[Bug libfortran/91593] Implicit enum conversions in libgfortran/io/transfer.c

2019-10-01 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91593 --- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Wed Oct 2 02:35:14 2019 New Revision: 276439 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276439=gcc=rev Log: 2019-10-01 Jerry DeLisle PR libfortran/91593 * io/read.c

[Bug target/88630] Incorrect float negating together with convertion to int on ST-40

2019-10-01 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88630 Oleg Endo changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/91961] __has_attribute expands macro argument

2019-10-01 Thread egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91961 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/91785] ICE in check_assumed_size_reference, at fortran/resolve.c:1601

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91785 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug c++/69531] Implement CWG 1307; Differently bounded array parameters

2019-10-01 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69531 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug target/91269] [9/10 regression] unaligned floating-point register with -mcpu=niagara4 -fcall-used-g6

2019-10-01 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91269 --- Comment #22 from Eric Botcazou --- > Funny how the fix for the gcc-8.3.0 branch was a backport of this patch! Nothing funny though, just an analysis of the behavior of the GCC 8 compiler with a testcase that triggers a failure; the original

[Bug c++/91962] [10 Regression] ice in build_target_expr, at cp/tree.c:488

2019-10-01 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0

[Bug c++/91962] [10 Regression] ice in build_target_expr, at cp/tree.c:488

2019-10-01 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/91962] [10 Regression] ice in build_target_expr, at cp/tree.c:488

2019-10-01 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug c/91961] __has_attribute expands macro argument

2019-10-01 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91961 --- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- There's bug 80005 for expansion of __has_include arguments.

[Bug c/91961] __has_attribute expands macro argument

2019-10-01 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91961 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I thought I had saw this before but I can't seem to find it right now.

[Bug c++/91962] New: ice in build_target_expr, at cp/tree.c:488

2019-10-01 Thread dcb314 at hotmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962 Bug ID: 91962 Summary: ice in build_target_expr, at cp/tree.c:488 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/91957] [10 Regression] ICE in lra_assign building libgcc for csky-linux-gnuabiv2 soft-float

2019-10-01 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91957 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last

[Bug c/91961] New: __has_attribute expands macro argument

2019-10-01 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91961 Bug ID: 91961 Summary: __has_attribute expands macro argument Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug fortran/91959] [8/9/10 Regression] Accepts invalid variable declaration %x

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91959 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/91959] [8/9/10 Regression] Accepts invalid variable declaration %x

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91959 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/83534] C++17: typeinfo for noexcept function lacks noexcept information

2019-10-01 Thread alisdairm at me dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83534 Alisdair Meredith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alisdairm at me dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/91958] type info does not respect 'noexcept' on C++17 function types

2019-10-01 Thread alisdairm at me dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91958 Alisdair Meredith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/91957] [10 Regression] ICE in lra_assign building libgcc for csky-linux-gnuabiv2 soft-float

2019-10-01 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91957 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug c++/91950] -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766

2019-10-01 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2) > I think this is actually a dup of another bug that asked the same thing, but > I forget its number... There are dozens of them, because nobody understands how

[Bug target/91269] [9/10 regression] unaligned floating-point register with -mcpu=niagara4 -fcall-used-g6

2019-10-01 Thread mattst88 at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91269 --- Comment #21 from Matt Turner --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #16) > > I believe the Known to work field is wrong and gcc-8.3.0 has this bug as > > well. > > No, the field is correct and you're wrong. Funny how the fix for the

[Bug c++/91958] type info does not respect 'noexcept' on C++17 function types

2019-10-01 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91958 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- PR 83534 ? (it could also be related to bug 67772, but it is a bit further)

[Bug fortran/91960] New: ICE: backend decl for module variable 'j' already exists

2019-10-01 Thread gs...@t-online.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91960 Bug ID: 91960 Summary: ICE: backend decl for module variable 'j' already exists Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/91953] [8/9/10 Regression] G++ rejects lambda with constexpr variable

2019-10-01 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91953 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/91959] [8/9/10 Regression] Accepts invalid variable declaration %x

2019-10-01 Thread gs...@t-online.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91959 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid --- Comment #1 from G.

[Bug fortran/91959] New: [8/9/10 Regression] Accepts invalid variable declaration %x

2019-10-01 Thread gs...@t-online.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91959 Bug ID: 91959 Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] Accepts invalid variable declaration %x Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/85401] segfault building code for VAX

2019-10-01 Thread law at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401 --- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Tue Oct 1 19:25:31 2019 New Revision: 276426 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276426=gcc=rev Log: PR target/85401 * ira-color.c (allocno_copy_cost_saving): Call

[Bug fortran/91864] [9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_do_variable, at fortran/parse.c:4405

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91864 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/91864] [9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_do_variable, at fortran/parse.c:4405

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91864 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Tue Oct 1 19:21:05 2019 New Revision: 276425 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276425=gcc=rev Log: 2019-10-01 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/91864 *

[Bug fortran/91802] ICE in mio_name_expr_t, at fortran/module.c:2141

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91802 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/91802] ICE in mio_name_expr_t, at fortran/module.c:2141

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91802 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.3 --- Comment #5 from kargl

[Bug fortran/91802] ICE in mio_name_expr_t, at fortran/module.c:2141

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91802 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Tue Oct 1 18:58:01 2019 New Revision: 276423 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276423=gcc=rev Log: 2019-10-01 Steven G. Kargl Backport of r276254+276265

[Bug c++/91950] -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766

2019-10-01 Thread john.boyer at tutanota dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950 --- Comment #3 from John Boyer --- Actually, I believe Jonathan is correct. I misread the CWG. The "range" of an enum class has nothing to do with how many enumerators it has.

[Bug fortran/91714] Accepts type statement without delimiter in free form

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91714 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|NEW

[Bug c++/91958] New: type info does not respect 'noexcept' on C++17 function types

2019-10-01 Thread alisdairm at me dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91958 Bug ID: 91958 Summary: type info does not respect 'noexcept' on C++17 function types Product: gcc Version: 9.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/91714] Accepts type statement without delimiter in free form

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91714 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Tue Oct 1 18:37:53 2019 New Revision: 276421 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276421=gcc=rev Log: 2019-10-01 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/91714 * decl.c

[Bug c++/91222] [10 Regression] 507.cactuBSSN_r build fails in warn_types_mismatch at ipa-devirt.c:1006 since r273571

2019-10-01 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot

[Bug c++/91950] -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766

2019-10-01 Thread egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/91222] [10 Regression] 507.cactuBSSN_r build fails in warn_types_mismatch at ipa-devirt.c:1006 since r273571

2019-10-01 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222 --- Comment #22 from Jan Hubicka --- Hi, I have commited patch that avoids the ICE while producing warning. However I wonder why C++ FE is silent here $ cat 2.ii extern "C" { struct { } admbaserest_; } We probably could warn about two things

[Bug c++/91222] [10 Regression] 507.cactuBSSN_r build fails in warn_types_mismatch at ipa-devirt.c:1006 since r273571

2019-10-01 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222 --- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka --- Author: hubicka Date: Tue Oct 1 18:21:31 2019 New Revision: 276420 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276420=gcc=rev Log: PR lto/91222 * ipa-devirt.c (warn_types_mismatch): Do not ICE when

[Bug fortran/91641] [9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_is_contiguous_expr, at fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:2857

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91641 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/26241] [7/8/9/10 Regression] None of the IPA passes are documented in passes.texi

2019-10-01 Thread egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26241 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch CC|

[Bug fortran/91641] [9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_is_contiguous_expr, at fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:2857

2019-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91641 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Tue Oct 1 18:16:36 2019 New Revision: 276419 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276419=gcc=rev Log: 2019-10-01 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/91641 * check.c

[Bug target/88630] Incorrect float negating together with convertion to int on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread zavadovsky.yan at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88630 --- Comment #9 from Zavadovsky Yan --- >Can you try it out please and see >if it fixes the issue on your hardware? Checked GCC 8.2 + your patch and crosstool-ng to build toolchain(using same config as I've used while reporting bug). At least

[Bug c++/88562] Incorrect pointer incrementing on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread zavadovsky.yan at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562 --- Comment #12 from Zavadovsky Yan --- I've checked this patch locally on our STiH237 hardware. Using GCC 8.2 built by crosstool-ng. It works!

[Bug middle-end/91957] New: [10 Regression] ICE in lra_assign building libgcc for csky-linux-gnuabiv2 soft-float

2019-10-01 Thread jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91957 Bug ID: 91957 Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in lra_assign building libgcc for csky-linux-gnuabiv2 soft-float Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug ipa/91956] New: [10 Regression] ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed (error: comdat-local function called by __ct .isra outside its comdat)

2019-10-01 Thread asolokha at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91956 Bug ID: 91956 Summary: [10 Regression] ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed (error: comdat-local function called by __ct .isra outside its comdat) Product: gcc

[Bug c++/91953] [8/9/10 Regression] G++ rejects lambda with constexpr variable

2019-10-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91953 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Reduced testcase: template struct integral_constant { static constexpr _Tp value = __v; typedef _Tp value_type; typedef integral_constant<_Tp, __v> type; constexpr operator value_type() const

[Bug c/66970] Add __has_builtin() macro

2019-10-01 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66970 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/91955] New: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-truncation-1.C should not rely on early inlinng

2019-10-01 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91955 Bug ID: 91955 Summary: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-truncation-1.C should not rely on early inlinng Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/91954] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr66142.c should not need early inlining to be vectorized

2019-10-01 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91954 Bug ID: 91954 Summary: gcc.dg/vect/pr66142.c should not need early inlining to be vectorized Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/91953] [8/9/10 Regression] G++ rejects lambda with constexpr variable

2019-10-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91953 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/91946] wrong result comparing pointer with pointer+offset with -m32

2019-10-01 Thread tim.ruehsen at gmx dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946 --- Comment #8 from Tim Ruehsen --- Here is a good blog post about pointer overflow: https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1395

[Bug bootstrap/91949] [10 Regression] bootstrap failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf and s390x-linux-gnu (cannot convert 'bool' to 'const predefined_function_abi*')

2019-10-01 Thread doko at debian dot org
|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose --- that fixes the issue, however the armhf bootstrap is still broken in libstdc++v3. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-snapshot/1:20191001-1ubuntu2/+build/17831585

[Bug c++/91925] [9/10 Regression] -fpack-struct causes a decltype with template to ICE

2019-10-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91925 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Oct 1 16:19:04 2019 New Revision: 276415 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276415=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/91925 * c-warn.c (check_alignment_of_packed_member): Ignore

[Bug c++/88562] Incorrect pointer incrementing on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread zavadovsky.yan at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562 --- Comment #11 from Zavadovsky Yan --- Thanks for fixing!

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt --- Excellent! I'm glad you have a workaround for the time being.

[Bug target/88630] Incorrect float negating together with convertion to int on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88630 --- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo --- Created attachment 46987 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46987=edit Trial patch The ST-40 manual describes the fneg and fabs instructions separately for single and double precision. I take

[Bug libstdc++/91947] std::filesystem::file_size will return wrong value on 32bit platforms with large files support

2019-10-01 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91947 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/91950] -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766

2019-10-01 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread cand at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #14 from Lauri Kasanen --- Inline asm works on the buggy versions. Thanks.

[Bug c++/88562] Incorrect pointer incrementing on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562 Oleg Endo changed: What|Removed |Added Target|sh4 |sh*-*-* Status|NEW

[Bug c++/88562] Incorrect pointer incrementing on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562 --- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo --- Author: olegendo Date: Tue Oct 1 15:02:25 2019 New Revision: 276414 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276414=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ 2019-10-01 Oleg Endo Backport from mainline 2019-10-01

[Bug c++/88562] Incorrect pointer incrementing on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562 --- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo --- Author: olegendo Date: Tue Oct 1 15:00:40 2019 New Revision: 276413 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276413=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ 2019-10-01 Oleg Endo Backport from mainline 2019-10-01

[Bug c++/88562] Incorrect pointer incrementing on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562 --- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo --- Author: olegendo Date: Tue Oct 1 14:58:10 2019 New Revision: 276412 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276412=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ 2019-10-01 Oleg Endo Backport from mainline 2019-10-01

[Bug c++/88562] Incorrect pointer incrementing on SH4

2019-10-01 Thread olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562 --- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo --- Author: olegendo Date: Tue Oct 1 14:55:34 2019 New Revision: 276411 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276411=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ 2019-10-01 Oleg Endo PR target/88562 * config/sh/sh.c

[Bug c++/91606] [9/10 regression] Optimization leads to invalid code

2019-10-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- And the reason for alias set 5 is that it is TYPE_ALIAS_SET of pointer to the METHOD_TYPE. reference_alias_ptr_type_1 in the D.10827._M_elems[0].D.10649.f1.__pfn case skips through the f1 and __pfn

[Bug c/91951] goto + mixed declarations + cleanup attribute considered harmful

2019-10-01 Thread allison.karlitskaya at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91951 --- Comment #1 from Allison Karlitskaya --- Two notes: First: Owen Taylor (the author of the blog post) pointed out that with -O2, GCC is able to notice the uninitialised use of the variable in my example and warn about it. Note that this is

[Bug c++/91953] New: [8/9/10 Regression] G++ rejects lambda with constexpr variable

2019-10-01 Thread ostash at ostash dot kiev.ua
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91953 Bug ID: 91953 Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] G++ rejects lambda with constexpr variable Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/91952] New: [rfe] __attribute__((__default_value__()))

2019-10-01 Thread allison.karlitskaya at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91952 Bug ID: 91952 Summary: [rfe] __attribute__((__default_value__())) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.0 Known to fail|

[Bug c/91951] New: goto + mixed declarations + cleanup attribute considered harmful

2019-10-01 Thread allison.karlitskaya at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91951 Bug ID: 91951 Summary: goto + mixed declarations + cleanup attribute considered harmful Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt --- Committed to trunk with 276410. Forgot to annotate the ChangeLog with the PR, so here it is: [gcc] 2019-10-01 Bill Schmidt * config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.c (rtx_is_swappable_p): Don't swap

[Bug target/77918] S390: Floating point comparisons don't raise invalid for unordered operands.

2019-10-01 Thread iii at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77918 --- Comment #5 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: iii Date: Tue Oct 1 14:04:08 2019 New Revision: 276409 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276409=gcc=rev Log: S/390: Remove code duplication in vec_* comparison expanders s390.md uses a

[Bug target/77918] S390: Floating point comparisons don't raise invalid for unordered operands.

2019-10-01 Thread iii at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77918 --- Comment #4 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: iii Date: Tue Oct 1 14:03:08 2019 New Revision: 276408 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276408=gcc=rev Log: S/390: Implement vcond expander for V1TI,V1TF Currently gcc does not emit

[Bug c++/91606] [9/10 regression] Optimization leads to invalid code

2019-10-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > for example _31->__delta gets alias-set 4 and the store alias-set 6. It > looks > like the C++ FE creates separate pfn structure types without any TBAA measure

[Bug c++/91950] New: -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766

2019-10-01 Thread john.boyer at tutanota dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950 Bug ID: 91950 Summary: -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/91948] [10 Regression] SEGV in reload with r276389

2019-10-01 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/91948] [10 Regression] SEGV in reload with r276389

2019-10-01 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948 --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Tue Oct 1 12:55:16 2019 New Revision: 276407 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276407=gcc=rev Log: Fix reload after function-abi patches (PR91948) The code was

[Bug ipa/91853] [10 Regression] ICE in gimplify_modify_expr, at gimplify.c:5902 since r275982

2019-10-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91853 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- I tested #pragma target -mno-optimize-swaps, and it doesn't help. The only options that can be specified with #pragma target for Power are listed here:

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt --- I don't *believe* that "#pragma target" works with -mno-optimize-swaps, but you could try it. I think that mechanism only works for certain flags, but I haven't tried that one. I think inline asm should

[Bug tree-optimization/91934] [8 Regression] Performance regression on 8.3.0 with -O3 and avx

2019-10-01 Thread tochansky at tochlab dot net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934 --- Comment #10 from Dmitrii Tochanskii --- Anyway thanks for your work. Now we know where problem is and users can make their own decision about patch. RedHat 8 uses gcc 8.2 but debian 10 - gcc 8.3...

[Bug debug/91507] wrong debug for completed array with previous incomplete declaration

2019-10-01 Thread aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91507 --- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva --- Author: aoliva Date: Tue Oct 1 11:36:31 2019 New Revision: 276403 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276403=gcc=rev Log: DWARF array bounds missing from C++ array definitions A variable redeclaration

[Bug bootstrap/91949] New: [10 Regression] bootstrap failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf and s390x-linux-gnu (cannot convert 'bool' to 'const predefined_function_abi*')

2019-10-01 Thread doko at debian dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91949 Bug ID: 91949 Summary: [10 Regression] bootstrap failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf and s390x-linux-gnu (cannot convert 'bool' to 'const predefined_function_abi*') Product: gcc

[Bug bootstrap/91949] [10 Regression] bootstrap failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf and s390x-linux-gnu (cannot convert 'bool' to 'const predefined_function_abi*')

2019-10-01 Thread ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91949 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/91948] [10 Regression] SEGV in reload with r276389

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0 Summary|SEGV in reload

[Bug tree-optimization/91934] [8 Regression] Performance regression on 8.3.0 with -O3 and avx

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.4 Summary|Performance

[Bug tree-optimization/91934] Performance regression on 8.3.0 with -O3 and avx

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||87105, 87746, 87800 --- Comment #8

[Bug tree-optimization/91934] Performance regression on 8.3.0 with -O3 and avx

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- So the difference between good and bad is data-ref access analysis which figures single-element interleaving in GCC 8 and nicer interleaving in GCC 9 where I rewrote parts of that analysis: t.c:15:9: note:

[Bug middle-end/91948] SEGV in reload with r276389

2019-10-01 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948 --- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- There were subsequent reload-related commits, but building still fails as above at r276395.

[Bug middle-end/91948] New: SEGV in reload with r276389

2019-10-01 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948 Bug ID: 91948 Summary: SEGV in reload with r276389 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug c++/91606] [9/10 regression] Optimization leads to invalid code

2019-10-01 Thread m.cencora at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606 --- Comment #6 from m.cencora at gmail dot com --- Just a wild guess, but maybe it is related to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858 and there it just manifests itself in compilation error because it is in constexpr context.

[Bug tree-optimization/91940] __builtin_bswap16 loop optimization

2019-10-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 46985 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46985=edit gcc10-pr91940.patch Full untested patch.

[Bug c++/91606] [9/10 regression] Optimization leads to invalid code

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Component|middle-end

[Bug driver/69471] "-march=native" unintentionally breaks further -march/-mtune flags

2019-10-01 Thread ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69471 --- Comment #14 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Tue Oct 1 10:28:40 2019 New Revision: 276397 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276397=gcc=rev Log: driver: Also prune joined switches with negation 2019-10-01

[Bug middle-end/91946] wrong result comparing pointer with pointer+offset with -m32

2019-10-01 Thread tim.ruehsen at gmx dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946 --- Comment #7 from Tim Ruehsen --- Thanks for the explanations :-)

[Bug middle-end/91606] [9/10 regression] Optimization leads to invalid code

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/91940] __builtin_bswap16 loop optimization

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Looks good from a quick look.

[Bug middle-end/91946] wrong result comparing pointer with pointer+offset with -m32

2019-10-01 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- You can use -fwrapv-pointer to make pointer-wrapping defined. In C you are only allowed to use relational compares on pointers to the same object. On x86-linux there is no valid object at address zero

  1   2   >