[Bug c++/82632] New: copy deduction candidate erroneously preferred over deduction-guide

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82632 Bug ID: 82632 Summary: copy deduction candidate erroneously preferred over deduction-guide Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libfortran/82233] [6/7/8 Regression] execute_command_line causes program to stop when command fails (or does not exist)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82233 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/82612] missing -Warray-bounds on a non-zero offset from the address of a non-array object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82612 --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor --- I realize there's no ARRAY_REF but users unfamiliar with GCC internals don't, nor would they care. I'm less concerned about code that defeats the type system by using casts (though it would be nice to

[Bug debug/82630] New: Bogus DW_AT_GNU_call_site_value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82630 Bug ID: 82630 Summary: Bogus DW_AT_GNU_call_site_value Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: debug

[Bug debug/82631] New: Bogus DW_AT_GNU_call_site_value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82631 Bug ID: 82631 Summary: Bogus DW_AT_GNU_call_site_value Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: debug

[Bug c++/82308] [C++17] deduction of template arguments results in internal compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82308 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/82308] [C++17] deduction of template arguments results in internal compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82308 --- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: paolo Date: Fri Oct 20 00:30:41 2017 New Revision: 253920 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253920=gcc=rev Log: 2017-10-19 Paolo Carlini PR

[Bug c++/79790] [C++17] ICE class template argument deduction failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79790 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pkeir at outlook dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/80997] Failed C++17 class template deduction causes an ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80997 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/82629] New: OpenMP 4.5 Target Region mangling problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82629 Bug ID: 82629 Summary: OpenMP 4.5 Target Region mangling problem Product: gcc Version: 7.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug tree-optimization/82628] New: wrong code at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu in the 32-bit mode

/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/home/su/software/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 8.0.0 20171019 (experimental

[Bug lto/82598] [8 Regression] lto debugobj lacks .note.GNU-stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82598 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/82575] [8 Regression] lto debugobj references __gnu_lto_slim, ld test liblto-17 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/82575] [8 Regression] lto debugobj references __gnu_lto_slim, ld test liblto-17 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575 --- Comment #8 from Alan Modra --- Author: amodra Date: Thu Oct 19 23:06:20 2017 New Revision: 253914 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253914=gcc=rev Log: PR82575, lto debugobj references __gnu_lto_slim, ld test liblto-17 fails If

[Bug other/81712] gcc does not compile when using glib 2.26 (everything works fine with 2.25)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81712 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed by r249731 on trunk and r249956 on gcc-7-branch

[Bug target/82626] -msse and -mfpmath=sse Causes __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ to be -1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82626 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug target/82626] -msse and -mfpmath=sse Causes __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ to be -1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82626 --- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I think a value of 0 should be correct with -mfpmath=sse.

[Bug target/82626] -msse and -mfpmath=sse Causes __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ to be -1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82626 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||i?86-*-* Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug other/82627] New: [8 regression] r253809 breaks test cases gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-3.c -7.c, -9.c, and uns-interchange-9.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82627 Bug ID: 82627 Summary: [8 regression] r253809 breaks test cases gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-3.c -7.c, -9.c, and uns-interchange-9.c Product: gcc Version: 8.0

[Bug regression/82626] New: -msse and -mfpmath=sse Causes __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ to be -1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82626 Bug ID: 82626 Summary: -msse and -mfpmath=sse Causes __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ to be -1 Product: gcc Version: 6.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/82597] [8 Regression] ICE at -O2 and -O3 x86_64-linux-gnu in the 32-bit mode: in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2207

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82597 --- Comment #6 from Michael Collison --- Yes I am aware of that report. I have a fix that should be sent to gcc-patches shortly.

[Bug gcov-profile/82614] GCOV crashes while parsing gcda file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614 --- Comment #5 from Marco Castelluccio --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4) > (In reply to Marco Castelluccio from comment #3) > > > Thanks for the report Marco. Looks it comes from Firefox, am I right? > > > > Yes, that's correct.

[Bug target/81924] [6 Regression] ICE: in simplify_binary_operation_1, at simplify-rtx.c:3678 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81924 --- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt --- Yeah, that looks like a backporting oversight. I'll have a look after I recover from the post-vacation email slog.

[Bug tree-optimization/82625] New: lower-optimization are not inlined with symbol multiversioning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82625 Bug ID: 82625 Summary: lower-optimization are not inlined with symbol multiversioning Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/82617] Internal compiler error in expand_expr_real_1 when compiling the attached file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82617 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- The ICE depends on the configuration of the compiler: with --enable-checking=release, I get during RTL pass: expand pr82617.f90:27:0: items = strwords_impl(str,white) internal compiler error:

[Bug rtl-optimization/82597] [8 Regression] ICE at -O2 and -O3 x86_64-linux-gnu in the 32-bit mode: in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2207

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82597 --- Comment #5 from Arseny Solokha --- So there is another testcase in PR82592.

