[Bug go/83308] Missing platform definitions for SH in libgo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308 --- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- Seems like the changes suggested by Ian aren't enough: libtool: compile: /<>/build/./gcc/gccgo -B/<>/build/./gcc/ -B/usr/sh4-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/usr/sh4-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem

[Bug tree-optimization/83312] [8 regression] bogus -Warray-bounds warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83312 --- Comment #5 from Arnd Bergmann --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #4) > > I think we can avoid the warning by simply clearing EDGE_EXECUTABLE on the > appropriate edge when we simplify the conditional. That won't capture >

[Bug tree-optimization/81303] [8 Regression] 410.bwaves regression caused by r249919

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81303 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Dec 8 08:06:31 2017 New Revision: 255497 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255497=gcc=rev Log: 2017-12-08 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/81303] [8 Regression] 410.bwaves regression caused by r249919

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81303 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #12 from sergey.shalnov at intel dot com --- Richard, Your last proposal changed the code generated a bit. Currently is shows: test_bugzilla1.c:6:5: note: Cost model analysis:. Vector inside of loop cost: 62576 Vector prologue

[Bug tree-optimization/83141] SRA and memcpy folding interact badly generating wrong-code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- Author: jamborm Date: Fri Dec 8 12:11:02 2017 New Revision: 255510 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255510=gcc=rev Log: Prevent SRA from removing type changing assignment 2017-12-08 Martin Jambor

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, sergey.shalnov at intel dot com wrote: > And it uses xmm+ vpbroadcastd to spill tmp[] to stack > ... > 1e7: 62 d2 7d 08 7c c9 vpbroadcastd %r9d,%xmm1 > 1ed: c4 c1

[Bug tree-optimization/83141] SRA and memcpy folding interact badly generating wrong-code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141 > > --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor --- > Fixed on trunk, should I backport both

[Bug go/83308] Missing platform definitions for SH in libgo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308 --- Comment #8 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz --- (In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #7) > Sorry, I did not mean to imply that I listed all the changes required. I'm > sure there will be many more, though likely mostly simple. Ah, I

[Bug c/83324] [feature request] Pragma or special syntax for guaranteed tail calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug target/82699] ENDBR isn't generated at function entrance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/81652] [meta-bug] -fcf-protection=full -mcet bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652 Bug 81652 depends on bug 82699, which changed state. Bug 82699 Summary: ENDBR isn't generated at function entrance https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/83141] SRA and memcpy folding interact badly generating wrong-code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141 --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor --- Fixed on trunk, should I backport both patches to gcc7? to gcc6?

[Bug go/83308] Missing platform definitions for SH in libgo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308 --- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor --- Sorry, I did not mean to imply that I listed all the changes required. I'm sure there will be many more, though likely mostly simple. For the ones you mention, you'll need to add "sh" to the +build

[Bug tree-optimization/83325] Compile time hog w/ -Os -fwrapv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83325 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||powerpc-linux

[Bug tree-optimization/81303] [8 Regression] 410.bwaves regression caused by r249919

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81303 --- Comment #14 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Dec 8 08:22:08 2017 New Revision: 255499 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255499=gcc=rev Log: 2017-12-08 Richard Biener PR

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Note the first loop is now vectorized fine thus the strange code is gone. -> fixed? (probably by the fix for PR83202)

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #9 from sergey.shalnov at intel dot com --- Created attachment 42813 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42813=edit New reproducer Slightly changed first loop

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- Just to note this is _basic block vectorization_ triggering. Of course we do vectorize basic blocks even when we do not vectorize any loop. Is this about the "stupid" attempt to use as little AVX512 as

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #11 from sergey.shalnov at intel dot com --- Richard, “Is this about the "stupid" attempt to use as little AVX512 as possible” No, it is not. I provided asm listing at the beginning with zmm only to illustrate the issue more

[Bug target/81647] inconsistent LTGT behavior at different optimization levels on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81647 --- Comment #8 from sudi at gcc dot gnu.org --- For the inconsistent behavior on AArch64, I will try to write a patch

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Testcase: int x[1024], y[1024]; void __attribute__((noipa)) foo () { for (int i = 0; i < 1024; ++i) { x[i] = 0; for (int j = 0; j < 1024; ++j) if (y[j]) x[i] = y[j];

