[Bug other/63847] FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/builtin_fn_custom.c execution test on i?86 with -fpic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63847 --- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak --- Ah, excess FP precision issue at: double x, yy, array3[NUMBER], array4[NUMBER]; double max_value = 0.000, min_value = 0.000, add_value, mul_value = 1.00; ... if (x != max_value) return 1; Breakpoi

[Bug tree-optimization/63843] [5 Regression] wrong code generation at -O1 and higher

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63843 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-* Priority|P3

[Bug tree-optimization/63844] open mp parallelization prevents vectorization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63844 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization, openmp

[Bug sanitizer/63845] [5 Regression] c-c++-common/asan/bitfield-[12345].c fails on i?86 -with -fpic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63845 Igor Zamyatin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug target/63848] New: [5.0 regression] FAIL: c-c++-common/torture/builtin-arith-overflow-17.c -O0 execution test

are b-a-o-18.c (t103sub) and b-a-o-6.c (t153add). Breakpoint 2, bar () at /usr/local/gcc/gcc-20141113/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/builtin-arith-overflow.h:17 17v++; (gdb) bt #0 bar () at /usr/local/gcc/gcc-20141113/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/builtin-arith-overflow.h

[Bug libgcc/56846] _Unwind_Backtrace on ARM and noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56846 --- Comment #15 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org --- I'll take care of it.

[Bug other/63847] New: FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/builtin_fn_custom.c execution test on i?86 with -fpic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63847 Bug ID: 63847 Summary: FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/builtin_fn_custom.c execution test on i?86 with -fpic Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sever

[Bug ipa/63671] [5 Regression] 21% tramp3d-v4 performance hit due to -fdevirtualize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 12 Nov 2014, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671 > > --- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka --- > With early VRP (but also without) the inlin

[Bug tree-optimization/61559] FAIL: gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-8.c on i686 with -mmovbe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559 --- Comment #16 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Nov 13 08:45:29 2014 New Revision: 217464 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217464&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2014-12-13 Richard Biener PR middle-end/61559 * match.pd:

[Bug tree-optimization/61559] FAIL: gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-8.c on i686 with -mmovbe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/63846] New: c-c++-common/asan/misalign-[12].c fails on i?86 with -fpic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63846 Bug ID: 63846 Summary: c-c++-common/asan/misalign-[12].c fails on i?86 with -fpic Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug sanitizer/63845] [5 Regression] c-c++-common/asan/bitfield-[12345].c fails on i?86 -with -fpic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63845 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5 Regression] |[5 Regression] |c-c++-co

[Bug sanitizer/63845] [5 Regression] c-c++-common/asan/bitfield-1.c fails on i?86 -with -fpic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63845 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/63845] New: c-c++-common/asan/bitfield-1.c fails on i?86 -with -fpic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63845 Bug ID: 63845 Summary: c-c++-common/asan/bitfield-1.c fails on i?86 -with -fpic Product: gcc Version: 5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priorit

[Bug libgcc/56846] _Unwind_Backtrace on ARM and noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56846 --- Comment #14 from Yvan Roux --- > No I meant FSF 4.8 branch. The bug log only show a commit to trunk and GCC > 4.9 FSF branch. It's only in trunk (the backport I made was in Linaro 4.9 branch). For FSF branches check with the maintainers an

<    1   2