[Bug fortran/82620] [PDT] ICE: free_expr0(): Bad expr type (at fortran/expr.c:497)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82620 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/82617] Internal compiler error in expand_expr_real_1 when compiling the attached file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82617 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/82597] [8 Regression] ICE at -O2 and -O3 x86_64-linux-gnu in the 32-bit mode: in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2207

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82597 Michael Collison changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michael.collison at linaro dot org

[Bug fortran/82620] [PDT] ICE: free_expr0(): Bad expr type (at fortran/expr.c:497)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82620 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug libstdc++/81797] gcc 7.1.0 fails to build on macOS 10.13 (High Sierra):

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797 --- Comment #32 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Misty De Meo from comment #31) > For what it's worth, Apple's response was: "We analyzed the issue and > determined the problem to be a latent bug in gcc’s build system that is > revealed by

[Bug sanitizer/82595] bootstrap fails in libsanitizer on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595 --- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager --- On 10/19/17, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595 > > --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- > BTW, why --without-pic? What you

[Bug target/82624] [msp430] Target must allow for NULL pointer dereferences

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82624 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Patches should be sent to gcc-patches@.

[Bug target/82624] New: [msp430] Target must allow for NULL pointer dereferences

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82624 Bug ID: 82624 Summary: [msp430] Target must allow for NULL pointer dereferences Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libgomp/82623] many omp tests failed for both C++ and Fortran, gcc-6.4 on Redhat 7.3/64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82623 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/79402] ICE with submodules: module procedure interface defined in parent module

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79402 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/79402] ICE with submodules: module procedure interface defined in parent module

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79402 --- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Oct 19 17:54:58 2017 New Revision: 253908 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253908=gcc=rev Log: 2017-10-19 Paul Thomas PR fortran/79402 *

[Bug c++/82623] New: many omp tests failed for both C++ and Fortran, gcc-6.4 on Redhat 7.3/64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82623 Bug ID: 82623 Summary: many omp tests failed for both C++ and Fortran, gcc-6.4 on Redhat 7.3/64 Product: gcc Version: 6.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug libfortran/82233] [6/7/8 Regression] execute_command_line causes program to stop when command fails (or does not exist)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82233 --- Comment #17 from Christophe Lyon --- Thanks for your effort; I'm still seeing noise though. Sorry, I'm not fluent in fortran: is there a way to call wait() from fortran? I could try adding it at the end of the testcase, to see if it

[Bug libfortran/82233] [6/7/8 Regression] execute_command_line causes program to stop when command fails (or does not exist)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82233 --- Comment #18 from Thomas Koenig --- Author: tkoenig Date: Thu Oct 19 17:49:24 2017 New Revision: 253907 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253907=gcc=rev Log: 2017-10-19 Thomas Koenig Backport from trunk

[Bug target/82618] Inefficient double-word subtraction on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/82618] Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618 --- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Thu Oct 19 17:35:39 2017 New Revision: 253905 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253905=gcc=rev Log: PR target/82618 * config/i386/i386.md (sub to cmp): New

[Bug c++/82619] C++17 std::apply treated as in global namespace under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619 tower120 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/82619] C++17 std::apply treated as in global namespace under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/82407] [8 Regression][meta-bug] qsort_chk fallout tracking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82407 Bug 82407 depends on bug 82395, which changed state. Bug 82395 Summary: [8 Regression] qsort comparator non-negative on sorted output: 1 in color_allocnos https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82395 What|Removed

[Bug rtl-optimization/82395] [8 Regression] qsort comparator non-negative on sorted output: 1 in color_allocnos

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82395 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/82395] [8 Regression] qsort comparator non-negative on sorted output: 1 in color_allocnos

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82395 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov --- Author: amonakov Date: Thu Oct 19 16:48:34 2017 New Revision: 253904 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253904=gcc=rev Log: ira-color: fix allocno_priority_compare_func for qsort (PR 82395)

[Bug other/79543] Inappropriate "ld --version" checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79543 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug other/79543] Inappropriate "ld --version" checking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79543 Thomas Schwinge changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/81797] gcc 7.1.0 fails to build on macOS 10.13 (High Sierra):

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797 --- Comment #31 from Misty De Meo --- > If --disable-libstdcxx-pch works (does it?), and until someone can > investigate more, I'd be tempted to consider it a mac bug and recommend that > option in https://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html .

