[Bug c/63272] GCC should warn when using pointer to dead scoped variable within the same function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63272 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c/63272] GCC should warn when using pointer to dead scoped variable within the same function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63272 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1) It would be nice to have. Perhaps related to PR49974. Definitely related to PR 53855.

[Bug c/63272] GCC should warn when using pointer to dead scoped variable within the same function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63272 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- But really this is already talked about the warning in bug 60517 and really in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60770#c1 .

[Bug c++/63275] New: ice in is_base_type with -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63275 Bug ID: 63275 Summary: ice in is_base_type with -g Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/63275] [5 Regression] ice in is_base_type with -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63275 Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug target/63234] arm used label is removed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63234 Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug target/63234] arm used label is removed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63234 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com --- (apparently TAB became save changes, how weird...) ... but .LPIC3 is not defined at all. .LPIC[0124] are all defined and used.

[Bug target/55212] [SH] Switch from IRA to LRA

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212 --- Comment #20 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Vlad, do you have any idea/suggestion what could be going wrong in this case? Also, could you please have a look at the patch applied to the sh-lra branch as r215246 and see whether

[Bug libstdc++/58038] std::this_thread::sleep_until can cause inifinite sleep

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58038 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0

[Bug libstdc++/63274] std::list uses T(...) instead of T{...} in implementation of emplace()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63274 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/63273] atomic operations lead to inefficient code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63273 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug tree-optimization/63271] Should commute arithmetic with vector load

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63271 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug fortran/56408] Fix dependency handling of testsuite/gfortran.dg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56408 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Sep 16 09:35:00 2014 New Revision: 215293 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215293root=gccview=rev Log: PR fortran/56408 * gfortran.dg/dg.exp

[Bug target/56993] power gcc built 416.gamess generates wrong result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56993 Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at

[Bug c++/63275] [5 Regression] ice in is_base_type with -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63275 Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc

[Bug lto/58528] lto1: internal compiler error: in build_abbrev_table, at dwarf2out.c:7478

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58528 npl at chello dot at changed: What|Removed |Added CC||npl at chello dot at --- Comment

[Bug ada/63276] New: implicit access checking is inserted for not null access type against pragma Suppress (Access_Check)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63276 Bug ID: 63276 Summary: implicit access checking is inserted for not null access type against pragma Suppress (Access_Check) Product: gcc Version: 4.9.1 Status:

[Bug target/63277] New: ARM - NEON excessive use of vmov for vtbl2 / uint8x8x2 for shuffling data unnecessarily around

=hard --with-fpu=neon --disable-libgcj --enable-libgomp --disable-libmudflap --disable-libssp --enable-lto --without-cloog Thread model: posix gcc version 5.0.0 20140916 (experimental) (GCC) armv7a-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi-gcc-5.0.0 -march=armv7-a -mfpu=neon -O3 -S arm_neon_excessive_vmov.c -o

[Bug target/63277] ARM - NEON excessive use of vmov for vtbl2 / uint8x8x2 for shuffling data unnecessarily around

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63277 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug c/63279] New: Processes hang inside Linux Kernel built with gcc5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63279 Bug ID: 63279 Summary: Processes hang inside Linux Kernel built with gcc5 Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/63278] New: Fails to compute loop bound from constant string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63278 Bug ID: 63278 Summary: Fails to compute loop bound from constant string Product: gcc Version: 4.9.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal

[Bug testsuite/63258] [5.0 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-slp-33.c scan-tree-dump-times vect vectorization not profitable 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63258 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug testsuite/63258] [5.0 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-slp-33.c scan-tree-dump-times vect vectorization not profitable 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63258 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Sep 16 14:10:07 2014 New Revision: 215299 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215299root=gccview=rev Log: 2014-09-16 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de

[Bug c/63279] Processes hang inside Linux Kernel built with gcc5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63279 Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug c/63279] Processes hang inside Linux Kernel built with gcc5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63279 --- Comment #2 from Sasha Levin sasha.levin at oracle dot com --- PR61848 is talking about a linux kernel boot failure when compiled using trunk gcc.. In this case, the kernel boots just fine, but it has problem executing tasks. I've double

[Bug tree-optimization/63278] Fails to compute loop bound from constant string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63278 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot

[Bug tree-optimization/63278] Fails to compute loop bound from constant string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63278 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Yes, the testcase for fails to compute loop bound (and unroll) wasn't supposed to use 'constexpr'. Unrolling should work without that, too ;)

[Bug middle-end/63279] [5 Regression] Processes hang inside Linux Kernel built with gcc5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63279 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug middle-end/63279] [5 Regression] Processes hang inside Linux Kernel built with gcc5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63279 --- Comment #4 from Sasha Levin sasha.levin at oracle dot com --- Here's what I see with 'make V=1' on the kernel: gcc -Wp,-MD,kernel/.exec_domain.o.d -nostdinc -isystem /home/sasha/gcc-inst/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.10.0/include

