[Bug c++/80655] -Werror=format-truncation inconsistency between x86_32 and x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80655 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug c++/80655] -Werror=format-truncation inconsistency between x86_32 and x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80655 --- Comment #4 from Armin K. --- There is a log file in the tarball with all the options. Package is built with cmake, so there's lot of them.

[Bug c++/80655] -Werror=format-truncation inconsistency between x86_32 and x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80655 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Also what options is being used to invoke GCC?

[Bug c/80659] New: [7 regression] -fsanitize=address evokes ICE in in gimplify_switch_expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80659 Bug ID: 80659 Summary: [7 regression] -fsanitize=address evokes ICE in in gimplify_switch_expr Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/80658] New: Memory leak reported in libstdc++ (zerotier)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80658 Bug ID: 80658 Summary: Memory leak reported in libstdc++ (zerotier) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/80648] [DR903] Valid C++11 null pointer constant (1-1) is rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80648 --- Comment #4 from Keith Thompson --- Then what does > Issues with DR, accepted, DRWP, and WP status are NOT part of the > International Standard for C++. mean? The web page itself says that issues with DR status are not part of C++11.

[Bug tree-optimization/67213] When compiling for size with -Os loops can get bigger after peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67213 --- Comment #6 from Fredrik Hederstierna --- Same thing for x86, not only ARM: bash# gcc --version gcc (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.4) 5.4.0 20160609 bash# gcc -c test.c -Os --param

[Bug tree-optimization/67213] When compiling for size with -Os loops can get bigger after peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67213 --- Comment #5 from Fredrik Hederstierna --- Still same in GCC-7.1.0. I analyzed using -fdump-tree-cunroll-details void test_iter_6(void) { int i; for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) { data[i] = i; } }

[Bug fortran/77327] AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free gcc-trunk-239276/gcc/fortran/interface.c:403 in compare_components

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77327 Vittorio Zecca changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/61908] load of invalid value for 'expr_t' in interface.c compare_actual_formal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61908 Vittorio Zecca changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug other/63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 Bug 63426 depends on bug 61908, which changed state. Bug 61908 Summary: load of invalid value for 'expr_t' in interface.c compare_actual_formal https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61908 What|Removed

[Bug fortran/67498] interface.c sanitizer runtime error: load of value 1818451807, which is not a valid value for type 'expr_t'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67498 Vittorio Zecca changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/62058] Undefined behaviour in tree-data-ref.c with options -O1 -ftree-loop-vectorize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62058 --- Comment #6 from Vittorio Zecca --- Still there in 7.1.0

[Bug middle-end/77383] -fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx ICE with VLA struct return type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77383 --- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca --- Still in 7.1.0

[Bug middle-end/67486] ira-color.c sanitizer detects signed integer overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67486 --- Comment #3 from Vittorio Zecca --- Still in 7.1.0

[Bug fortran/80657] New: Loop in character function declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80657 Bug ID: 80657 Summary: Loop in character function declaration Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug c++/80648] [DR903] Valid C++11 null pointer constant (1-1) is rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80648 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/80649] value-initialization rather than default-initialization at some optimization levels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80649 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/80648] [DR903] Valid C++11 null pointer constant (1-1) is rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80648 Keith Thompson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug bootstrap/80656] mips64-linux cross build fails: Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80656 --- Comment #1 from felix-gcc at fefe dot de --- Turns out my libc was installed incorrectly. Retrying now. I'm still getting this build error in libgomp and libstdc++.

[Bug bootstrap/80656] New: mips64-linux cross build fails: Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80656 Bug ID: 80656 Summary: mips64-linux cross build fails: Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/80654] is_trivially_copy_constructible fails with compiler error with vector of uncopyable objects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80654 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.

[Bug tree-optimization/78496] [7/8 Regression] Missed opportunities for jump threading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78496 --- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Sat May 6 18:20:31 2017 New Revision: 247722 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247722=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/78496 * tree-vrp.c

[Bug c++/80655] -Werror=format-truncation inconsistency between x86_32 and x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80655 --- Comment #2 from Armin K. --- Created attachment 41333 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41333=edit Preprocessed source files Here are the requested files. I apologize for having to compress them, but a single file

[Bug c++/80655] -Werror=format-truncation inconsistency between x86_32 and x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80655 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug c++/80655] New: -Werror=format-truncation inconsistency between x86_32 and x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80655 Bug ID: 80655 Summary: -Werror=format-truncation inconsistency between x86_32 and x86_64 Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/80654] New: is_trivially_copy_constructible fails with compiler error with vector of uncopyable objects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80654 Bug ID: 80654 Summary: is_trivially_copy_constructible fails with compiler error with vector of uncopyable objects Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/50184] Segmentation fault. Copy Constructor.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50184 --- Comment #5 from Vittorio Zecca --- Fixed in 7.1.0

[Bug sanitizer/71158] ICE in tree_to_uhwi with -fsanitize=address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71158 Vittorio Zecca changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/16994] [meta-bug] VLA and C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16994 Bug 16994 depends on bug 71158, which changed state. Bug 71158 Summary: ICE in tree_to_uhwi with -fsanitize=address https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71158 What|Removed |Added

[Bug sanitizer/70878] [5/6 Regression] ICE in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7680

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70878 Vittorio Zecca changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/80652] Union conversion between __m128d and double array does not work under 5.0 through 6.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80652 --- Comment #3 from Peter Boyle --- Can confirm (5.4) that -O2 also fails, -O1 passes.

