[Bug fortran/59746] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59746 Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212 --- Comment #60 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #59) Yet another lra-assigns.c:1335 ICE when compiling nrrd/kernel.c of CSiBE/ teem-1.6.0 test. It looks that RA fails for FPUL_REGS

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212 --- Comment #61 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 33692 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33692action=edit a possible patch I'm testing a patch to define a SH specific

[Bug c++/62115] [5 Regression] ICE with invalid default argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62115 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug c/16351] NULL dereference warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351 --- Comment #18 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #16) Created attachment 31928 [details] Work-In-Progress patch Jeff, what happened with this?

[Bug other/63513] New: Error to build gcc loaded from svn

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63513 Bug ID: 63513 Summary: Error to build gcc loaded from svn Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: blocker Priority: P3 Component: other

[Bug c++/25689] missed diagnostic about assignment used as truth value.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25689 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2006-01-06 12:32:23 |2014-10-12

[Bug c/37866] passing argument from incompatible pointer type warning cannot be passed to -Werror=

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37866 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/63260] [SH] fabs, fneg do not need fp-mode setting and do not use fpscr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63260 --- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- The following functions should not show any mode changes: float test_0 (float x) { return -x; } double test_1 (double x) { return -x; } float test_2 (float x) { return

[Bug c++/43487] method locations are incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43487 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/63514] New: functions containing volatile are considered pure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63514 Bug ID: 63514 Summary: functions containing volatile are considered pure Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/63514] functions containing volatile are considered pure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63514 Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug target/53513] SH Target: Add support for fschg and fpchg insns

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53513 --- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #14) The switch is done by 3 (+2 artificial) individual instructions (load - modify - store). In this case the RA / optimizers figure out that

[Bug other/63504] [5 Regression] Issues found by --enable-checking=valgrind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63504 --- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 33693 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33693action=edit testcase for issue 2) 2) % valgrind --track-origins=yes --trace-children=yes

[Bug target/54429] [SH] SImode values get ferried through FPUL and FP regs for -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54429 --- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- A test case for this problem is gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tls/thread_local-order1.C, which is compiled without optimizations and contains the following sequence: stc gbr,r1

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212 --- Comment #62 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Just a note... I've briefly checked whether PR 54429 gets any better with LRA. It doesn't seem to be the case.

[Bug other/63504] [5 Regression] Issues found by --enable-checking=valgrind

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63504 --- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- 4) markus@x4 gcc % valgrind -q --track-origins=yes --trace-children=yes g++ -Igcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y -Igcc/testsuite//g++.dg/cpp1y/testinc

[Bug c++/63515] New: unused templated member can be instatiated

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63515 Bug ID: 63515 Summary: unused templated member can be instatiated Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug bootstrap/63516] New: error when trying to build without a c++ compiler could be better

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63516 Bug ID: 63516 Summary: error when trying to build without a c++ compiler could be better Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/63516] error when trying to build without a c++ compiler could be better

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63516 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug other/63509] Misleading error message when building gcc without C++ compiler installed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63509 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tbsaunde at

[Bug target/54760] [SH] Add __builtin_thread_pointer, __builtin_set_thread_pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760 --- Comment #15 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: olegendo Date: Sun Oct 12 23:14:07 2014 New Revision: 216128 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216128root=gccview=rev Log: gcc/ PR target/59401 *

[Bug target/59401] [SH] GBR addressing mode optimization produces wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59401 --- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: olegendo Date: Sun Oct 12 23:14:07 2014 New Revision: 216128 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216128root=gccview=rev Log: gcc/ PR target/59401 *

[Bug target/59401] [SH] GBR addressing mode optimization produces wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59401 Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kkojima at gcc

[Bug c/60440] Bogus -Wreturn-type warning after error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60440 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic

[Bug c++/63517] New: bogus Wreturn-type warning after error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63517 Bug ID: 63517 Summary: bogus Wreturn-type warning after error Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/62181] [C/C++] Expected new warning: adding 'char' to a string does not append to the string [-Wstring-plus-int]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c++/62181] [C/C++] Expected new warning: adding 'char' to a string does not append to the string [-Wstring-plus-int]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181 --- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- In both FEs there is a function build_binary_op. Put a break-point inside, examine the operands with debug_tree and figure out how to detect this case and when to warn. Add the

[Bug middle-end/63518] New: missing Wuninitialized warning independent of order of arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63518 Bug ID: 63518 Summary: missing Wuninitialized warning independent of order of arguments Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/63519] New: missing Wparenthesis warning for x binary_op bool ?:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63519 Bug ID: 63519 Summary: missing Wparenthesis warning for x binary_op bool ?: Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/60664] bool / out of range int comparison warning failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60664 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/63302] [4.9 Regression] Code with 64-bit long long constants is miscompiled on 32-bit host

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302 --- Comment #19 from Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com --- (In reply to John David Anglin from comment #18) Hi Zhenqiang, Do you plan to submit patch to gcc-patches soon? Yes. It is in internal review process. I hope to send out

[Bug target/59401] [SH] GBR addressing mode optimization produces wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59401 --- Comment #4 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #3) Do you have an opinion on that? Looks the latter is enough for the released branches. I'm OK with eather way, though.