[Bug debug/69073] internal compiler error: in maybe_record_trace_start

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69073 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #1

[Bug fortran/69064] [5/6 Regression] ICE: in gfc_typenode_for_spec, at fortran/trans-types.c:1062 when LEN is set to a variable with no explicit type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69064 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug c++/68847] [6 Regression] ICE in cxx_eval_constant_expression on __atomic_compare_exchange (constexpr.c:3719) in c++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68847 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug tree-optimization/69117] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O1 -fstrict-aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69117 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- This goes wrong in fre3, which does not consider that *e might alias d.

[Bug fortran/69090] Allocatable arrays mishandled in 'omp declare target'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69090 iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/69090] Allocatable arrays mishandled in 'omp declare target'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69090 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov --- Ilya, 'omp declare target' is not applicable to arrays with automatic storage, is it? The array needs to be either global, or have the SAVE attribute (similar to 'static' keyword for local vars in C) —

[Bug tree-optimization/69117] [6 Regression] wrong code at -O1 -fstrict-aliasing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69117 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/68847] [6 Regression] ICE in cxx_eval_constant_expression on __atomic_compare_exchange (constexpr.c:3719) in c++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68847 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka --- Perhaps something like this? Index: constexpr.c === --- constexpr.c (revision 232023) +++ constexpr.c (working copy) @@ -3560,6 +3560,7 @@

[Bug debug/69073] internal compiler error: in maybe_record_trace_start

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69073 --- Comment #2 from Yoshinori Sato --- It looks different problem. I tried x86_64 cross compile. Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=rx-elf-gcc COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/ysato/rxelf/libexec/gcc/rx-elf/6.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: rx-elf Configured

[Bug fortran/67779] Strange ordering with strings in extended object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67779 --- Comment #23 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #21) > the right patch this time Works well, looks obvious. Pre-approved if you don't think it is, in fact, obvious :-)

[Bug target/55144] opening glibc-c.o: No such file or directory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55144 Mike Frysinger changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/47093] [meta-bug]: broken configurations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47093 Bug 47093 depends on bug 55144, which changed state. Bug 55144 Summary: opening glibc-c.o: No such file or directory https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55144 What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/55144] opening glibc-c.o: No such file or directory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55144 Mike Frysinger changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug c++/68810] [6 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-reinterpret1.C -- test for errors -- -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68810 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug target/69118] New: Wrong condition in avx512f_maskcmp3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69118 Bug ID: 69118 Summary: Wrong condition in avx512f_maskcmp3 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug fortran/69101] IEEE_SELECTED_REAL_KIND is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69101 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 --- Comment #7 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to vries from comment #4) > Created attachment 37210 [details] > minimal version, v2 needs -fno-tree-loop-im as well: ... $ gcc doloop-2.c -O1 -ftree-parallelize-loops=2 -Wl,-rpath=$(pwd

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 --- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37207 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37207=edit minimal version

[Bug c/69088] type conversion to int

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69088 --- Comment #2 from BENAÏSSA --- /* thank you for your answer. A.Benaïssa Comment:   Please consider this case: */ #include int main() {   float A = 0.F  ;   _Bool  B1  = 1.F / A ;   signed char  

[Bug fortran/69064] [5/6 Regression] ICE: in gfc_typenode_for_spec, at fortran/trans-types.c:1062 when LEN is set to a variable with no explicit type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69064 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #37208|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #37207|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/68917] test suite failure for builtin-bitops-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68917 Bernd Edlinger changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/69101] IEEE_SELECTED_REAL_KIND is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69101 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #5) > (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #4) > > I was looking at this yesterday. It is implemented in ieee_arithmetic.F90 > > and I think

[Bug lto/69119] New: More fun with LTO on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69119 Bug ID: 69119 Summary: More fun with LTO on arm Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto Assignee:

[Bug lto/69119] More fun with LTO on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69119 PeteVine changed: What|Removed |Added Target||armv7 Host|

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 --- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37209 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37209=edit doloop-2.c.142t.parloops

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 --- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37208 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37208=edit doloop-2.c.141t.ivcanon

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 --- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- With -floop-parallelize-all --param graphite-min-loops-per-function=1 we have in graphite: ... Creating dr for i analyze_innermost: success. base_address: offset from base address:

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] [Regression 4.9/5/6] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #37209|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/69121] New: IEEE_SCALB is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69121 Bug ID: 69121 Summary: IEEE_SCALB is not generic Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] [Regression 4.9/5/6] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug fortran/69101] IEEE_SELECTED_REAL_KIND is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69101 --- Comment #5 from Francois-Xavier Coudert --- (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #4) > I was looking at this yesterday. It is implemented in ieee_arithmetic.F90 > and I think can be done with generic type bound procedures. There's also

[Bug c++/69098] Member function pointer template flagged with 'is not a function template'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69098 --- Comment #1 from hir...@trash-mail.com --- The error message I got, copied from Wandbox: prog.cc: In instantiation of 'static void Specializer::InnerClassTempl< >::InnerMemberFn() [with unsigned int = 0u]': prog.cc:16:24: required from

[Bug target/68191] s390x Linux Split Stacks support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68191 Marcin Kościelnicki changed: What|Removed |Added CC||koriakin at 0x04 dot net ---

[Bug tree-optimization/69110] execution failure in gcc.c-torture/execute/doloop-2.c with -ftree-parallelize-loops=2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69110 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/69120] New: sse2_shufpd_v2df_mask has wrong name

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69120 Bug ID: 69120 Summary: sse2_shufpd_v2df_mask has wrong name Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug fortran/69101] IEEE_SELECTED_REAL_KIND is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69101 --- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- > I believe that one should force type conversion in > external_spec_function. All valid values fit in > a REAL(4). The only problem might be integer > wrap-around semantics. Bummer that

[Bug target/68973] [6 regression] Internal compiler error on power for gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr67211.C

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68973 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- 141d7d6e93a44d509f0be246231b46939e728c97 is the first bad commit git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@231674 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4

[Bug fortran/69101] IEEE_SELECTED_REAL_KIND is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69101 --- Comment #8 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #7) > > I believe that one should force type conversion in > > external_spec_function. All valid values fit in > > a REAL(4). The only problem might be integer >

[Bug fortran/69121] IEEE_SCALB is not generic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69121 --- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- This is easy to fix by adding the appropriate code to libgfortran/ieee/ieee_arithmetic.F90. % svn diff ieee_arithmetic.F90 | wc -l 225

[Bug testsuite/68886] [6 regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/stkalign.c execution test

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68886 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Target|hppa-unknown-linux-gnu |hppa-*-*,

[Bug c++/69065] [C++11] multiple alignas specifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69065 kukyakya at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/69065] [C++11] multiple alignas specifiers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69065 kukyakya at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED