[Bug tree-optimization/90637] [10 Regression] ICE in vect_loop_versioning, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:3055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90637 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/90637] [10 Regression] ICE in vect_loop_versioning, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:3055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90637 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon May 27 13:18:12 2019 New Revision: 271661 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271661=gcc=rev Log: 2019-05-27 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/90637 *

[Bug go/90614] gcc-9.1.0/libgo/go/syscall/wait.c:54:22: error: unused parameter ‘w’ [-Werror=unused-parameter] Continued (uint32_t *w)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90614 --- Comment #7 from martin --- (In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #6) > Fixed on trunk and GCC 9 branch. Many thanks!

[Bug go/90645] New: sparc-unknown-linux-gnu/libgo/.libs/libgo.so: undefined reference to `fdopendir'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90645 Bug ID: 90645 Summary: sparc-unknown-linux-gnu/libgo/.libs/libgo.so: undefined reference to `fdopendir' Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/90627] : internal compiler error when compiling cython-generated python3 modules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90627 --- Comment #11 from bogi788 at hotmail dot com --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6) > Sorry, I can't reproduce that. Maybe you could test a vanilla GCC built from > source files? I tried again in a new rhel7 vm, going straight from

[Bug tree-optimization/90594] [9/10 regression] Spurious popcount emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90594 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 46417 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46417=edit prerequesite This is the prerequesite for getting rid of the seprate pass doing final value replacement. It makes

[Bug go/90645] sparc-unknown-linux-gnu/libgo/.libs/libgo.so: undefined reference to `fdopendir'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90645 --- Comment #2 from martin --- Created attachment 46419 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46419=edit usr\include\bits ldd --version

[Bug tree-optimization/90610] [10 Regression] 526.blender_r miscompared on znver1 with -Ofast -march=native since r271463

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90610 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon May 27 10:52:14 2019 New Revision: 271652 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271652=gcc=rev Log: 2019-05-27 Richard Biener PR middle-end/90610 * match.pd

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #32 from Thomas Koenig --- Hi Martin, this 3822 ierr = pio_put_var (tape(t)%File, ps0var, (/ps0/)) looks like the culprit (or rather, where gfortran currently generates wrong code). This is consistent with the problem

[Bug tree-optimization/90644] Call to __builtin_memcmp not folded for identical vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90644 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/88440] size optimization of memcpy-like code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440 --- Comment #26 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Mon May 27 13:37:57 2019 New Revision: 271662 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271662=gcc=rev Log: [testsuite,aarch64,arm] PR88440: Fix testcases 2019-05-27 Christophe Lyon

[Bug go/90645] sparc-unknown-linux-gnu/libgo/.libs/libgo.so: undefined reference to `fdopendir'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90645 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- >fdopendir() is available in glibc since version 2.4. What glibc version are you using?

[Bug libstdc++/90646] std::filesystem::absolute( "yourpathhere" ) segfaults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90646 --- Comment #3 from myLC at gmx dot net --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Can you provide a compilable example? Good point. The example works, hence the problem seems to be somewhere else: #include #include #include #include

[Bug c++/90643] New: Code works with differences on ICC and GNU++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90643 Bug ID: 90643 Summary: Code works with differences on ICC and GNU++ Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug libstdc++/90638] Wrong results of pow(complex , T1) function when the T1 type differs from T and from int

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90638 --- Comment #6 from Igor Smirnov --- Mark, thank you for useful advice. So, my conclusion is that the rules for resolution in the presence of function templates are not changed in gcc. For all versions of C++ the result generated by this site

[Bug libstdc++/90638] Wrong results of pow(complex , T1) function when the T1 type differs from T and from int

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90638 --- Comment #7 from Igor Smirnov --- There can be still problems with big integer powers of complex numbers in the latest versions. I just don't see a single correct answer. As above the expected correct responses are marked by "should be" and

[Bug tree-optimization/90610] [10 Regression] 526.blender_r miscompared on znver1 with -Ofast -march=native since r271463

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90610 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 90610, which changed state. Bug 90610 Summary: [10 Regression] 526.blender_r miscompared on znver1 with -Ofast -march=native since r271463 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90610 What|Removed

[Bug libgomp/90641] libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90641 --- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- > Does malloc guarantee sufficient alignment for long long? It does: 8 bytes for 32-bit, 16 bytes for 64-bit with the libc malloc. > What is

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #33 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #32) > Hi Martin, > > this > > 3822 ierr = pio_put_var (tape(t)%File, ps0var, (/ps0/)) > > looks like the culprit (or rather, where gfortran currently >

[Bug libstdc++/90646] std::filesystem::absolute( "yourpathhere" ) segfaults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90646 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |libstdc++ --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug target/90627] : internal compiler error when compiling cython-generated python3 modules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90627 --- Comment #8 from bogi788 at hotmail dot com --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6) > Sorry, I can't reproduce that. Maybe you could test a vanilla GCC built from > source files? This was on gcc 9.1 compiled from source on rhel7. I

[Bug target/90644] New: Call to __builtin_memcmp not folded for identical vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90644 Bug ID: 90644 Summary: Call to __builtin_memcmp not folded for identical vectors Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libgomp/90641] libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90641 --- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- > Created attachment 46418 > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46418=edit > gcc10-pr90641.patch > > Untested fix. Worked for

[Bug target/90627] : internal compiler error when compiling cython-generated python3 modules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90627 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9

[Bug c++/90643] Code works with differences on ICC and GNU++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90643 Monster changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/90627] : internal compiler error when compiling cython-generated python3 modules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90627 --- Comment #10 from bogi788 at hotmail dot com --- (In reply to bogi788 from comment #8) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6) > > Sorry, I can't reproduce that. Maybe you could test a vanilla GCC built from > > source files? > > This

[Bug tree-optimization/90594] [9/10 regression] Spurious popcount emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90594 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/90644] Call to __builtin_memcmp not folded for identical vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90644 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug libgomp/90641] libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90641 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 46418 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46418=edit gcc10-pr90641.patch Untested fix.

[Bug libstdc++/90638] Wrong results of pow(complex , T1) function when the T1 type differs from T and from int

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90638 --- Comment #8 from Igor Smirnov --- Let me add corrections to my previous post. 1. It needs to add (long double) before M_PI / LONG_MAX in the line long double phid = M_PI / LONG_MAX; in the above example. But the result is not changed

[Bug c++/90646] New: std::filesystem::absolute( "yourpathhere" ) segfaults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90646 Bug ID: 90646 Summary: std::filesystem::absolute( "yourpathhere" ) segfaults Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/90646] std::filesystem::absolute( "yourpathhere" ) segfaults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90646 --- Comment #1 from myLC at gmx dot net --- Forgot to mention that it's C++20 (-std=c++2a).

[Bug libstdc++/90646] std::filesystem::absolute( "yourpathhere" ) segfaults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90646 myLC at gmx dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/90648] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE tree check: accessed operand 4 of call_expr with 3 operands in generic_simplify_MULT_EXPR, at generic-match.c:27222

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90648 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/68485] ICE while building gpsd package on microblaze

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68485 --- Comment #7 from Giulio Benetti --- This Bug still exists on Gcc 9.1. I have tested it with 4.9/5/6/7/8/9

[Bug libstdc++/90634] filesystem::path insane memory allocations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90634 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes, I'm well aware what the standard says, I reported https://wg21.link/lwg2674 I consider it a mistake for the standard to say "these are bidirectional iterators, except they're not, but it's OK because

[Bug c++/90647] New: Warn on returning a lambda with captured local variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90647 Bug ID: 90647 Summary: Warn on returning a lambda with captured local variables Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug c/90648] New: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE tree check: accessed operand 4 of call_expr with 3 operands in generic_simplify_MULT_EXPR, at generic-match.c:27222

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90648 Bug ID: 90648 Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE tree check: accessed operand 4 of call_expr with 3 operands in generic_simplify_MULT_EXPR, at generic-match.c:27222 Product:

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #34 from Thomas Koenig --- Created attachment 46420 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46420=edit Patch which includes a check for being contiguous This patch looks like it could do the job. I'll have to work a

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #35 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #34) > Created attachment 46420 [details] > Patch which includes a check for being contiguous > > This patch looks like it could do the job. I'll have to work a bit

[Bug libstdc++/90646] std::filesystem::absolute( "yourpathhere" ) segfaults

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90646 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Is it possible you're mixing code compiled with GCC 8 and GCC 9? In general that works, but not for the new C++17 components that were still experimental in GCC 8, such as filesystem::path. Valgrind might

[Bug c++/90652] New: Recursive concept leads to segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90652 Bug ID: 90652 Summary: Recursive concept leads to segfault Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/90648] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE tree check: accessed operand 4 of call_expr with 3 operands in generic_simplify_MULT_EXPR, at generic-match.c:27222

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90648 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|jakub at gcc dot

[Bug target/90639] [10 Regression] Boostrap failure with recent trunk

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90639 --- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Mon May 27 19:12:19 2019 New Revision: 271668 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271668=gcc=rev Log: rs6000: Fix sanitizer build (PR90639) The assembler code needs to say it

[Bug c/44715] Break in increment expression of "for" statement inconsistent with g++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44715 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bastian.beischer@rwth-aache

[Bug c++/90617] GCC 9 miscompiles Qt4 "foreach" macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90617 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE --- Comment #5 from Andrew

[Bug d/90650] New: ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2552

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90650 Bug ID: 90650 Summary: ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2552 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: d

[Bug d/90650] ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2552

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90650 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code Target|

[Bug c++/90642] g++ fails to resolve template function overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90642 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- I'm pretty sure this is a dup of an existing bug.

[Bug c/90649] New: ICE tree check: accessed operand 4 of call_expr with 3 operands in generic_simplify_EQ_EXPR, at generic-match.c:42857

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90649 Bug ID: 90649 Summary: ICE tree check: accessed operand 4 of call_expr with 3 operands in generic_simplify_EQ_EXPR, at generic-match.c:42857 Product: gcc

[Bug d/90651] New: ICE in FuncDeclaration::semantic3, at d/dmd/func.c:1524

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90651 Bug ID: 90651 Summary: ICE in FuncDeclaration::semantic3, at d/dmd/func.c:1524 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/68485] ICE while building gpsd package on microblaze

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68485 --- Comment #8 from Giulio Benetti --- This is the build failure log: http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/d86/d86251974a0a348a64d9a1d1fd7d02dd4aff0792/build-end.log

[Bug libgomp/90641] libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90641 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon May 27 21:27:00 2019 New Revision: 271671 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271671=gcc=rev Log: PR libgomp/90641 * work.c (gomp_init_work_share): Instead of

[Bug c++/90617] GCC 9 miscompiles Qt4 "foreach" macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90617 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug go/90645] sparc-unknown-linux-gnu/libgo/.libs/libgo.so: undefined reference to `fdopendir'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90645 --- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor --- Did libgo ever work on this system? I can't remember. I don't see how we can work around a missing __tls_get_addr symbol. That suggests that the system does not support Thread Local Storage.

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #36 from Thomas Koenig --- ... which should be Index: testsuite/gfortran.dg/internal_pack_21.f90 === --- testsuite/gfortran.dg/internal_pack_21.f90 (Revision 271629)

[Bug c/90653] New: --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90653 Bug ID: 90653 Summary: --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks. Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/90653] --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90653 --- Comment #4 from Alexander von Gluck --- ok, this one got kinda long. I've discovered the "how". gcc7 calling the linker using a --sysroot:

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #37 from Thomas Koenig --- Hm, with that patch, there still seems to be a failure in netcdf :-( I will keep looking (possibly some small problem with the patch).

[Bug c/90653] --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90653 --- Comment #2 from Alexander von Gluck --- I was wrong about the autotools aspect... it *is* passing the sysroot to gcc during the C compiler test. I reproduced the test configure is running and enabled verbosity...

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #38 from Thomas Koenig --- So, I finally have a self-contained test case: module t2 implicit none contains subroutine foo(a) real, dimension(*) :: a end subroutine foo end module t2 module t1 use t2 implicit none

[Bug c/90653] --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90653 --- Comment #3 from Alexander von Gluck --- I ran an strace on it, and it's almost like ld isn't aware of the correct library directory for our libraries after gcc8... 8838 openat(AT_FDCWD,

[Bug c++/70196] inconsistent constness of inequality of weak symbol addresses

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70196 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c/90653] --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90653 --- Comment #1 from Alexander von Gluck --- Created attachment 46421 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46421=edit config.loh attached is the config.log from gcc. I should mention we see the same error across all of our

[Bug c++/90654] New: GCC doesn't value-initialize base class with trivial default constructor, resulting in uninitialized data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90654 Bug ID: 90654 Summary: GCC doesn't value-initialize base class with trivial default constructor, resulting in uninitialized data Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status:

[Bug c/90653] --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90653 --- Comment #6 from Alexander von Gluck --- Created attachment 46424 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46424=edit gcc8-verbose.txt

[Bug c/90653] --with-build-sysroot= not honored for ./configure C compiler checks.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90653 --- Comment #5 from Alexander von Gluck --- Created attachment 46423 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46423=edit gcc7-verbose.txt

[Bug objc/50909] Process "#pragma options align=reset" correctly on Mac OS X

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50909 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #15

[Bug c++/70075] incorrect initialization of multidimensional VLAs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70075 --- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2) > > I get this output on i386-apple-darwin9.8.0 with gcc8: > > $ /usr/local/bin/g++ -Wall -Wextra -Wpedantic -o 70075.exe 70075.cc > 70075.cc: In function ‘void

[Bug debug/90441] [9/10 Regression] corrupt debug info with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90441 --- Comment #25 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Sun, 26 May 2019, hoganmeier at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90441 > > --- Comment #22 from krux --- > I can also reproduce it without any linker

[Bug target/90616] Suboptimal code generated for accessing an aligned array.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90616 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Note GCC 5 is no longer maintained. Eventually the target could make use of nonzero_bits knowledge here.

