[Bug c/69985] [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 --- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- Created attachment 37812 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37812=edit unreduced testcase

[Bug c/69985] New: [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69985 Bug ID: 69985 Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: in linemap_position_for_loc_and_offset, at libcpp/line-map.c:924 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status:

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/69896] [6 Regression] wrong code with -frename-registers @ x64_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69896 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/69896] [6 Regression] wrong code with -frename-registers @ x64_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69896 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Sat Feb 27 06:43:20 2016 New Revision: 233777 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233777=gcc=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/69896 * tree-vect-generic.c

[Bug fortran/66310] Problems with intrinsic repeat for large number of copies

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310 --- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle --- Created attachment 37811 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37811=edit Proposed patch This patch fixes some signed integer problems in a few places and allows the test case to compile on

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

23:31:56 UTC 2016 (revision 233771) --- > LAST_UPDATED: Fri Feb 26 23:30:24 UTC 2016 (revision 233771) 26c26 < /home/wschmidt/gcc/build/gcc-mainline-base/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../xg++ versi on 6.0.0 20160226 (experimental) [trunk revision 233771] (GCC) --- > /home/wschmidt/gcc/build/gcc-m

[Bug target/54349] _mm_cvtsi128_si64 unnecessary stores value at stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54349 --- Comment #11 from Alexander Peslyak --- Turns out that gcc 4.6.x to 4.8.x generating "movd" instead of "movq" is actually a deliberate hack, to support binutils older than 2.17 ("movq" support committed in 2005, released in 2006) and

[Bug tree-optimization/15826] don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Resolution|FIXED

[Bug middle-end/19466] [meta-bug] bit-fields are non optimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19466 Bug 19466 depends on bug 15826, which changed state. Bug 15826 Summary: don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826 What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/19987] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987 Bug 19987 depends on bug 15826, which changed state. Bug 15826 Summary: don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826 What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- Will check now.

[Bug tree-optimization/15826] don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/19466] [meta-bug] bit-fields are non optimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19466 Bug 19466 depends on bug 15826, which changed state. Bug 15826 Summary: don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826 What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/19987] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987 Bug 19987 depends on bug 15826, which changed state. Bug 15826 Summary: don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/15826] don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826 --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Fri Feb 26 23:24:29 2016 New Revision: 233771 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233771=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/15826 - don't use "if" to extract a single bit

[Bug target/69773] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "assign_by_spills"

/6.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/home/absozero/trunk/root-gcc --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib Thread model: posix gcc version 6.0.0 20160226 (experimental) [trunk revision 233763] (GCC) $ gcc-trunk pr65693.c

[Bug tree-optimization/69740] [5 Regression] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "verify_loop_structure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/69984] [4.9/5/6] Signed comparison instruction emitted for unsigned variable comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69984 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/69740] [5 Regression] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "verify_loop_structure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Feb 26 22:56:02 2016 New Revision: 233769 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233769=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/69740 * cfghooks.c (remove_edge): Request loop

[Bug tree-optimization/69984] New: [4.9/5/6] Signed comparison instruction emitted for unsigned variable comparison

popq%rbx .cfi_remember_state .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8 jmp bar2 .p2align 4,,10 .p2align 3 .L6: .cfi_restore_state callbar1 jmp .L2 .cfi_endproc .LFE0: .size foo, .-foo .ident "GCC: (GNU) 6.0.0

[Bug target/69969] [5 Regression] Function attribute no-vsx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69969 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/69969] [5/6 Regression] Function attribute no-vsx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69969 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Feb 26 22:35:00 2016 New Revision: 233767 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233767=gcc=rev Log: PR target/69969 * config/rs6000/rs6000.c

[Bug c++/15766] bad parse error recovery (2 bugs)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15766 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/15766] bad parse error recovery (2 bugs)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15766 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Fri Feb 26 21:50:15 2016 New Revision: 233765 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233765=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/15766 - bad parse error recovery (2 bugs) gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Try https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69896#c8 ? I'm bootstrapping/regtesting it now on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, if it fixes even this testcase for you and you could bootstrap/regtest it on

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 --- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt --- Executing on host: /home/wschmidt/gcc/build/gcc-mainline-test/gcc/xgcc -B/home/wschmidt/gcc/build/gcc-mainline-test/gcc/ /home/wschmidt/gcc/gcc-mainline-test/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr69613.c