[Bug c++/82619] C++17 std::apply treated as in global namespace under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619 --- Comment #2 from tower120 --- > If a `std::tuple` is passed in as `tuple`, isn't `std::apply` found by ADL? Maybe, I don't understand how and when ADL work :( Visual Studio / clang compiler said nothing about it, so I thought ... Are you

[Bug fortran/82622] New: [PDT] ICE in structure_alloc_comps, at fortran/trans-array.c:8963

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82622 Bug ID: 82622 Summary: [PDT] ICE in structure_alloc_comps, at fortran/trans-array.c:8963 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/82622] [PDT] ICE in structure_alloc_comps, at fortran/trans-array.c:8963

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82622 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||82173 --- Comment #1

[Bug target/82621] New: [6/7/8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fgcse -fweb

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82621 Bug ID: 82621 Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fgcse -fweb Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/82620] New: [PDT] ICE: free_expr0(): Bad expr type (at fortran/expr.c:497)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82620 Bug ID: 82620 Summary: [PDT] ICE: free_expr0(): Bad expr type (at fortran/expr.c:497) Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/56456] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456 Bug 56456 depends on bug 82596, which changed state. Bug 82596 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds index into string literal https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82596 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/82596] missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds index into string literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82596 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/82596] missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds index into string literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82596 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu Oct 19 16:03:07 2017 New Revision: 253902 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253902=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/82596 - missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds index

[Bug c++/82619] C++17 std::apply treated as in global namespace under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619 --- Comment #1 from d25fe0be@ --- If a `std::tuple` is passed in as `tuple`, isn't `std::apply` found by ADL?

[Bug c++/82619] New: C++17 std::apply treated as in global namespace under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619 Bug ID: 82619 Summary: C++17 std::apply treated as in global namespace under certain circumstances Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/82600] [8 Regression] Address of local variable returned [-Werror=return-local-addr] when building mozilla-central

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82600 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/82600] [8 Regression] Address of local variable returned [-Werror=return-local-addr] when building mozilla-central

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82600 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Oct 19 14:24:39 2017 New Revision: 253899 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253899=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/82600 * typeck.c (check_return_expr): Don't call

[Bug bootstrap/82610] [8 Regression] Bootstrap fails on macOS 10.13 because of abort redefinition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82610 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Sorry about the breakage. (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Hmm, include/ shouldn't include system headers directly :/ Of course they > all do... > > is probably not too bad to include

[Bug tree-optimization/82434] -fstore-merging does not work reliably.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82434 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/82615] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 453.povray ~10% performance deviation with r248863

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82615 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > The rev. was supposed to be a no-op? I also guess so.

[Bug middle-end/82601] missing uninitialized warning for INTENT(OUT) argument with -O0 / -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82601 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Here is a variant of the example in comment 0, where the subroutine has been substituted by a function: program uninit integer :: p,q p = -1 q = f(p) if (p

[Bug target/82615] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 453.povray ~10% performance deviation with r248863

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82615 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unknown |8.0 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener

[Bug libgomp/81591] segmentation fault when using priorities of nested tasks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81591 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Sistek --- Hello, are there any news regarding this issue, please? Were you able to reproduce it? Best wishes, Jakub Sistek

[Bug debug/82509] DW_AT_endianity issues with attribute scalar_storage_order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82509 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/82601] missing uninitialized warning with -O0 / -Og

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82601 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > (does intent(out) mean it comes in uninitialized?) Yes. To quote the Fortran 2008 standard (from section 5.3.10): "The INTENT (OUT) attribute for a

[Bug debug/82509] DW_AT_endianity issues with attribute scalar_storage_order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82509 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Thu Oct 19 13:50:10 2017 New Revision: 253893 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253893=gcc=rev Log: PR debug/82509 * dwarf2out.c (new_die_raw): New static inline

[Bug target/82618] Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Comment on attachment 42402 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42402 Prototype patch Nice, thanks.

[Bug target/82618] Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618 --- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak --- Created attachment 42402 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42402=edit Prototype patch Attached patch compiles the test to: movq%rsi, %r10 cmpq%rdx, %rdi

[Bug preprocessor/82130] stringification (#) in traditional mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82130 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Heiko Eißfeldt from comment #1) > This variant works for me with: Yes, that's a simple workaround. Still, it would be nice to have support for the stringification operator '#' in

[Bug lto/82575] [8 Regression] lto debugobj references __gnu_lto_slim, ld test liblto-17 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575 --- Comment #7 from Alan Modra --- > --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- > OK. I suppose they are properly prevailed by any global symbol of the same > name > as well? Like a weak definition with default visibility? Or is there

[Bug sanitizer/82595] bootstrap fails in libsanitizer on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- BTW, why --without-pic? What you want to achieve by that?