[Bug c++/80652] Union conversion between __m128d and double array does not work under 5.0 through 6.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80652 --- Comment #2 from Peter Boyle --- Thanks for the quick response. Hope this more complete info is helpful. Should give (1,0) but does give (0,0) under G++ 5.0-6.2 under -O3. peterboyle$ g++-mp-5 --version g++-mp-5 (MacPorts gcc5 5.4.0_0)

[Bug c++/80652] Union conversion between __m128d and double array does not work under 5.0 through 6.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80652 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- I didn't study the testcase (a bit long), but I am getting the same output with any version of gcc or clang I tried, at any level of optimization. Are you certain about your example? What is the expected

[Bug tree-optimization/78496] [7/8 Regression] Missed opportunities for jump threading

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78496 --- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Sat May 6 15:03:40 2017 New Revision: 247721 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247721=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/78496 * tree-vrp.c

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 --- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse --- Created attachment 41331 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41331=edit recognize a VEC_CONCAT from a constructor (not clean) One piece of the issue is v4di = { v2di, v2di } where we

[Bug c/80653] New: Enhancement: better location info for -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80653 Bug ID: 80653 Summary: Enhancement: better location info for -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug c++/80652] New: Union conversion between __m128d and double array does not work under 5.0 through 6.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80652 Bug ID: 80652 Summary: Union conversion between __m128d and double array does not work under 5.0 through 6.2 Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/80649] value-initialization rather than default-initialization at some optimization levels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80649 --- Comment #1 from J.D. Duncan --- Created attachment 41330 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41330=edit g++ -v output

[Bug fortran/80477] [OOP] Polymorphic function result generates memory leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477 --- Comment #20 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to janus from comment #19) > And IIRC we even use the finalization > wrapper for deallocating polymorphic variables in other cases (even if they > have no actual FINAL procedures). In

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10

[Bug fortran/80477] [OOP] Polymorphic function result generates memory leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug target/80527] SSE4 Compiling issue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80527 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/75964] insn combiner removes comparison after ABS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=75964 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot

[Bug rtl-optimization/75964] insn combiner removes comparison after ABS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=75964 --- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Sat May 6 07:44:13 2017 New Revision: 247719 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247719=gcc=rev Log: PR 75964: Invalid integer ABS handling in simplify-rtx.c RTL has

[Bug testsuite/80606] avx-vtestpd-1.c contains outdated line number

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80606 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/80606] avx-vtestpd-1.c contains outdated line number

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80606 --- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Sat May 6 07:31:27 2017 New Revision: 247718 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247718=gcc=rev Log: Remove default_packed lines from i386/avx-vtestp{d,s}* 2017-05-06 Tom de Vries

[Bug c++/80649] New: value-initialization rather than default-initialization at some optimization levels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80649 Bug ID: 80649 Summary: value-initialization rather than default-initialization at some optimization levels Product: gcc Version: 6.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Sat May 6 07:17:05 2017 New Revision: 247716 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247716=gcc=rev Log: Replace absolute line numbers in gcc.target/powerpc 2017-05-06 Tom de Vries

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #10 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Sat May 6 07:16:43 2017 New Revision: 247714 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247714=gcc=rev Log: Replace absolute line numbers in gcc.target/arm 2017-05-06 Tom de Vries

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Sat May 6 07:16:33 2017 New Revision: 247713 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247713=gcc=rev Log: Replace absolute line numbers in gcc.target/aarch64 2017-05-06 Tom de Vries

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Sat May 6 07:16:53 2017 New Revision: 247715 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247715=gcc=rev Log: Replace absolute line numbers in gcc.target/spu 2017-05-06 Tom de Vries

[Bug testsuite/80557] rewrite absolute line numbers into relative or saved line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80557 --- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Sat May 6 07:16:17 2017 New Revision: 247712 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247712=gcc=rev Log: Replace absolute line numbers in g++.dg/{debug,goacc} 2017-05-06 Tom de Vries

[Bug c++/80650] New: #pragma do not control -Wcpp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80650 Bug ID: 80650 Summary: #pragma do not control -Wcpp Product: gcc Version: 7.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++