[Bug tree-optimization/50374] Support vectorization of min/max location pattern

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374 --- Comment #25 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch 2011-11-29 15:24:02 UTC --- Thanks Jakub for the new patch. Using it I get this: any Idea how to fix/avoid?

[Bug preprocessor/51341] make cannot detect head file change by dependency file with gcc 4.6.1 on ubuntu 11.10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51341 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 15:26:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) I am a little confused. -MT will create .d file. Then make command will include .d and re-compile if dependency file changes. The

[Bug middle-end/51038] [4.7 Regression]: 29_atomics/atomic_flag/clear/1.cc test_and_set/explicit.cc implicit.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51038 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot

[Bug debug/51276] ICE: in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:19261

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51276 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org 2011-11-29 15:54:24 UTC --- This bug seems to have disappeared (cool!). At least the attached file doesn't crash g++, and I don't see this error anywhere in our testsuite anymore

[Bug debug/51276] ICE: in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:19261

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51276 fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fabien at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/51189] [4.7 Regression] ICE in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:19261

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51189 Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug debug/51276] ICE: in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:19261

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51276 Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/51038] [4.7 Regression]: 29_atomics/atomic_flag/clear/1.cc test_and_set/explicit.cc implicit.cc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51038 Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/51338] [4.6/4.7 Regression] seg fault in gfc_dep_compare_expr with -O2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338 Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug bootstrap/51346] New: [4.7 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51346 Bug #: 51346 Summary: [4.7 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug bootstrap/51346] [4.7 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51346 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-11-29 17:47:40 UTC --- It is caused by revision 181803: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-11/msg01097.html

[Bug bootstrap/51346] [4.7 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51346 H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0

[Bug bootstrap/51346] [4.7 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51346 --- Comment #2 from Diego Novillo dnovillo at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 17:50:01 UTC --- Investigating.

[Bug fortran/40958] module files too large

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 17:49:31 UTC --- Author: tkoenig Date: Tue Nov 29 17:49:24 2011 New Revision: 181810 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181810 Log: 2011-11-29 Thomas

[Bug bootstrap/51346] [4.7 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51346 Diego Novillo dnovillo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/51117] [4.7 regression] rev.181172 causes glibc build failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51117 Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Bug c++/51347] New: [trans-mem] Segfault on templates with -O1 -fgnu-tm

reproducible and tested on various configurations. I simplified code and made reduced testcase. gcc from the trunk rev 181801 date 2029. Debian gcc-snapshot 2014 has some problems. -- Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot --disable-bootstrap --enable-languages=c,c

[Bug c++/51347] [trans-mem] Segfault on templates with -O1 -fgnu-tm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51347 --- Comment #1 from Roman Tsisyk roman at tsisyk dot com 2011-11-29 18:59:31 UTC --- Created attachment 25947 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25947 gcc output 2029

[Bug debug/49951] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Debug stepping behavior regarding g++ Class destructor has changed for the worse starting at gcc 4.5.0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49951 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot

[Bug fortran/51310] -finit-bla doesn't initialize *all* items of type bla to the requested constant.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51310 --- Comment #1 from Toon Moene toon at moene dot org 2011-11-29 19:37:19 UTC --- Created attachment 25948 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25948 Untested patch to the documentation This is a completely untested patch to the

[Bug target/50123] cmpxchg generated for atomic and with zero/or with -1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50123 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com 2011-11-29 19:42:50 UTC --- Author: amacleod Date: Tue Nov 29 19:42:44 2011 New Revision: 181815 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181815 Log: 2011-11-29 Andrew

[Bug c++/51348] New: [c++0x] ICE in finish_class_member_access_expr with bogus(?) enum class use

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51348 Bug #: 51348 Summary: [c++0x] ICE in finish_class_member_access_expr with bogus(?) enum class use Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.2 Status:

[Bug testsuite/51349] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: obj-c++.dg/naming-[34].mm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51349 Bug #: 51349 Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: obj-c++.dg/naming-[34].mm Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/51247] [4.7 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:417

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51247 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 21:03:18 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Nov 29 21:03:09 2011 New Revision: 181818 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181818 Log: PR

[Bug tree-optimization/51247] [4.7 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at tree-vrp.c:417

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51247 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/51348] [c++0x] ICE in finish_class_member_access_expr with bogus(?) enum class use

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51348 --- Comment #1 from Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 21:52:49 UTC --- Confirmed. The code crashes since GCC 4.4.0 when scoped enums were introduced. The ICE also appears without the 'class' keyword before the enum.

[Bug c++/51348] [c++0x] ICE in finish_class_member_access_expr with bogus(?) enum class use

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51348 Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c++/51318] [4.7 Regression] segfault on Eigen3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51318 Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug c++/51319] [4.7 Regression] Eigen3 enums not accepted

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51319 Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug lto/51198] [c++0x] [4.7 Regression] ICE with -flto and non-static data member initializers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51198 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/51350] New: [4.7 Regression] Bogus -Wstrict-overflow warning: assuming signed overflow does not occur when assuming that (X + c) X is always false

compiling the following code with g++ -Wall -O2 test.cc, one gets with GCC 4.7.0 2029. [GCC 4.6.2 does not print a warning.] test.cc:9:3: Warnung: assuming signed overflow does not occur when assuming that (X + c) X is always false [-Wstrict-overflow] However, I fail to see why one has (X + c

[Bug c++/51009] [4.7 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51009 Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||3dw4rd at

[Bug c++/51243] internal compiler error: in verify_gimple_stmt, at tree-cfg.c:4235

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51243 Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/51275] CLOBBERS can be optimized if they are right before the return (or RESX)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51275 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW

[Bug debug/49951] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Debug stepping behavior regarding g++ Class destructor has changed for the worse starting at gcc 4.5.0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49951 --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 22:49:58 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) Manu, could you look at this? This is quite an annoying regression for C++ After a couple of hours I gave up. I tried greping

[Bug target/51337] SH Target: Various testsuite ICEs for -m2a -O0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51337 --- Comment #1 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 22:52:59 UTC --- Author: kkojima Date: Tue Nov 29 22:52:55 2011 New Revision: 181823 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181823 Log: PR target/51337

[Bug target/28115] possible bug in recog_memoized usage in rs6000.c??

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28115 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Known

[Bug tree-optimization/40992] [4.4 Regression] cunroll ignoring asm size

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40992 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW

[Bug middle-end/36143] [4.4 Regression]: FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr19637.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW

[Bug rtl-optimization/29589] incorrect conversion of (ior (ashiftrt (plus ...))) in combine.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29589 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW

[Bug target/41868] cell microcode instruction (addic.) is generated for a trivial loop with -O2 optimizations, hurting performance badly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41868 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW

[Bug target/41868] cell microcode instruction (addic.) is generated for a trivial loop with -O2 optimizations, hurting performance badly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41868 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 23:18:32 UTC --- No longer working on this.

[Bug target/28115] possible bug in recog_memoized usage in rs6000.c??

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28115 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at

[Bug target/17381] Unnecessary register move for float extend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17381 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/46027] (unsignedtype1)(unsignedtype2)(unsignedtype1_var) not changed into unsignedtype1_var NNN when sizeof(type1) sizeof(type2)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46027 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/51285] [4.7 Regression] internal compiler error: in check_loop_closed_ssa_use, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51285 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0

[Bug tree-optimization/51281] GCC fails to hoist stores in asm out of loop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51281 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug c++/51304] gcc segfaults for large -ftemplate-depth values (if depth is reached)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51304 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 23:41:45 UTC --- g++: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus) You are most likely hitting the stack limit.

[Bug middle-end/51351] New: undefined reference to __sync_fetch_and_ior_4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51351 Bug #: 51351 Summary: undefined reference to __sync_fetch_and_ior_4 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libgomp/51249] semaphore implemetation for linux leaves threads blocked

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51249 --- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-30 03:44:02 UTC --- Author: amodra Date: Wed Nov 30 03:43:57 2011 New Revision: 181831 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181831 Log: PR libgomp/51249 *

[Bug libgomp/51298] libgomp team_barrier locking failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51298 --- Comment #1 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-30 04:44:18 UTC --- Author: amodra Date: Wed Nov 30 04:44:13 2011 New Revision: 181833 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181833 Log: PR libgomp/51298 *

[Bug libgomp/51249] semaphore implemetation for linux leaves threads blocked

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51249 Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug libgomp/51298] libgomp team_barrier locking failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51298 Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/51352] New: g++ can't pass variable-length array as a function argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51352 Bug #: 51352 Summary: g++ can't pass variable-length array as a function argument Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/51352] g++ can't pass variable-length array as a function argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51352 --- Comment #1 from Joshua Green jvgreen at gmail dot com 2011-11-30 06:23:40 UTC --- (Of course, compiling under gcc requires replacing #include iostream #include cstdlib with #include stdio.h #include stdlib.h and std::cout

[Bug rtl-optimization/51353] New: GCC incorrectly optimizes away assignment to return address

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51353 Bug #: 51353 Summary: GCC incorrectly optimizes away assignment to return address Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED