[Bug c++/80567] [8 Regression] bogus fixit hint for undeclared memset: else

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80567 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2017-08-18

[Bug target/83828] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512vpopcntdqvl-vpopcntq-1.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83828 --- Comment #10 from Kirill Yukhin --- HJ, I cannot reproduce this fail on recent SDE. Here's what I have in gcc.log: spawn -ignore SIGHUP /export/kyukhin/gcc/bld-svn/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xgcc

[Bug libfortran/84156] [8 Regression] valgrind error with print *,1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84156 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/84222] [[deprecated]] class complains about internal class usage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84222 --- Comment #2 from Daryl Haresign --- See also bug 79817.

[Bug c++/84222] [[deprecated]] class complains about internal class usage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84222 --- Comment #1 from Daryl Haresign --- Additionally, any external use of a static method of a deprecated class should probably (but does not currently) emit a warning (Clang emits a warning). class [[deprecated]] C { public: void fn() {}

[Bug c++/84222] New: [[deprecated]] class complains about internal class usage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84222 Bug ID: 84222 Summary: [[deprecated]] class complains about internal class usage Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/50477] -Wunused-parameter should not warn about virtual method declarations with bodies

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50477 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug lto/84212] -Wno-* does not disable warnings from -flto link stage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84212 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/84221] [6/7/8 Regression] spurious -Wunused warning on a variable of a template type declared unused

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84221 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/84221] [6/7/8 Regression] spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning on a variable of a template type declared unused

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84221 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to work|

[Bug c++/84221] New: spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning on a variable of a template type declared unused

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84221 Bug ID: 84221 Summary: spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning on a variable of a template type declared unused Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/83369] Missing diagnostics during inlining

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83369 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Component|c

[Bug c/83369] Missing diagnostics during inlining

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83369 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Mon Feb 5 22:45:04 2018 New Revision: 257400 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257400=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/83369 - Missing diagnostics during inlining gcc/ChangeLog:

[Bug bootstrap/84017] [6/7/8 regression] Bootstrap failure on Solaris 10/x86 with gas/ld

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84017 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/84017] [6/7/8 regression] Bootstrap failure on Solaris 10/x86 with gas/ld

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84017 --- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth --- Author: ro Date: Mon Feb 5 22:37:13 2018 New Revision: 257399 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257399=gcc=rev Log: Disable SHF_MERGE on Solaris 10/x86 (PR bootstrap/84017) Backport from

[Bug bootstrap/84017] [6/7/8 regression] Bootstrap failure on Solaris 10/x86 with gas/ld

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84017 --- Comment #9 from Rainer Orth --- Author: ro Date: Mon Feb 5 22:35:08 2018 New Revision: 257398 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257398=gcc=rev Log: Disable SHF_MERGE on Solaris 10/x86 (PR bootstrap/84017) Backport from mainline

[Bug tree-optimization/84178] [7/8 Regression] ICE in release_bb_predicate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84178 --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- FWIW, in both cases the ICE started with r240865. I have a fix for the ICE in comment #0, but not yet for the one in comment #2.

[Bug libfortran/84156] [8 Regression] valgrind error with print *,1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84156 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/84204] [8 Regression] [graphite] ICE in set_codegen_error, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:206

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84204 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/84178] [7/8 Regression] ICE in release_bb_predicate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84178 --- Comment #3 from David Malcolm --- (In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #2) > Trivial change to the testcase also makes gcc-8 ICE in > mark_block_for_update(): Thanks; yes, I see this one segfault both trunk and gcc 7; gcc 6 is

[Bug fortran/84217] [8 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84217 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug fortran/84218] ICE in free_expr0, at fortran/expr.c:451

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84218 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug fortran/84219] [8 Regression] ICE: Invalid expression in gfc_target_interpret_expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84219 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug target/84220] New: rs6000 builtin __builtin_vec_sld() ICEs on invalid 3rd argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84220 Bug ID: 84220 Summary: rs6000 builtin __builtin_vec_sld() ICEs on invalid 3rd argument Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/83743] -mcpu=native causes gcc to exit in error if cpu is not recognized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83743 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED --- Comment #9 from Peter

[Bug target/83743] -mcpu=native causes gcc to exit in error if cpu is not recognized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83743 --- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner --- Author: bergner Date: Mon Feb 5 19:17:37 2018 New Revision: 257392 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257392=gcc=rev Log: Back port from mainline 2018-02-01 Peter Bergner

[Bug target/56010] Powerpc, -mcpu=native and -mtune=native use the wrong name for target 7450

