[Bug fortran/48298] [F03] User-Defined Derived-Type IO (DTIO)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48298 --- Comment #17 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Wed Aug 31 05:36:22 2016 New Revision: 239880 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239880=gcc=rev Log: 2016-08-31 Paul Thomas Jerry DeLisle

[Bug rtl-optimization/77289] [7 Regression] ICE in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2212 on powerpc64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77289 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED URL|

[Bug target/77289] [7 Regression] ICE in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2212 on powerpc64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77289 --- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner --- Another similar test case, but thi sone I'm able to make fail on a 64-bit LE compile. bergner@genoa:~/gcc/BUGS/PR77289$ cat q.i void dummy (long *); long bar (long); void foo (long a, long b) { long

[Bug rtl-optimization/77416] [7 Regression] LRA rematerializing use of CA reg across function call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77416 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |bergner at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #24 from Bill Schmidt --- This seems to work as a short-term solution (c,c++,ada bootstrap succeeds). Need to do a full regstrap with all the languages. Index: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c

[Bug rtl-optimization/77416] LRA rematerializing use of CA reg across function call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77416 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/77416] New: LRA rematerializing use of CA reg across function call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77416 Bug ID: 77416 Summary: LRA rematerializing use of CA reg across function call Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #23 from Bill Schmidt --- Bleah, that doesn't work because offsetreg needs to contain something that's a valid address in order to use replace_equiv_address. So something more involved is needed.

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #22 from Michael Meissner --- Note, if the index register is R0 and the base register is SP, you might not be able to use the other register (well you can use it, but you likely will get a segmentation fault or just access the wrong

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #21 from Bill Schmidt --- I think for the purposes of this bug we should be able to work around it by forcing the offset register to be modified instead of the base register. Going to try testing this: Index:

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #20 from Michael Meissner --- Yeah, it sounds like you don't want to adjust any of the stack related registers. However, in looking at this $#!%, we probably need to rewrite it so it doesn't do clever tricks like this. Which

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #19 from Bill Schmidt --- I'm suspicious of rs6000_split_multireg_move in rs6000.c, which appears to be the code that gets called to split a TImode move involving a GPR pair. In particular, this code: else

[Bug fortran/77415] ICE: tree check: expected function_type or method_type, have pointer_type in create_function_arglist, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2263

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77415 --- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- With official releases (configured with --enable-checking=release), down to at least 4.8 : $ gfortran-6 z1.f90 z1.f90:1:0: integer function f() internal

[Bug fortran/77415] New: ICE: tree check: expected function_type or method_type, have pointer_type in create_function_arglist, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2263

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77415 Bug ID: 77415 Summary: ICE: tree check: expected function_type or method_type, have pointer_type in create_function_arglist, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2263 Product: gcc

[Bug libstdc++/77395] [6/7 Regression] std::is_constructible is false for type constructible via implicit conversion operator affecting std::tuple

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77395 --- Comment #6 from Ville Voutilainen --- Fixed on trunk, backporting to the gcc-6 branch.

[Bug libstdc++/77395] [6/7 Regression] std::is_constructible is false for type constructible via implicit conversion operator affecting std::tuple

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77395 --- Comment #5 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ville Date: Tue Aug 30 18:46:11 2016 New Revision: 239870 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239870=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/77395 * include/std/type_traits

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #18 from Bill Schmidt --- The frame pointer adjustments are introduced in 263r.split2. I haven't yet run down the offending split, but the pattern being split is a *vsx_movti_64bit. I know we've had changes in the back end fairly

[Bug fortran/77414] ICE in create_function_arglist, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2410

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77414 --- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Backup tests, more variants : $ cat z2.f90 subroutine s(x) real :: x contains subroutine s(x) character(*) :: x end end $ cat z3.f90 subroutine

[Bug fortran/77414] New: ICE in create_function_arglist, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2410

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77414 Bug ID: 77414 Summary: ICE in create_function_arglist, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2410 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/44348] ICE in build_function_decl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348 --- Comment #12 from Gerhard Steinmetz --- Slightly modified variant : $ cat z7.f90 subroutine s(x) contains subroutine s(x) end end $ gfortran-7-20160828 z7.f90 z7.f90:3:0: subroutine s(x)

[Bug tree-optimization/22041] Reverse loop order for increased efficiency

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22041 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2013-03-17 12:00:00 |2016-8-30 --- Comment #9 from Thomas

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou --- > Is this kind of frame pointer adjustment a common occurrence with Ada code > gen, or do you think this is related to POWER code gen somehow? I've never > seen this sort of thing before. No, that's

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt --- Looks like the back end must be inserting the frame pointer adjustments, as they aren't there at expand time. From the 218.vregs dump: (call_insn 141 140 3128 2 (parallel [ (set (reg:TI 3 3)

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #10 from Jeff Hammond --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9) > (In reply to Jeff Hammond from comment #8) > > So GCC refuses to compile any code that potentially includes undefined > > behavior? > > Semantics not being

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jeff Hammond from comment #8) > So GCC refuses to compile any code that potentially includes undefined > behavior? Semantics not being defined is different than undefined behavior.