[Bug target/82699] ENDBR isn't generated at function entrance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug target/81652] [meta-bug] -fcf-protection=full -mcet bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652 Bug 81652 depends on bug 82699, which changed state. Bug 82699 Summary: ENDBR isn't generated at function entrance https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Fails with -O2 -funroll-and-jam --param unroll-jam-min-percent=0 int x[1024], y[1024]; void __attribute__((noipa)) foo () { for (int i = 0; i < 1024; ++i) { x[i] = 0; for (int j = 0; j <

[Bug tree-optimization/83325] New: Compile time hog w/ -Os -fwrapv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83325 Bug ID: 83325 Summary: Compile time hog w/ -Os -fwrapv Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: compile-time-hog Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug target/81842] -fcf-protection -mcet is incompatible with makecontext family functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81842 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/81647] inconsistent LTGT behavior at different optimization levels on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81647 sudi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sudi at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- -O2 -funroll-and-jam miscompares.

[Bug tree-optimization/83141] SRA and memcpy folding interact badly generating wrong-code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/83324] New: [feature request] Pragma or special syntax for guaranteed tail calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324 Bug ID: 83324 Summary: [feature request] Pragma or special syntax for guaranteed tail calls Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/83317] [7/8 Regression] ICE in lra_eliminate_reg_if_possible compiling Python with -mfpmath=sse on x86 Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/83317] [7/8 Regression] ICE in lra_eliminate_reg_if_possible compiling Python with -mfpmath=sse on x86 Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Instead of -march=prescott we can use -msse2.

[Bug c++/83322] [8 Regression] r255469 causes: ICE: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (baselink) in diag_attr_exclusions, at attribs.c:393

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83322 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug rtl-optimization/83317] [7/8 Regression] ICE in lra_eliminate_reg_if_possible compiling Python with -mfpmath=sse on x86 Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, ra

[Bug bootstrap/81470] [8 Regression] Bootstrap comparison failures in gcc/ada

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81470 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/83321] Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value in ira.c/ira-color.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83321 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target|x86_64-*-* |x86_64-*-*,

[Bug middle-end/81782] [7/8 Regression] Yet another -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive with empty array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81782 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Ah. (gdb) p ref $1 = {ref = , base = , offset = 0, size = 8, max_size = 0, ref_alias_set = -1, base_alias_set = -1, volatile_p = false} Testing patch.

[Bug tree-optimization/83320] Mismatched free() / delete / delete [] in gimple-loop-interchange.cc:948

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83320 --- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- Err, turned out a stupid mistake using new/free...

[Bug driver/83206] -mfpu=auto does not work on ARM (armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83206 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/83304] [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr61725.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83304 --- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Fri Dec 8 11:26:35 2017 New Revision: 255506 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255506=gcc=rev Log: combine: Fix PR83304 In PR83304 two insns are combined, where the I2 uses a

[Bug target/82960] spu_machine_dependent_reorg does not handle jump_table_data insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82960 Ulrich Weigand changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #5 from sergey.shalnov at intel dot com --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > The strange code is because we perform basic-block vectorization resulting in > > vect_cst__249 = {_251, _251, _251, _251, _334, _334, _334,

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #8 from sergey.shalnov at intel dot com --- Richard, This is great changes and I see the first loop became vectorized for the test example I provided with gcc-8.0 main trunk. But I think the issue a bit more complicated. Vectorization

[Bug driver/83206] -mfpu=auto does not work on ARM (armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83206 --- Comment #17 from Richard Earnshaw --- Author: rearnsha Date: Fri Dec 8 11:19:20 2017 New Revision: 255504 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255504=gcc=rev Log: [arm] PR target/83206: Make native driver select fp-capable armv6 cores A

[Bug target/82960] spu_machine_dependent_reorg does not handle jump_table_data insn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82960 --- Comment #5 from Ulrich Weigand --- Author: uweigand Date: Fri Dec 8 11:33:09 2017 New Revision: 255508 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255508=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ PR target/82960 * config/spu/spu.c (pad_bb): Only check

[Bug c++/83301] [6 Regression] cgraph.c segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83301 --- Comment #6 from henning.schild at siemens dot com --- @doko I originally encountered that problem on Debian9. Rebuilt gcc packages with the fix of PR78692 work fine, without further issues. The Debian-packages already contain the fix for

[Bug target/83008] [performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in data passing between loops?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008 --- Comment #6 from sergey.shalnov at intel dot com --- I found the issue request related to the vactorization issues in second loop (reduction uint->int). https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65930

[Bug tree-optimization/83320] Mismatched free() / delete / delete [] in gimple-loop-interchange.cc:948

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83320 amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0

[Bug c++/83322] New: [8 Regression] r255469 causes: ICE: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (baselink) in diag_attr_exclusions, at attribs.c:393

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83322 Bug ID: 83322 Summary: [8 Regression] r255469 causes: ICE: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (baselink) in diag_attr_exclusions, at attribs.c:393

[Bug bootstrap/81470] [8 Regression] Bootstrap comparison failures in gcc/ada

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81470 --- Comment #16 from Olivier Hainque --- Author: hainque Date: Fri Dec 8 09:33:08 2017 New Revision: 255501 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255501=gcc=rev Log: 2017-06-08 Tristan Gingold PR ada/81470

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] New: [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 Bug ID: 83323 Summary: [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/82952] Hang compiling with g++ -fsanitize=undefined -Wduplicated-branches

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82952 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > Yeah, indeed. I'd say in this case the biggest problem is probably repeated > traversal of SAVE_EXPRs in inchash::add_expr (which BTW doesn't seem to be >

[Bug rtl-optimization/83321] Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value in ira.c/ira-color.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83321 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > Any idea on which source file it is (or at least a small set of them)? > What your -march=native is? It happens almost an any source file, for example

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug rtl-optimization/83321] New: Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value in ira.c/ira-color.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83321 Bug ID: 83321 Summary: Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value in ira.c/ira-color.c Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug rtl-optimization/83304] [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr61725.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83304 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/83319] [7/8 Regression] ICE on use of allocatable component in derived type coarray defined in module

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83319 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/83322] [8 Regression] r255469 causes: ICE: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have ‘exceptional’ (baselink) in diag_attr_exclusions, at attribs.c:393

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83322 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0

[Bug rtl-optimization/83327] Spilling into hard regs not taken into account in lra liveness analysis

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83327 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/83330] New: [7/8 Regression] generating unaligned store to stack for SSE register with -mno-push-args

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83330 Bug ID: 83330 Summary: [7/8 Regression] generating unaligned store to stack for SSE register with -mno-push-args Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/83326] New: [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 648.exchange2_s ~6% performance regression with r255267 (reproducer attached)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83326 Bug ID: 83326 Summary: [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 648.exchange2_s ~6% performance regression with r255267 (reproducer attached) Product: gcc Version: 8.0

[Bug c++/83328] New: string.insert does not return a iterator when using initializer lists

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328 Bug ID: 83328 Summary: string.insert does not return a iterator when using initializer lists Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/83321] Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value in ira.c/ira-color.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83321 --- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- It makes no sense: ==23914== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) ==23914==at 0x10C8165: improve_allocation() (ira-color.c:2820) ==23914==by

[Bug rtl-optimization/83327] Spilling into hard regs not taken into account in lra liveness analysis

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83327 --- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries --- Created attachment 42817 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42817=edit Demonstrator patch Using this demonstrator patch, I managed to fix the failure and run the test-case successfully.

[Bug libstdc++/83328] string.insert does not return a iterator when using initializer lists

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- I guess include/debug/string should be adjusted too.

[Bug rtl-optimization/83327] New: Spilling into hard regs not taken into account in lra liveness analysis

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83327 Bug ID: 83327 Summary: Spilling into hard regs not taken into account in lra liveness analysis Product: gcc Version: 7.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/83329] New: internal compiler error: in vectorizable_store, at tree-vect-stmts.c:6327

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83329 Bug ID: 83329 Summary: internal compiler error: in vectorizable_store, at tree-vect-stmts.c:6327 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/83326] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 648.exchange2_s ~6% performance regression with r255267 (reproducer attached)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83326 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Target

[Bug fortran/83319] [7/8 Regression] ICE on use of allocatable component in derived type coarray defined in module

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83319 Ethan Gutmann changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gutmann at ucar dot edu --- Comment #1

[Bug tree-optimization/80631] [6/7/8 Regression] Compiling with -O3 -mavx2 gives wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/83325] Compile time hog w/ -Os -fwrapv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83325 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- [local count: 78951607]: # ou_lsm.117_263 = PHI # mb_lsm.120_277 = PHI mb.74_96 = mb_lsm.120_277; if (mb.74_96 <= 1)

[Bug middle-end/81782] [7/8 Regression] Yet another -Wmaybe-uninitialized false positive with empty array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81782 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Dec 8 14:45:30 2017 New Revision: 255512 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255512=gcc=rev Log: 2017-12-08 Richard Biener PR middle-end/81782

[Bug target/71657] Wrong code on trunk gcc (std::out_of_range), westmere

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71657 --- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to mpf from comment #11) > (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #10) > > Meaning that this PR may still occur for the other archs that define the > > target hook: mips and arc. > > > > Shouldn't

[Bug libstdc++/83328] string.insert does not return a iterator when using initializer lists

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c/83324] [feature request] Pragma or special syntax for guaranteed tail calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324 --- Comment #1 from m...@daniel-mendler.de --- See also bug 77734

[Bug c/82679] Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679 --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek --- Testing a fix now. Sorry for the delay.