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56010 --- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner --- Author: bergner Date: Mon Feb 5 19:17:37 2018 New Revision: 257392 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257392=gcc=rev Log: Back port from mainline 2018-02-01 Peter Bergner

[Bug target/84113] [7/8 Regression] libgcc/unwind.inc:136:1: unrecognizable insn: internal compiler error on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84113 --- Comment #37 from Douglas Mencken --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #36) > I'll take care of it. Fine. I published my build here https://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/manulix/other/GCC/ And they’re on “rs6000” too (; manulix@ftp-osl

[Bug tree-optimization/82604] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 410.bwaves ~50% performance regression with trunk@253679 when ftree-parallelize-loops is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 --- Comment #25 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Alexander Nesterovskiy from comment #24) > Yes, it looks like more time is being spent in synchronizing. > r256990 really changes the way autopar works: > For r253679...r256989 the

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #25 from Aldy Hernandez --- > Aldy - these easiest thing for now would be to unilaterally relax the > alignment > test in Handle_Store_Double and see if that allows you to get further with > your > tests. We're debugging past each

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #24 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #22) > (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #21) > > Hi Aldy, > > > > >>> instruction. :-( Looking at the code in Handle_Store_Double() in > > >>>

[Bug fortran/84219] New: [8 Regression] ICE: Invalid expression in gfc_target_interpret_expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84219 Bug ID: 84219 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: Invalid expression in gfc_target_interpret_expr Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #23 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Guys, >> But, as you have just discovered, (r5 + 12) is not 64-bit aligned... > > But from ARMv7 onwards it only has to be 4-byte aligned, which it is. And > this > code was build for cortex-a9, which

[Bug fortran/84218] New: [8 Regression] ICE in free_expr0, at fortran/expr.c:451

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84218 Bug ID: 84218 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in free_expr0, at fortran/expr.c:451 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/84217] [8 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84217 --- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz --- When configured with --enable-checking=release, an additional -ftrapv is necessary : $ gfortran-8-20180204 -c z1.f90 -fopenacc $ $ gfortran-8-20180204 -c z1.f90 -fopenacc -ftrapv during

[Bug fortran/84217] New: [8 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84217 Bug ID: 84217 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #22 from Richard Earnshaw --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #21) > Hi Aldy, > > >>> instruction. :-( Looking at the code in Handle_Store_Double() in > >>> sim/arm/armemu.c, I think that the reason is probably because the

[Bug c/84187] -O0 fails inline assembly compile

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84187 --- Comment #2 from Liu, Rong2 --- Created attachment 43342 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43342=edit preprocess file I attached preprocessed file. Also this one maybe related to this bug:

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #21 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Aldy, >>> instruction. :-( Looking at the code in Handle_Store_Double() in >>> sim/arm/armemu.c, I think that the reason is probably because the address >>> for the store is not double word aligned.

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #20 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Aldy, >>> for the store is not double word aligned. Which leads me to wonder, >>> what value is stored in r5 when the STRD instruction is being executed ? >> >> 1: x/i $pc >> => 0x8c24

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #19 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #16) > (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #13) > > Hi Aldy, > > > > > > > pc: 8ca4, instr: e1c520fc > > > pc: 4, instr: ea00089b > > > > > > I took a peek

[Bug c/84195] newlines in deprecated diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84195 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic --- Comment #2 from Martin

[Bug target/84113] [7/8 Regression] libgcc/unwind.inc:136:1: unrecognizable insn: internal compiler error on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84113 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/84113] [7/8 Regression] libgcc/unwind.inc:136:1: unrecognizable insn: internal compiler error on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84113 --- Comment #35 from Douglas Mencken --- (In reply to Douglas Mencken from comment #34) > And this https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-02/msg00181.html By merging that patch this issue is okay to close as resolved

[Bug target/84113] [7/8 Regression] libgcc/unwind.inc:136:1: unrecognizable insn: internal compiler error on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84113 --- Comment #34 from Douglas Mencken --- And this https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-02/msg00181.html

[Bug target/84113] [7/8 Regression] libgcc/unwind.inc:136:1: unrecognizable insn: internal compiler error on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84113 --- Comment #33 from Douglas Mencken --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #32) > Yes, run "make -k check" (add -jN to taste if you have multiple CPUs). > And then run contrib/test_summary. See if that is as expected (compare > it to

[Bug c/84195] newlines in deprecated diagnostics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84195 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug lto/84212] -Wno-* does not disable warnings from -flto link stage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84212 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug lto/81004] [7/8 Regression] linking failed with -flto and static libboost_program_options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81004 --- Comment #24 from Matt Godbolt --- Thanks so much for looking in to this Jan!