[Bug middle-end/20432] complex reciprocal has too many operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20432 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2008-12-11 21:22:46 |2016-8-30 CC|

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #8 from Jeff Hammond --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6) > (In reply to Jeff Hammond from comment #3) > > Do you seriously pick this one time to prevent the user from even trying to > > write incorrect code, while

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #7 from Jeff Hammond --- The fact that the parser doesn't handle a particle case where something might go wrong is no reason to have the compiler refuse to compile code that includes stdatomic.h with -fopenmp. Look at my example and

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt --- Created attachment 39520 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39520=edit Dumps before and after dse2 Here are the full dumps before and after dse2 in tarball form.

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jeff Hammond from comment #3) > Do you seriously pick this one time to prevent the user from even trying to > write incorrect code, while allowing an uncountable number of others? This is

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- From the original discussions on why this is disabled: _Atomic support is currently disabled for Objective-C and OpenMP. For both (but mainly OpenMP), the relevant parser code needs checking to determine

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #14 from Bill Schmidt --- Confirmed that the frame pointer dance is where the issue is. Prior to dse2: (insn 3854 144 4133 2 (set (reg:DI 9 9 [1674]) (const_int 1208 [0x4b8])) /home/wschmidt/gcc/gcc-mainline-base/gcc/ada/\

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #4 from Jeff Hammond --- Apparently, the GCC team wants to make it impossible for anyone to build software where independent components that share CFLAGS in the build system cannot use both the C11 atomics header and the OpenMP flag.

[Bug target/71151] [avr] -fmerge-constants and -fdata-sections/-ffunction-sections results in string constants in .progmem.gcc_sw section

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71151 --- Comment #21 from Senthil Kumar Selvaraj --- It occurs with "7.0.0 20160824 (experimental) (GCC)". Besides, the errors go away if I remove --relax, so I think it's a linker issue.

[Bug middle-end/66240] RFE: extend -falign-xyz syntax

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66240 --- Comment #5 from Denis Vlasenko --- Patches v3 posted to the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg02073.html https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg02074.html

[Bug c++/71913] [5/6/7 Regression] Missing copy elision with operator new

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71913 --- Comment #11 from Renlin Li --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #10) > I've noticed that something similar to what Renlin suggested was committed > to trunk as r238728. > > Could this testcase fix be backported to the release

[Bug java/71917] [7 regression] libjava.jar/ReturnProxyTest.jar etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71917 --- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou --- > I'm getting my head around this now! The conversion functions will need to > perform the 32-bit to 64-bit sign extension but do nothing for the reverse. > I think this means that only the raw-to-rvalue

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou --- > Yes, it does! The tools appear to be building normally with this option. > Without it the build of gnattools fails almost immediately. > > I'll work on getting some dumps to see what is happening in

[Bug c/65467] [libgomp] sorry, unimplemented: '_Atomic' with OpenMP

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467 --- Comment #3 from Jeff Hammond --- This is awful. How do I disable this horrible thing? I am using OpenMP to create a thread pool, because C11 threads are still not implemented in glibc, and all of my access to C11 _Atomic variables use C11

[Bug fortran/77374] [6/7 Regression] ICE in resolve_omp_atomic, at fortran/openmp.c:3949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77374 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c/63336] cilkplus array notation ICE in find_rank

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63336 --- Comment #10 from Yves Vandriessche --- A similar internal compile error is triggered in find_rank when dealing with two-dimensional array arguments, for both g++-5.2 and g++-6.1.1. >void test(double Arr[][16]) { > double A[16]= {0}; >

[Bug c/63336] cilkplus array notation ICE in find_rank

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63336 --- Comment #9 from Yves Vandriessche --- Created attachment 39518 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39518=edit 2D-array cilk array notation ICE test case

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #10) > > So the double-word load before the call to SS_Release should be from a > Mark_Id object obtained from a preceding call to SS_Mark. It indeed looks > like the

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #8) > > I'm afraid I don't know anything about Ada and how its runtime works; it > > looks like system.secondary_stack.ss_release is called automatically somehow > >

[Bug java/71917] [7 regression] libjava.jar/ReturnProxyTest.jar etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71917 --- Comment #10 from Matthew Fortune --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #9) > > I'll certainly check on this but I did run the fix on both big and little > > endian MIPS which seems to suggest there isn't a double adjustment overall. >

[Bug tree-optimization/59124] [5/6/7 Regression] Wrong warnings "array subscript is above array bounds"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124 --- Comment #43 from Szőts Ákos --- Yes, I can agree with this reasoning. However, when you remove either the "while" or the "if" statements, the warning disappears. I don't think they should have any influence on the array_size.

[Bug tree-optimization/69270] DOM should exploit range information to create more equivalences

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69270 mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/77413] [7 regression] experimental/numeric/gcd.cc etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77413 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- i.e. it's caused by r239777

[Bug libstdc++/77413] [7 regression] experimental/numeric/gcd.cc etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77413 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/59124] [5/6/7 Regression] Wrong warnings "array subscript is above array bounds"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124 --- Comment #42 from Patrick Palka --- (In reply to Szőts Ákos from comment #41) > A newer example: > > int main() { > bool exists = true; > int i = 0; > int sum = 0; > > volatile int array_size = 7; > volatile int array[7]; > >

[Bug java/71917] [7 regression] libjava.jar/ReturnProxyTest.jar etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71917 --- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou --- > I'll certainly check on this but I did run the fix on both big and little > endian MIPS which seems to suggest there isn't a double adjustment overall. So this was broken in 64-bit big-endian too before

[Bug fortran/77374] [6/7 Regression] ICE in resolve_omp_atomic, at fortran/openmp.c:3949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77374 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug libstdc++/77413] [7 regression] experimental/numeric/gcd.cc etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77413 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0

[Bug libstdc++/77413] New: [7 regression] experimental/numeric/gcd.cc etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77413 Bug ID: 77413 Summary: [7 regression] experimental/numeric/gcd.cc etc. FAIL Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/77382] ICE: verify_gimple failed -- expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:9651

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77382 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- If this is invalid Fortran, it should be diagnosed somewhere during resolve.c and not make it the translation phase. There for the "s" symbol which is a subroutine is first given a FUNCTION_DECL as

[Bug fortran/77382] ICE: verify_gimple failed -- expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:9651

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77382 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/59124] [5/6/7 Regression] Wrong warnings "array subscript is above array bounds"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124 Szőts Ákos changed: What|Removed |Added CC||szotsaki at gmail dot com --- Comment #41

[Bug java/71917] [7 regression] libjava.jar/ReturnProxyTest.jar etc. FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71917 --- Comment #8 from Matthew Fortune --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #7) > > 2016-07-13 Matthew Fortune > > > > * interpret-run.cc: Use ffi_arg for FFI integer return types. > > so we now have a

[Bug tree-optimization/69047] memcpy is not as optimized as union is

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69047 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69047 > > mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug c++/57728] Explicit template instantiation with defaulted method causes missing symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57728 mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/77412] constructor of an extended type with an allocatable component in the base type crashes gfortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77412 --- Comment #1 from Daan van Vugt --- Some more info: changing 1.0 to 1d0 does not prevent the crash. Adding a type constructor and changing 1.0 to 1d0 does work.

[Bug tree-optimization/69047] memcpy is not as optimized as union is

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69047 mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug sanitizer/77396] address sanitizer crashes if all static global variables are optimized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77396 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 39517 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39517=edit gcc7-pr77396.patch Untested partial fix for the compiler side. It should fix the common case when this happens, but

[Bug fortran/77412] New: constructor of an extended type with an allocatable component in the base type crashes gfortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77412 Bug ID: 77412 Summary: constructor of an extended type with an allocatable component in the base type crashes gfortran Product: gcc Version: 6.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug sanitizer/77396] address sanitizer crashes if all static global variables are optimized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77396 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/77399] Poor code generation for vector casts and loads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 > > --- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov --- > > The extension is closely modeled

[Bug tree-optimization/77399] Poor code generation for vector casts and loads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 --- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov --- > The extension is closely modeled after openCL Hm, that doesn't sound right: gcc had vector types long before OpenCL was even a thing; I believe it's modeled after Altivec actually: the discrepancy

[Bug tree-optimization/77399] Poor code generation for vector casts and loads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #6) > Thanks. Any comment on having gimple lowering emit cleaner code in the first > place? well, I'm not sure if it is worth the trouble. FEs emit return

[Bug target/63789] g++ -m32 on solaris has trouble finding abs with int64_t

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63789 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/77399] Poor code generation for vector casts and loads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 --- Comment #6 from Alexander Monakov --- Thanks. Any comment on having gimple lowering emit cleaner code in the first place?

[Bug middle-end/77407] Optimize integer i / abs (i) into the sign of i

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77407 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libfortran/77393] [7 Regression] Revision r237735 changed the behavior of F0.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0

[Bug libstdc++/77395] [6/7 Regression] std::is_constructible is false for type constructible via implicit conversion operator affecting std::tuple

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77395 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Target Milestone|---

[Bug ipa/77397] function initializing global static variables is not optimized away fully

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77397 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/77399] Poor code generation for vector casts and loads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- OTOH sth like tree-complex.c for vectors would be nice as well (well, really re-writing tree-vect-generic.c to sth better).

[Bug tree-optimization/77399] Poor code generation for vector casts and loads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Note that this is a patten matching issue that could be quite easily fixed in tree-ssa-forwprop.c:simplify_vector_constructor (which currently recognizes a VEC_PERM but it should be easy to handle

[Bug tree-optimization/69047] memcpy is not as optimized as union is

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69047 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Aug 30 09:22:17 2016 New Revision: 239857 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239857=gcc=rev Log: 2016-08-30 Richard Biener PR

[Bug testsuite/77411] object-size-9.c -fpic -m32 failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77411 --- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries --- Analysis at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg01985.html : ... The problem here is that the functions f2 and f3 access a stack- based object out of bounds and that is inlined in main and therefore

[Bug testsuite/77411] New: object-size-9.c -fpic -m32 failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77411 Bug ID: 77411 Summary: object-size-9.c -fpic -m32 failure Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: testsuite

[Bug tree-optimization/72866] Compile time hog w/ -O3 (-Ofast)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72866 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[7 Regression] Compile time |Compile time hog w/ -O3

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou --- > It does look possible that this is an LRA issue. Here's the code right > before failure: > > 100dae08: f8 95 22 39 addir9,r2,-27144 > 100dae0c: 01 00 40 39 li r10,1 >

[Bug c++/77363] [5/6 Regression] Missing debug information in DWARF

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77363 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Known to work|

[Bug c++/77363] [5/6/7 Regression] Missing debug information in DWARF

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77363 Jiří Engelthaler changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/77399] Poor code generation for vector casts and loads

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|SLP does not handle |Poor code generation for

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marc.glisse at normalesup dot org ---

[Bug target/72827] [7 Regression] gnat bootstrap broken on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou --- > I'm afraid I don't know anything about Ada and how its runtime works; it > looks like system.secondary_stack.ss_release is called automatically somehow > as part of entering make.Initialize, but I have no

[Bug ada/77405] SIGBUS from gnatmake in stage 3 (gcc 7.0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405 --- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou --- > if that attempt doesn't let you reproduce it, and if it still happens when I > remove that flag, I can start bisecting and see if I can get it to a > specific day or even commit that caused it. That will

[Bug tree-optimization/72866] [7 Regression] Compile time hog w/ -O3 (-Ofast)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72866 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Aug 30 06:54:02 2016 New Revision: 239856 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239856=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/72866 * tree-vect-patterns.c

[Bug c++/77363] [5/6/7 Regression] Missing debug information in DWARF

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77363 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Aug 30 06:46:38 2016 New Revision: 239855 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239855=gcc=rev Log: PR debug/77363 * dwarf2out.c (modified_type_die): Use

[Bug middle-end/77377] [7 Regression] c-c++-common/pr59037.c ICEs with -fpic -msse on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77377 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Aug 30 06:45:56 2016 New Revision: 239854 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239854=gcc=rev Log: PR middle-end/77377 * simplify-rtx.c

[Bug debug/77389] FAIL: g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/template-params-12f.C -std=gnu++11 scan-assembler-times DIE \\\\([^\\n]*\\\\) DW_TAG_template_value_param ...

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77389 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Aug 30 06:44:43 2016 New Revision: 239853 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239853=gcc=rev Log: PR debug/77389 * g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/template-params-12f.C: Pass

[Bug objc/77404] Add Wobjc-root-class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77404 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/67962] Optimization opportunity with conditional swap to two MIN/MAX in phiopt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67962 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2015-10-14 00:00:00 |2016-8-29 --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug objc/77404] Add Wobjc-root-class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77404 --- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1) > (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0) > > Is the -Wobjc-root-class warning something we want to have in gcc objc as > > well? > > What's the reasoning