[Bug libstdc++/83328] string.insert does not return a iterator when using initializer lists

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixing it is an ABI change, so it's not that simple. It should also have a const_iterator parameter, not iterator, and needs to be fixed for both std::string implementations.

[Bug c++/83331] New: Compile time evaluation of cbrt does not match library evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83331 Bug ID: 83331 Summary: Compile time evaluation of cbrt does not match library evaluation Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/83317] [7/8 Regression] ICE in lra_eliminate_reg_if_possible compiling Python with -mfpmath=sse on x86 Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|ebotcazou

[Bug tree-optimization/83329] internal compiler error: in vectorizable_store, at tree-vect-stmts.c:6327

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83329 --- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor --- Bisecting revealed that the first bad revision is Honza's r255268, but since that is just a cost adjustment, it seems it has just revealed a pre-existing latent bug.

[Bug demangler/83333] New: Incorrect demangling of lambda destructors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8 Bug ID: 8 Summary: Incorrect demangling of lambda destructors Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/83323] [8 Regression] 186.crafty miscompares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323 Michael Matz changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |matz at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug testsuite/83332] New: [8 regression] new test case gfortran.dg/vect/pr81303.f fails (r255499)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83332 Bug ID: 83332 Summary: [8 regression] new test case gfortran.dg/vect/pr81303.f fails (r255499) Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/83334] New: __builtin_ms_va_copy used in function with sysv_abi is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83334 Bug ID: 83334 Summary: __builtin_ms_va_copy used in function with sysv_abi is broken Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/61428] wrong "maybe-uninitialized" (jump threading? predicate analysis?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61428 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/83328] string.insert does not return a iterator when using initializer lists

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/83328] string.insert does not return a iterator when using initializer lists

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/80631] [6/7/8 Regression] Compiling with -O3 -mavx2 gives wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On December 8, 2017 4:56:12 PM GMT+01:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631 > >Jakub Jelinek changed: > >

[Bug tree-optimization/80631] [6/7/8 Regression] Compiling with -O3 -mavx2 gives wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Related to PR81179 and http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg02054.html As the patch doesn't apply cleanly, can't easily verify it.

[Bug tree-optimization/81303] [8 Regression] 410.bwaves regression caused by r249919

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81303 --- Comment #15 from Pat Haugen --- Just confirming that the changes have eliminated the bwaves degradation on PowerPC that started with r249919.

[Bug rtl-optimization/83317] [7/8 Regression] ICE in lra_eliminate_reg_if_possible compiling Python with -mfpmath=sse on x86 Linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317 --- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov --- Eric, I think the patch caused the problem was intended for asm insns but it actually works on any insn. I guess constraining the original patch to asms could be a solution. I can make a patch and after

[Bug rtl-optimization/81595] [8 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: multiple hot/cold transitions found)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81595 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/81595] [8 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: multiple hot/cold transitions found)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81595 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Dec 8 19:05:56 2017 New Revision: 255516 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255516=gcc=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/81595 * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr81595.c: New

[Bug target/83335] New: [8 regression][aarch64,ilp32] gcc.target/aarch64/asm-2.c ICEs since 255481

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83335 Bug ID: 83335 Summary: [8 regression][aarch64,ilp32] gcc.target/aarch64/asm-2.c ICEs since 255481 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/83336] New: Issues with displaying inlining chain for middle-end warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83336 Bug ID: 83336 Summary: Issues with displaying inlining chain for middle-end warnings Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug tree-optimization/83337] New: ICE at -O3 x86_64-linux-gnu: in interpret_rhs_expr, at tree-scalar-evolution.c:1775

8.0.0 20171208 (experimental) [trunk revision 255516] (GCC) $ $ gcctk -O2 -c small.c $ gcc-7.2.0 -O3 -c small.c $ $ gcctk -O3 -c small.c during GIMPLE pass: linterchange small.c: In function ‘j’: small.c:9:6: internal compiler error: in interpret_rhs_expr, at tree-scalar-evolution.c:1775 void j

[Bug tree-optimization/83336] Issues with displaying inlining chain for middle-end warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83336 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

  1   2   >