[Bug go/84215] Random results in go/libgo tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84215 --- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor --- What do you mean by "random results?" Can you post some output? Thanks.

[Bug c++/84191] Compiler ICEs when trying to resolve impossible arithmetic operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84191 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/84145] Wrong CET options processing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84145 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug libstdc++/84216] New: std::get_time fails to parse output from std::put_time, but strptime can parse them (c++11)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84216 Bug ID: 84216 Summary: std::get_time fails to parse output from std::put_time, but strptime can parse them (c++11) Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #18 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #17) > (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #12) > > > along with the isub8 subroutine, and continue chopping things similarly > > upward until you get to the

[Bug go/84215] New: Random results in go/libgo tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84215 Bug ID: 84215 Summary: Random results in go/libgo tests Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: go

[Bug target/68028] [6/7/8 regression] Compilation error "lto1: error: target attribute or pragma changes single precision floating point" with LTO on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68028 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 5 Feb 2018, nickc at redhat dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68028 > > --- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton --- > Hi Richard, > > > If the backend doesn't

[Bug c/84179] -save-temps breaks implicit-fallthrough comment heuristic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84179 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug preprocessor/78497] compiling with -save-temps adds -Wimplicit-fallthrough warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78497 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Patrick.Schluter at ec dot europa.

[Bug middle-end/84214] New: recip and slp passes conflict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84214 Bug ID: 84214 Summary: recip and slp passes conflict Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #17 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #12) > along with the isub8 subroutine, and continue chopping things similarly > upward until you get to the abort that fails. Then see if you can chop >

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #16 from Richard Earnshaw --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #13) > Hi Aldy, > > > > pc: 8ca4, instr: e1c520fc > > pc: 4, instr: ea00089b > > > > I took a peek at the executable being run with "/my-arm-build/objdudump -D >

[Bug ipa/84149] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 505.mcf/605.mcf ~10% performance regression with r256888

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84149 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/84200] [8 Regression] r256888 causes 30% performance regression of 519.lbm_r at -Ofast generic tuning on Zen

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84200 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Sebastian Peryt from comment #1) > I'm not sure if that can be treated as duplicate but that performance > degradation looks like is related to PR84149. I guess it will be a different story as

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #15 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #14) > (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #13) > > Hi Aldy, > > > > > > > pc: 8ca4, instr: e1c520fc > > > pc: 4, instr: ea00089b > > > > > > I took a peek at

[Bug middle-end/84200] [8 Regression] r256888 causes 30% performance regression of 519.lbm_r at -Ofast generic tuning on Zen

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84200 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/84200] [8 Regression] r256888 causes 30% performance regression of 519.lbm_r at -Ofast generic tuning on Zen

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84200 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Confirmed, thank you Martin for reporting that. I was able to reproduce that on Zen. I see ~25% regression on train size and reverting following predictor helps for me: -DEF_PREDICTOR (PRED_LOOP_EXIT, "loop

[Bug lto/81004] [7/8 Regression] linking failed with -flto and static libboost_program_options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81004 --- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka --- Created attachment 43340 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43340=edit Patch in am testing This patch transitions the info to merged tree and adds sanity check that we miss no resolutions.

[Bug lto/84213] New: 521.wrf_r from SPEC 2017 fails to build (link) with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84213 Bug ID: 84213 Summary: 521.wrf_r from SPEC 2017 fails to build (link) with LTO Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #13) > Hi Aldy, > > > > pc: 8ca4, instr: e1c520fc > > pc: 4, instr: ea00089b > > > > I took a peek at the executable being run with "/my-arm-build/objdudump -D > >

[Bug sanitizer/84210] __ubsan_handle_builtin_unreachable shoun't be const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84210 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- I don't remember if the const was needed. I guess if the testcases added in r217553 still pass even without the const then we can get rid of it.

[Bug libstdc++/84170] std::find_if performance issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84170 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- When the code was written it was definitely beneficial to manually unroll, as measurements at the time showed. Any change would have to be based on measurements, not just unverified assumptions.

[Bug c++/84186] nested template qualified-id not parsed correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84186 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes, I would have thought it's needed too. The other compilers I tried accept it with or without the 'template' keyword.

[Bug lto/81004] [7/8 Regression] linking failed with -flto and static libboost_program_options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81004 --- Comment #22 from Jan Hubicka --- OK, the bug reproduces with tree.c changes reverted and I see what is going on. We have two files in res file we get: 2 lines.o 7 245 4d647b2020ca5815 PREVAILING_DEF_IRONLY _Z8validatev 334 4d647b2020ca5815

[Bug c++/84191] Compiler ICEs when trying to resolve impossible arithmetic operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84191 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||needs-bisection, |

[Bug lto/63688] all_symbols_read_handler: Assertion `lto_wrapper_argv' failed.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63688 Allan Jensen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||linux at carewolf dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/84196] [6/7/8 Regression] invalid call to a function template with a vector argument silently accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84196 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/63311] [6/7/8 Regression] -O1 optimization introduces valgrind warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63311 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2014-09-22 00:00:00 |2018-2-5 CC|

[Bug c++/84197] Segmentation fault when setting -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84197 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug sanitizer/84208] fsanitize-address-use-after-scope Not working for ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84208 --- Comment #4 from Akhilesh Kumar --- Please find Patch and test Case I tried but unable to attached patch as Attachment :( My Changes for address-use-after-scope which is working for X86 but not for ARM target --- gcc/asan.c |

[Bug target/68028] [6/7/8 regression] Compilation error "lto1: error: target attribute or pragma changes single precision floating point" with LTO on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68028 --- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Richard, > If the backend doesn't support mixing of -msingle-float/-mno-single-float > within a compilation unit then this will only work if the user didn't mix TUs > with conflicting setting at

[Bug middle-end/64501] Unreachable catch BB for try blocks that cannot create an exception of specific type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64501 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/84204] [8 Regression] [graphite] ICE in set_codegen_error, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:206

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84204 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- The limit you set to scev-max-expr-size is quite low but I expect it just needs a more complicated testcase to trigger this with larger values. We apply this limit in tree-chrec.c very inconsequential so I

[Bug ipa/81360] [8 Regression] ice in estimate_edge_growth, at ipa-inline.h:86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81360 --- Comment #15 from Martin Liška --- Should(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #14) > The new test fails on arm and aarch64: > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr81360.C -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin > -fno-fat-lto-objects scan-ipa-dump icf

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #13 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Aldy, > pc: 8ca4, instr: e1c520fc > pc: 4, instr: ea00089b > > I took a peek at the executable being run with "/my-arm-build/objdudump -D > the-executable.exe", and I see we are failing in >

[Bug sanitizer/84208] fsanitize-address-use-after-scope Not working for ARM

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84208 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/84210] __ubsan_handle_builtin_unreachable shoun't be const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84210 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug lto/84212] New: -Wno-* does not disable warnings from -flto link stage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84212 Bug ID: 84212 Summary: -Wno-* does not disable warnings from -flto link stage Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug lto/81004] [7/8 Regression] linking failed with -flto and static libboost_program_options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81004 --- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka --- > It's really fixed on trunk since r257023. Seems like it just went latent. I do not see how that change can fix the problem. Honza

[Bug target/84211] [avr] Perform a post-reload register optimization pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84211 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug sanitizer/84210] __ubsan_handle_builtin_unreachable shoun't be const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84210 --- Comment #2 from Andrey Ryabinin --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Confirmed. Note that I'm not sure it makes no sense - it just means the > function has no side-effect besides not returning ;) > Well, GCC docs say that

[Bug target/84211] New: [avr] Perform a post-reload register optimization pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84211 Bug ID: 84211 Summary: [avr] Perform a post-reload register optimization pass Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3

[Bug c/84190] [7/8 Regression] double arithmetic on x86 no longer rounds to nearest

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84190 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/82518] [8 regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 fails on armeb since r252917

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518 --- Comment #12 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #11) > My setup uses armeb-none-linux-gnueabihf (as opposed to armeb-eabi as you > report). I have never tried armeb-eabi. > > I am also using qemu as simulator

[Bug tree-optimization/84106] loop distribution cost-model needs work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84106 --- Comment #6 from Daniel Fruzynski --- When you will be revisiting your cost-model for loops, please also take a look on this code. test2 has one assignment moved to separate loops, and it is about twice as

[Bug target/84209] [avr] Don't split SP in split2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84209 --- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay --- Created attachment 43338 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43338=edit Proposed patch against v7

[Bug target/84209] [avr] Don't split SP in split2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84209 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|gjl at gcc

[Bug sanitizer/84210] __ubsan_handle_builtin_unreachable shoun't be const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84210 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/84204] [8 Regression] [graphite] ICE in set_codegen_error, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:206

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84204 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/84205] [8 Regression] [graphite] ICE in set_codegen_error, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:206

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84205 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/84200] [8 Regression] r256888 causes 30% performance regression of 519.lbm_r at -Ofast generic tuning on Zen

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84200 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

  1   2   >