[Bug testsuite/90615] [10 regression] several vector test cases fail starting with r271553

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90615 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon May 27 07:39:14 2019 New Revision: 271645 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271645=gcc=rev Log: 2019-05-27 Richard Biener PR testsuite/90615 *

)漂/2019年05月27日

代開各行业【普通、增值税】 电、微：139-2552-3045唐经理；gcc-bugs

[Bug middle-end/85598] [7/8 Regression] Incorrect -Wformat-truncation in a loop only at -O2 and -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85598 --- Comment #25 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 24 May 2019, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85598 > > Martin Sebor changed: > >What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/88784] Middle end is missing some optimizations about unsigned

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784 --- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 27 May 2019, ffengqi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784 > > --- Comment #18 from Qi Feng --- > I only learned gcc for about 2 months, and I

[Bug testsuite/90615] [10 regression] several vector test cases fail starting with r271553

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90615 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/90617] GCC 9 miscompiles Qt4 "foreach" macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90617 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/90619] [10 regression] spec 2017 tests 527.cam4_r and 521.wrf_r segfault while running after r271386

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90619 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Blocks|

[Bug target/90619] [10 regression] spec 2017 tests 527.cam4_r and 521.wrf_r segfault while running after r271386

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90619 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 90619, which changed state. Bug 90619 Summary: [10 regression] spec 2017 tests 527.cam4_r and 521.wrf_r segfault while running after r271386 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90619 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/90625] fold strcmp(a, b) == 0 to zero for strings of unequal but non-const lengths

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90625 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/90631] this statement may fall through

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90631 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug libgomp/90641] New: libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90641 Bug ID: 90641 Summary: libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libgomp/90641] libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90641 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0

[Bug c++/90640] -Wpointer-arith appears to be enabled by default, but is not reported as enabled by --help

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90640 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/90638] Wrong results of pow(complex , T1) function when the T1 type differs from T and from int

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90638 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- GCC 7, 8 and 9 for me output (1,1.46292e-09) 2147483647 2147483648 (-1,7.77156e-16) (-1,-1.46292e-09) (1.55377,0.643594) (1.55377,0.643594) (1.55377,0.643594) (1.55377,0.643594) (1.55377,0.643594)

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #29 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #28) > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-05/msg00173.html reports > the same symptoms for netcdf-fortran-4.4.5, presumably due > to the same issue. > > I'll try to

[Bug tree-optimization/90610] [10 Regression] 526.blender_r miscompared on znver1 with -Ofast -march=native since r271463

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90610 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- It's actually cunroll that exposes the issue in zbufclip. Ah, oops.

[Bug c/90628] __builtin_mul_overflow writes to const qualified integer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90628 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- I wonder if in C it should be controlled by -Wdiscarded-qualifiers. I am happy with the unconditional error, just asking.

[Bug c/90628] __builtin_mul_overflow writes to const qualified integer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90628 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- -Wdiscarded-qualifiers is for when the prototype requires pointer to non-const and pointer to const is passed, which is the case for the clang style builtins, but not for __builtin_{add,sub,mul}_overflow,

[Bug libgomp/90641] libgomp.c-c++-common/lastprivate-conditional-1.c etc FAIL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90641 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Does malloc guarantee sufficient alignment for long long? What is offsetof (struct gomp_work_share, inline_ordered_team_ids) on the target?

[Bug c++/90640] New: -Wpointer-arith appears to be enabled by default, but is not reported by --help

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90640 Bug ID: 90640 Summary: -Wpointer-arith appears to be enabled by default, but is not reported by --help Product: gcc Version: 7.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/90637] [10 Regression] ICE in vect_loop_versioning, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:3055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90637 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/90627] : internal compiler error when compiling cython-generated python3 modules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90627 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/90610] [10 Regression] 526.blender_r miscompared on znver1 with -Ofast -march=native since r271463

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90610 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/90627] : internal compiler error when compiling cython-generated python3 modules

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90627 --- Comment #2 from bogi788 at hotmail dot com --- Created attachment 46414 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46414=edit gcc 8.3.0 preprocessed source The .i file was generated using gcc 8.3.0, since (as mentioned in the

  1   2   >