[Bug target/63277] ARM - NEON excessive use of vmov for vtbl2 / uint8x8x2 for shuffling data unnecessarily around

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63277 --- Comment #3 from Janne Grunau janne-gcc at jannau dot net --- Created attachment 33501 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33501action=edit arm_neon_excessive_vmov_wo_vcombine.c

[Bug target/63277] ARM - NEON excessive use of vmov for vtbl2 / uint8x8x2 for shuffling data unnecessarily around

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63277 --- Comment #2 from Janne Grunau janne-gcc at jannau dot net --- It is not only the vcombine. The handling of the table vectors is even more dreadful. The loads are combined to properly paired registers. Then moved in reverse in order to

[Bug middle-end/63279] [5 Regression] Processes hang inside Linux Kernel built with gcc5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63279 --- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Sasha Levin from comment #2) PR61848 is talking about a linux kernel boot failure when compiled using trunk gcc.. In this case, the kernel boots just fine, but

[Bug target/63234] arm used label is removed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63234 --- Comment #5 from baoshan pangbw at gmail dot com --- I dig it deeper yesterday, and I believe this change makes the 5.0 works fine: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/9b59e2174ee59dd3aa55c7c3342daa2a6bc23fba

[Bug bootstrap/63280] New: Double free in GCC compiled with LTO and -O3.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63280 Bug ID: 63280 Summary: Double free in GCC compiled with LTO and -O3. Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/61105] [constexpr] accepts-invalid with new-expression in constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61105 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/63273] atomic operations lead to inefficient code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63273 --- Comment #2 from Dmitry Vyukov dvyukov at google dot com --- Which is because to me it's not exactly clear as for what other operations an atomic load/store is a barrier for. That's trivial to answer -- memory_order_relaxed is barrier for

[Bug target/61599] [x86_64] With -mcmodel=medium, extern global arrays without size are not treated conservatively.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61599 Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/63273] atomic operations lead to inefficient code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63273 Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amacleod at

[Bug middle-end/63273] atomic operations lead to inefficient code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63273 --- Comment #4 from Dmitry Vyukov dvyukov at google dot com --- For the record, this bug is the result of my attempt to use std atomic operations in ThreadSanitizer runtime. We do a bunch of relaxed loads and stores during processing of every

[Bug middle-end/63273] atomic operations lead to inefficient code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63273 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com --- Do you have a test case which shows what specifically is the issue? I suspect its different from the included test case and it would be interesting to see the real world situation.

[Bug middle-end/63273] atomic operations lead to inefficient code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63273 --- Comment #6 from Dmitry Vyukov dvyukov at google dot com --- The real world situation is: replace atomic_load/store implementation with relaxed atomic builtins here:

[Bug go/60406] recover.go: test13reflect2 test failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406 --- Comment #7 from boger at us dot ibm.com --- I've built with Dominik's patches against trunk on ppc64le and have been trying to run the gcc testsuite for go and libgo. The recover.go testcase continues to fail in my build. I did some

[Bug c++/40752] -Wconversion generates false warnings for operands not larger than target type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40752 hariharan.gcc at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hariharan.gcc at gmail

[Bug libfortran/62768] Handling of file names with embedded nulls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62768 --- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: jb Date: Tue Sep 16 21:40:28 2014 New Revision: 215307 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215307root=gccview=rev Log: PR libfortran/62768 Handle filenames with embedded null

[Bug target/63281] New: powerpc64le creates 64 bit constants from scratch instead of loading them

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63281 Bug ID: 63281 Summary: powerpc64le creates 64 bit constants from scratch instead of loading them Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/61853] [4.9/5 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in store_field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61853 --- Comment #13 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: danglin Date: Tue Sep 16 23:39:28 2014 New Revision: 215309 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215309root=gccview=rev Log: PR target/61853 * config/pa/pa.c

[Bug target/61853] [4.9/5 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in store_field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61853 --- Comment #14 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: danglin Date: Tue Sep 16 23:42:44 2014 New Revision: 215310 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215310root=gccview=rev Log: PR target/61853 * config/pa/pa.c

[Bug target/61853] [4.9/5 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in store_field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61853 --- Comment #15 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 61858 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug middle-end/61858] GNAT BUG: in store_field, at expr.c:6591

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61858 John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/61853] [4.9/5 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in store_field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61853 John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug inline-asm/63282] New: [4.7 regression] ICE in redirect_jump_1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63282 Bug ID: 63282 Summary: [4.7 regression] ICE in redirect_jump_1 Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: inline-asm

[Bug c++/63283] New: constexpr function called by templated function is not treated as constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63283 Bug ID: 63283 Summary: constexpr function called by templated function is not treated as constexpr Product: gcc Version: 4.9.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: