[Bug driver/70132] ARM -mcpu=native can cause a double free abort.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Roberts --- Do I need to raise another bug report to get the march=native to actually generate native code, or has one already been raised? My original report (Bug 70136) included full /proc/cpuinfo for the BCM2834

[Bug driver/70132] ARM -mcpu=native can cause a double free abort.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Roberts --- Patch tested OK, on Raspberry Pi 3, on Arch Linux using latest gcc 6 snapshot: /usr/local/gcc-6.0.0/bin/gcc -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/usr/local/gcc-6.0.0/bin/gcc

[Bug target/69284] [5.3] SIGSEGV when running 32-bit result on MinGW when linked dynamically

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69284 --- Comment #4 from katayama.hirofumi.mz at gmail dot com --- Hello, Andrew Pinski. Where is ld bug track?

[Bug target/69284] [5.3] SIGSEGV when running 32-bit result on MinGW when linked dynamically

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69284 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/70206] use of causes segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70206 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69284] [5.3] SIGSEGV when running 32-bit result on MinGW when linked dynamically

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69284 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||katayama.hirofumi.mz@gmail.

[Bug c++/70106] [4.9/5/6 Regression][C++11 or above] adding parenthesis [cerr << (var)] cause error: invalid static_cast from type 'const size_t {aka const long unsigned int}' to type 'size_t& {aka lo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70106 --- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka --- Author: ppalka Date: Sat Mar 12 02:05:17 2016 New Revision: 234159 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234159=gcc=rev Log: Fix PR c++/70106 (type of parenthesized qualified-id has wrong cv-qualifiers)

[Bug c++/70207] use of causes segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70207 --- Comment #1 from katayama.hirofumi.mz at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 37947 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37947=edit hello.exe

[Bug c++/70207] New: use of causes segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70207 Bug ID: 70207 Summary: use of causes segmentation fault Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/70206] New: use of causes segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70206 Bug ID: 70206 Summary: use of causes segmentation fault Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/70205] New: ICE on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu: tree check: expected tree_binfo, have error_mark in add_candidates, at cp/call.c:5283

with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160311 (experimental) [trunk revision 234134] (GCC) $ $ g++-5.3 -c small.cpp $ $ g++-trunk -c small.cpp small.cpp: In member function ‘void D

[Bug c++/70204] New: ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu in non_const_var_error, at cp/constexpr.c:2764

--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160311 (experimental) [trunk revision 234134] (GCC) $ $ g++-5.3 -c small.cpp small.cpp: In function ‘void fn1()’: small.cpp:7:9: error: ‘y’ cannot appear in a constant-expression fn1 < y

[Bug c++/70181] missing -Wtautological-compare for constant expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70181 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/65178] incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized when using nested loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65178 --- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Leon Winter from comment #14) > I am not sure how smart he diagnostic of GCC is supposed to be it seems that > the source base of GCC itself has fallen victim to the false warning.

[Bug fortran/70198] simple test floating point sequence gives incorrect values-- optimizer changes them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70198 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug target/70131] PowerPC ISA 2.07 is inefficient at doint (float)(int)x.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70131 --- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Sat Mar 12 00:10:54 2016 New Revision: 234155 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234155=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2016-03-11 Michael Meissner PR

[Bug tree-optimization/70144] [4.9/5/6 Regression] g++ ICE at -O1 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "copy_reference_ops_from_ref"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70144 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||su at cs dot ucdavis.edu --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/70203] ICE at -O1 and above in copy_reference_ops_from_ref, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:958

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70203 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/70203] New: ICE at -O1 and above in copy_reference_ops_from_ref, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:958

-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160311 (experimental) [trunk revision 234134] (GCC) $ $ g++-trunk -O0 -c small.cpp $ g++-4.9 -O1 -c small.cpp $ $ g++-trunk -O1 -c small.cpp small.cpp: In function ‘void foo()’: small.cpp

[Bug target/70131] PowerPC ISA 2.07 is inefficient at doint (float)(int)x.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70131 --- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 37945 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37945=edit Proposed patch to fix the problem Proposed patch to fix the problem.

[Bug target/70123] [5 Regression] Miscompilation of cfitsio testcase on s390x-linux starting with r222144

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70123 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com

[Bug target/70123] [6 Regression] Miscompilation of cfitsio testcase on s390x-linux starting with r222144

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70123 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Mar 11 22:38:41 2016 New Revision: 234152 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234152=gcc=rev Log: PR target/70123 * lra-remat.c (operand_to_remat): Disallow hard regs

[Bug c++/70202] New: ICE on invalid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in build_simple_base_path, at cp/class.c:579

,c++,lto --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160311 (experimental) [trunk revision 234134] (GCC) $ $ g++-trunk small.cpp small.cpp:6:21: error: duplicate base type ‘A’ invalid class B : public A, A ^ small.cpp: In function

[Bug tree-optimization/70190] [6 Regression] ICE (segfault) at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70190 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/70190] [6 Regression] ICE (segfault) at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70190 --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Mar 11 22:32:11 2016 New Revision: 234151 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234151=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/70190 * tree-ssa-threadbackward.c

[Bug c++/70201] New: Dump C++ template instantiations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70201 Bug ID: 70201 Summary: Dump C++ template instantiations Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug target/70191] libatomic library does not have lock-free implementation for 16-bytes data object on Solaris

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70191 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |target --- Comment #5 from Andrew

[Bug c/70191] libatomic library does not have lock-free implementation for 16-bytes data object on Solaris

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70191 Alexey Lapshin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug c/70191] libatomic library does not have lock-free implementation for 16-bytes data object on Solaris

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70191 --- Comment #3 from Alexey Lapshin --- Please note : that is not the case of using correct -march. That is old code compatibility issue. Check the scenario on that page : https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Atomic/GCCMM/LIbrary It is OK to compile the

[Bug bootstrap/70200] builing gcc with -lfto without libunwind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70200 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Why don't you use --with-build-config==bootstrap-lto as documented on https://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html .

[Bug bootstrap/70200] builing gcc with -lfto without libunwind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70200 --- Comment #1 from Дилян Палаузов --- I was wrong, having libunwind, with --enable-cxx-exceptions, thus exporting _Unwind_Resume(), does not help in any way.

[Bug bootstrap/70200] New: builing gcc with -lfto without libunwind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70200 Bug ID: 70200 Summary: builing gcc with -lfto without libunwind Product: gcc Version: 5.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/64058] [5/6 Regression] Performance degradation after r216304

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64058 --- Comment #19 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Mar 11 21:07:31 2016 New Revision: 234149 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234149=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/64058 * tree-ssa-coalesce.c (struct

[Bug fortran/70198] simple test floating point sequence gives incorrect values-- optimizer changes them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70198 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/70199] Crash at -O2 when using labels.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70199 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Component|c

[Bug c/70199] New: Crash at -O2 when using labels.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70199 Bug ID: 70199 Summary: Crash at -O2 when using labels. Product: gcc Version: 5.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug fortran/70198] simple test floating point sequence gives incorrect values-- optimizer changes them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70198 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Can you add -ffloat-store as a gcc option and try again? If that works then it is a dup of bug 323. >It's clear what is going on is not a precision problem No

[Bug fortran/70198] simple test floating point sequence gives incorrect values-- optimizer changes them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70198 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Can you add -ffloat-store as a gcc option and try again?

[Bug fortran/70198] simple test floating point sequence gives incorrect values-- optimizer changes them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70198 --- Comment #1 from Scott (Kludge) Dorsey --- Created attachment 37943 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37943=edit correct output sample (run on vax)

[Bug c++/70197] dynamic_cast treated as constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70197 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid Known to fail|

[Bug fortran/70198] New: simple test floating point sequence gives incorrect values-- optimizer changes them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70198 Bug ID: 70198 Summary: simple test floating point sequence gives incorrect values-- optimizer changes them Product: gcc Version: 5.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/70197] New: dynamic_cast treated as constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70197 Bug ID: 70197 Summary: dynamic_cast treated as constant expression Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/70172] incorrect reinterpret_cast from integer to pointer error on invalid constexpr initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70172 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/70176] Regression with C++03 Issue cstdio

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70176 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Is this actually a regression? I don't think anything relevant changed in GCC 5 (there are related changes in GCC 6 though)

[Bug c/68187] [6 Regression] Poor error message from -Wmisleading-indentation on glibc's ../stdlib/strtol_l.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68187 --- Comment #11 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Fri Mar 11 19:54:43 2016 New Revision: 234146 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234146=gcc=rev Log: Wmisleading-indentation.c: add more test cases for PR c/68187

[Bug c/68187] [6 Regression] Poor error message from -Wmisleading-indentation on glibc's ../stdlib/strtol_l.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68187 --- Comment #10 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Fri Mar 11 19:48:49 2016 New Revision: 234145 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234145=gcc=rev Log: Wmisleading-indentation: add reproducer for PR c/70085 PR c/70085 reported a

[Bug c/70085] False positive -Wmisleading-indentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70085 --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Fri Mar 11 19:48:49 2016 New Revision: 234145 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234145=gcc=rev Log: Wmisleading-indentation: add reproducer for PR c/70085 PR c/70085 reported a

[Bug target/70146] missed-optimization: i386 hidden references should use PC32 relocations instead of GOTOFF

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70146 --- Comment #6 from Andy Lutomirski --- The PLT case could be reduced significantly by -fno-plt, but the TLS issue is just sad. I don't suppose it could be fixed with just toolchain changes while retaining compatibility with existing libc

[Bug c++/70145] g++-5 and g++-6: invalid code generated for -fno-elide-constructors and constexpr array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70145 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Probably PR70139

[Bug c++/70139] [5/6 Regression] -fno-ellide-constructor makes static std::regex to throw

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70139 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Viktor Ostashevskyi from comment #3) > Could be the same problem as in PR70145. Almost certainly

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 --- Comment #23 from Vladimir Makarov --- (In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #22) > Ok Vlad, I'll sign off for tonight and let you have a look. Ok, Bernd. Have a good weekend.

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 --- Comment #22 from Bernd Schmidt --- Ok Vlad, I'll sign off for tonight and let you have a look.

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 Vladimir Makarov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 --- Comment #20 from Bernd Schmidt --- So this: @@ -5890,11 +5897,24 @@ remove_inheritance_pseudos (bitmap remov continue; done_p = false; sregno = dregno = -1; - if (change_p && NONDEBUG_INSN_P

[Bug libstdc++/69879] Create a pointer to the default operator new and delete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69879 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Gabriel Ibarra from comment #5) > 1) When you say "it can't be applied until after GCC 6", you mean that my > changes won't be commited until then? If you commit this now, how would you >

[Bug c++/70196] inconsistent constness of inequality of weak symbol addresses

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70196 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid Known to fail|

[Bug sanitizer/70147] testcase from hana testsuite gets miscompiled with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70147 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70196] New: inconsistent constness of inequality of weak symbol addresses

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70196 Bug ID: 70196 Summary: inconsistent constness of inequality of weak symbol addresses Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 --- Comment #19 from Bernd Schmidt --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16) > insn 146 is the pre-reload first xor, insn 701 is storing of the result into > the [sp, #16] memory slot, but the insn 659 inserted during LRA is just > weird.

[Bug c/70195] GCC silently drops erroneous assignments in flexible arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70195 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug sanitizer/70147] testcase from hana testsuite gets miscompiled with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70147 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #9) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7) > > A small problem is that the second argument to POINTER_PLUS_EXPR is not > > signed, but unsigned (sizetype).

[Bug target/70048] [6 Regression][AArch64] Inefficient local array addressing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70048 --- Comment #18 from Jiong Wang --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #17) > (In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #16) > I ran this modified patch through a few benchmarks and there are no > regressions. The codesize of SPEC2006 reduces

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7) > A small problem is that the second argument to POINTER_PLUS_EXPR is not > signed, but unsigned (sizetype). Which is why I wrote "negative", negative > would

[Bug c/70195] New: GCC silently drops erroneous assignments in flexible arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70195 Bug ID: 70195 Summary: GCC silently drops erroneous assignments in flexible arrays Product: gcc Version: 5.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/70173] make distclean: leaves stage_final and libcc1/compiler-name.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70173 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu --- Comment

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #17) > I'm not getting similar-looking code. Please post the cc1 commandline. Have you commented out pass_dce before late uninit pass (patch in #c16)? Other than

[Bug c++/70194] [6 regression] missing -Waddress on constexpr pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70194 --- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor --- Below is a more comprehensive test case derived from one for another bug where I noticed this problem. It might be useful as a starting point for a test case for this one. Besides the regression it reveals

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 --- Comment #17 from Bernd Schmidt --- I'm not getting similar-looking code. Please post the cc1 commandline.

[Bug c++/70194] New: [6 regression] missing -Waddress on constexpr pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70194 Bug ID: 70194 Summary: [6 regression] missing -Waddress on constexpr pointer Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/70193] missed loop splitting support based on iteration space

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70193 vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/70193] New: missed loop splitting support based on iteration space

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70193 Bug ID: 70193 Summary: missed loop splitting support based on iteration space Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek --- Ah, true... well there's wi::sign_mask so maybe that. But given Comment 5 I'll hold off for now.

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- A small problem is that the second argument to POINTER_PLUS_EXPR is not signed, but unsigned (sizetype). Which is why I wrote "negative", negative would mean having the most significant bit set or so.