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/69896] [6 Regression] wrong code with -frename-registers @ x64_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69896 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 37810 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37810=edit gcc6-pr69896.patch And here is the unfinished BIT_FIELD_REF folding patch. This fixes one issue, where we are asking

[Bug c++/69517] [5/6 regression] SEGV on a VLA with excess initializer elements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69517 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug rtl-optimization/69896] [6 Regression] wrong code with -frename-registers @ x64_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69896 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 37809 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37809=edit gcc6-pr69896.patch Ah, managed to reproduce. I have one patch and one partial incomplete one. It doesn't make any

[Bug middle-end/69983] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/scop-sor.c scan-tree-dump-times graphite "number of SCoPs: 1" 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69983 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug middle-end/69983] New: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/scop-sor.c scan-tree-dump-times graphite "number of SCoPs: 1" 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69983 Bug ID: 69983 Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/scop-sor.c scan-tree-dump-times graphite "number of SCoPs: 1" 1 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status:

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/68714] [6 Regression] less folding of vector comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68714 Richard Henderson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/69896] [6 Regression] wrong code with -frename-registers @ x64_64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69896 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Can't reproduce such ICE (with a cross). That said, this was a RTL bug, so if it ICEs during gimple verification, IMHO it should be tracked in a different PR.

[Bug c++/69958] sizeof... computes wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69958 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69958] sizeof... computes wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69958 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Fri Feb 26 19:54:33 2016 New Revision: 233758 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233758=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/69958 * pt.c (make_argument_pack): New.

[Bug hsa/69674] hsa offloading, -m32: "internal compiler error: in hsa_build_append_simple_mov"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69674 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/6906] warn about asserts with side effects

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6906 --- Comment #6 from owner at bugs dot debian.org --- Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding this Bug report. This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message has been received. Your message is

[Bug c/66298] -Wmisleading-indentation should also detect missing indentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66298 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- IIRC, currently the warning is checking for guards that appear to guard a statement, but which don't; the above examples are all for guards that don't appear to guard a statement, but do.

[Bug c/66298] -Wmisleading-indentation should also detect missing indentation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66298 --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer --- Other examples. All should receive warnings. while (check_something()) // do_something(); (commented out) do_something(); if (check_something()) #include "/dev/null" do_something(); if

[Bug bootstrap/69709] [6 Regression] profiled bootstrap error on s390x-linux-gnu with r233194

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/15538] Misleading diagnostic for recursive template instantiation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15538 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2005-06-20 04:11:44 |2016-2-26 CC|

[Bug target/69946] [6 Regression] Invalid ppc64 assembly emitted starting with r226005

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69946 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69958] sizeof... computes wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69958 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/69946] [6 Regression] Invalid ppc64 assembly emitted starting with r226005

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69946 --- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool --- Author: segher Date: Fri Feb 26 18:49:18 2016 New Revision: 233755 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233755=gcc=rev Log: powerpc: Handle DImode rotatert implemented with rlwinm (PR69946) Some

[Bug target/69841] Wrong template instantiation in C++11 on armv7l

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69841 James Greenhalgh changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 --- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #12) > The Ice in 42704.c is gone on s390[x] with trunk (but not the other FAILs). > Is the Ice below related to this bug report or is it something totally >

[Bug middle-end/69976] Zero the local stack on function exit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69976 --- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I think you should read the discussion starting at and see how your ideas compare to it, then maybe try to restart that discussion and

[Bug tree-optimization/69740] [5/6 Regression] gcc ICE at -O2 and above on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "verify_loop_structure"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Author: law Date: Fri Feb 26 18:17:02 2016 New Revision: 233754 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233754=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/69740 * cfghooks.c (remove_edge): Request loop

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 --- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor --- Author: jamborm Date: Fri Feb 26 18:06:42 2016 New Revision: 233753 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233753=gcc=rev Log: [PR 69920] Prevent SRA from leaving a removed SSA_NAME in IL 2016-02-26 Martin

[Bug bootstrap/69709] [6 Regression] profiled bootstrap error on s390x-linux-gnu with r233194

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709 --- Comment #14 from Andreas Krebbel --- Author: krebbel Date: Fri Feb 26 18:03:51 2016 New Revision: 233752 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233752=gcc=rev Log: S/390: PR69709 Fix risbg splitter This fixes a wrong code generation problem

[Bug c++/15369] "Wrong" line number for static constructor function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15369 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug hsa/69568] Invalid HSAIL opcode when using builtin vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69568 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- Fixed on trunk. The hsa branch will pick this up next week as a part of a merge from trunk.