[Bug target/82445] ARM target generates unaligned STRD instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/82595] bootstrap fails in libsanitizer on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/82445] ARM target generates unaligned STRD instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445 --- Comment #7 from Richard Earnshaw --- Author: rearnsha Date: Thu Oct 19 13:14:55 2017 New Revision: 253891 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253891=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR 82445 - suppress 32-bit aligned ldrd/strd peepholing with

[Bug target/82445] ARM target generates unaligned STRD instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445 --- Comment #8 from Richard Earnshaw --- Author: rearnsha Date: Thu Oct 19 13:16:42 2017 New Revision: 253892 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253892=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR 82445 - suppress 32-bit aligned ldrd/strd peepholing with

[Bug target/82618] Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak --- Maybe a peephole2 pattern for sub_3 with: "find_regno_note (peep2_next_insn (0), REG_UNUSED, operand[0])" constraint that converts to equivalent compare would do the trick? Hopefully, later passes

[Bug libstdc++/81797] gcc 7.1.0 fails to build on macOS 10.13 (High Sierra):

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797 --- Comment #30 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #29) > The result of "make -d --trace -j8 all-target-libstdc++-v3", in a build > where x86_64-apple-darwin17.0.0/libstdc++-v3 was entirely removed, can be >

[Bug lto/82575] [8 Regression] lto debugobj references __gnu_lto_slim, ld test liblto-17 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On October 19, 2017 2:33:17 PM GMT+02:00, amodra at gmail dot com wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575 > >--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra --- >>

[Bug target/82445] ARM target generates unaligned STRD instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445 --- Comment #6 from Richard Earnshaw --- Author: rearnsha Date: Thu Oct 19 13:10:42 2017 New Revision: 253890 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253890=gcc=rev Log: [ARM] PR 82445 - suppress 32-bit aligned ldrd/strd peepholing with

[Bug bootstrap/49582] configure-target-libquadmath fail on powerpc-darwin8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49582 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/37704] RFE: Need specific version of --disable-multilib

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37704 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fang at csl dot cornell.edu --- Comment

[Bug target/48097] new Throw_2 failures in libjava under Xcode 4.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48097 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug target/82618] Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Or add a pattern for (set (reg:DI 100) (subreg:DI (minus:TI (reg/v:TI 90 [ x ]) (reg/v:TI 94 [ y ])) 8)) that combine would match and then reload that differently if not using SSE regs and

[Bug target/82618] New: Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618 Bug ID: 82618 Summary: Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/82617] New: Internal compiler error in expand_expr_real_1 when compiling the attached file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82617 Bug ID: 82617 Summary: Internal compiler error in expand_expr_real_1 when compiling the attached file Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug lto/82575] [8 Regression] lto debugobj references __gnu_lto_slim, ld test liblto-17 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575 --- Comment #5 from Alan Modra --- > --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- > Hmm, but those symbols will prevail, enlarging the final symbol table? > Or are weak + hidden symbols removed even for shared libaries? Well, they are still

[Bug sanitizer/82595] bootstrap fails in libsanitizer on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595 --- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Well, lsan_preinit.o shouldn't be linked into liblsan.so.*, either we should > just ignore it completely, or install and link in like asan_preinit.o or >

[Bug c/81795] Stray "originally defined here" when using -Wc++-compat with #pragma GCC diagnostic push/pop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81795 --- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager --- Compiling with an older GCC makes me wonder: could the fix for this bug also be backported to the other open branches?

[Bug fortran/81048] [6/7/8 Regression] incorrect derived type initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81048 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/81048] [6/7/8 Regression] incorrect derived type initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81048 --- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Oct 19 12:16:41 2017 New Revision: 253889 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253889=gcc=rev Log: 2017-10-19 Paul Thomas PR fortran/81048 *

[Bug gcov-profile/82614] GCOV crashes while parsing gcda file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Marco Castelluccio from comment #3) > > Thanks for the report Marco. Looks it comes from Firefox, am I right? > > Yes, that's correct. Actually, from a build of the JS shell. > > > Which

[Bug gcov-profile/82614] GCOV crashes while parsing gcda file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614 --- Comment #3 from Marco Castelluccio --- > Thanks for the report Marco. Looks it comes from Firefox, am I right? Yes, that's correct. Actually, from a build of the JS shell. > Which version of GCC have you been using? The build was done

[Bug sanitizer/82616] New: ../bfd/.libs/libbfd.a(plugin.o): undefined reference to symbol 'dlsym@@GLIBC_2.16'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82616 Bug ID: 82616 Summary: ../bfd/.libs/libbfd.a(plugin.o): undefined reference to symbol 'dlsym@@GLIBC_2.16' Product: gcc Version: 8.0 URL:

[Bug target/82580] Optimize comparisons for __int128 on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82580 --- Comment #15 from Morwenn --- That was insanely fast, thanks a lot! :)

[Bug driver/81829] [7 Regression] /usr/bin/gcc-{ar,nm,ranlib} segfault without arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81829 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||8.0 --- Comment #9 from Martin Liška

  1   2   >