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek --- -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks seems to change nothing. But the case you mention is something I wanted to think about more before posting a real patch. I suppose I could add a check that the offset part

[Bug c++/70141] [6 Regression] template parameter not deducible in partial specialization of template inside template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70141 --- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill --- Yes, this looks like a bug. I expect that we're saying "non-deduced" because of the typename, but the typename is gone due to partial instantiation when we get around to deducing U

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- It turns out that my patch for bug 67376 (still being tested) fixes this bug.

[Bug c/70191] libatomic library does not have lock-free implementation for 16-bytes data object on Solaris

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70191 Alexey Lapshin changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Alexey

[Bug fortran/38444] Poor recovery from error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38444 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/70191] libatomic library does not have lock-free implementation for 16-bytes data object on Solaris

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70191 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/70147] testcase from hana testsuite gets miscompiled with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70147 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Ok, so I analyzed more precisely what happens. The problem is that we want to zero vtbp_ptr.ios_base (struct ios_base), but as we are at the very beginning of a basic_istream::basic_istream, following value

[Bug c/7652] -Wswitch-break : Warn if a switch case falls through

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7652 --- Comment #42 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #41) > But it wasn't part of the working draft until now. Not everything that gets > approved by an EWG poll makes it into a standard. In case you really don't

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Shouldn't -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks disable that? Or maybe only if the constant is "negative", because with -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks in theory some object could live at address NULL and you

[Bug driver/70192] New: -fno-pic doesn't work with --enable-default-pie

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70192 Bug ID: 70192 Summary: -fno-pic doesn't work with --enable-default-pie Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c/7652] -Wswitch-break : Warn if a switch case falls through

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7652 --- Comment #41 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Matthew Woehlke from comment #39) > So? People have been asking for it for at least *13+ years* (this report was > opened in August 2002). Compared to clang which has had this feature for >

[Bug target/69614] [6 Regression] wrong code with -Os -fno-expensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns -mtpcs-leaf-frame -fira-algorithm=priority @ armv7a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/70170] [6 regression] bogus not a constant expression error comparing pointer to array to null

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70170 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- I think that to fix this, we need to add a new pattern to match.pd that deals with "(ptr +p off) !=/== 0B". Thus something like: --- a/gcc/match.pd +++ b/gcc/match.pd @@ -2263,6 +2263,11 @@

[Bug c/70191] New: libatomic library does not have lock-free implementation for 16-bytes data object on Solaris

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70191 Bug ID: 70191 Summary: libatomic library does not have lock-free implementation for 16-bytes data object on Solaris Product: gcc Version: 5.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/70190] ICE (segfault) at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70190 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/70190] New: ICE (segfault) at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

--disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160311 (experimental) [trunk revision 234134] (GCC) $ $ gcc-trunk -Os -c small.c $ gcc-5.3 -O2 -c small.c $ $ gcc-trunk -O2 -c small.c small.c: In function ‘fn1’: small.c:2:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault fn1

[Bug driver/70132] ARM -mcpu=native can cause a double free abort.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132 --- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Proposed patch at: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00700.html Can you give it a shot?

[Bug target/70002] [6 Regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr52429.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none ICEs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70002 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug target/70002] [6 Regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr52429.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none ICEs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70002 --- Comment #7 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Fri Mar 11 15:27:24 2016 New Revision: 234141 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234141=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64] PR target/70002: Make aarch64_set_current_function play

[Bug target/69245] [6 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2286 on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69245 --- Comment #17 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Fri Mar 11 15:27:24 2016 New Revision: 234141 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234141=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64] PR target/70002: Make aarch64_set_current_function play

[Bug target/70119] AArch64 should take advantage of implicit truncation of variable shift amount without defining SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70119 --- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37941 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37941=edit Example patch In the interests of getting a concrete proposal out and hammering out a course of action,

[Bug tree-optimization/70045] [6 Regression] ICE error: mismatching comparison operand types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70045 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #3 from

[Bug tree-optimization/66142] Loop is not vectorized because not sufficient support for GOMP_SIMD_LANE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66142 --- Comment #27 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- Created attachment 37940 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37940=edit test-case to reproduce Need to be compiled with -Ofast -mavx2 -fopenmp options.

[Bug tree-optimization/66142] Loop is not vectorized because not sufficient support for GOMP_SIMD_LANE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66142 --- Comment #26 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- If we convert copy structures to copy structure fields test will be vectorized and all mentions of GOMP_SIMD_LANE will be deleted. But if we slightly modify test by introducing new function vdot and

[Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368 --- Comment #89 from Jakub Jelinek --- I'd say it can be closed now.

[Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368 alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org|unassigned at gcc

  1   2   >