[Bug hsa/69568] Invalid HSAIL opcode when using builtin vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69568 --- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor --- Author: jamborm Date: Fri Feb 26 17:48:19 2016 New Revision: 233751 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233751=gcc=rev Log: [hsa/69568] Fix ld instruction type for packed data 2016-02-26 Martin Jambor

[Bug hsa/69674] hsa offloading, -m32: "internal compiler error: in hsa_build_append_simple_mov"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69674 --- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor --- Author: jamborm Date: Fri Feb 26 17:45:37 2016 New Revision: 233750 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233750=gcc=rev Log: [hsa/69674] Make testsuite libgomp.c/for-3.c compile with -m32 2016-02-26

[Bug go/69966] libgo: Port syscall.SetsockoptUcred from golang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69966 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 --- Comment #12 from Dominik Vogt --- The Ice in 42704.c is gone on s390[x] with trunk (but not the other FAILs). Is the Ice below related to this bug report or is it something totally different?

[Bug go/69966] libgo: Port syscall.SetsockoptUcred from golang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69966 --- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ian Date: Fri Feb 26 17:36:00 2016 New Revision: 233747 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233747=gcc=rev Log: PR go/69966 syscall: Add new Getsockopt functions. Add

[Bug fortran/69964] ICE on misspelled end block data, in gfc_ascii_statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69964 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/69962] ICE on missing parameter attribute, in gfc_set_constant_character_len

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69962 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 --- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01824.html

[Bug middle-end/69976] Zero the local stack on function exit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69976 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson --- Those are very good ideas but fell into the land of the backend. The red zone IIUC is a x86_64 only ABI concept. What do you think about adding also a -m counterpart option with the same semantic but for

[Bug rtl-optimization/69891] wrong code with -mstringop-strategy=libcall @ i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69891 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed on the trunk so far.

[Bug rtl-optimization/69942] gcc.dg/ifcvt-5.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69942 --- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- The cause of issue is that before ce1 phase pde (or pre) transformation has been done to remove partial redundant moves to variable i and j, i.e. code int i = x; int j = y; if (x > y) { i =

[Bug c/69981] -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69981 --- Comment #6 from David L. --- Created attachment 37808 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37808=edit patch (gcc-5.3.0) patch attached (probably makes the user's PC explode and burns down their house)

[Bug target/69245] [6 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2286 on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69245 --- Comment #16 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Fri Feb 26 16:02:21 2016 New Revision: 233745 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233745=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64] Set TREE_TARGET_GLOBALS in aarch64_set_current_function

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/56981] Slow I/O: Unformatted 5x slower, large sys component; formatted slow as well

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69613] [6 Regression] wrong code with -O and simple 128bit arithmetics and vectors @ aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613 --- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ktkachov Date: Fri Feb 26 15:59:45 2016 New Revision: 233744 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233744=gcc=rev Log: [AArch64] PR target/69613: Return zero TARGET_SHIFT_TRUNCATION_MASK

[Bug rtl-optimization/69891] wrong code with -mstringop-strategy=libcall @ i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69891 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Feb 26 15:53:43 2016 New Revision: 233743 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233743=gcc=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/69891 * dse.c (scan_insn): If we can't figure

[Bug target/61397] [4.9/5/6 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/p8vector-ldst.c scan-assembler lxsdx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61397 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/69982] missing warning when using __thread with -std=c99 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69982 --- Comment #3 from Vincent Lefèvre --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > [...] and __thread uses the implementation namespace, [...] Is this really the implementation namespace? The C standard says: "All identifiers that begin

[Bug c/69981] -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69981 --- Comment #5 from David L. --- (In reply to David L. from comment #4) > Poking around a bit, in wrapup_global_declaration_2() in gcc/toplev.c, the > check for >else if (TREE_READONLY (decl) && !TREE_PUBLIC (decl) >

[Bug c/69982] missing warning when using __thread with -std=c99 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69982 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug lto/69953] [5/6 Regression] Using lto causes gtkmm/gparted and gtkmm/inkscape compile to fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69953 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.9.2 Summary|Using

[Bug c/69982] missing warning when using __thread with -std=c99 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69982 --- Comment #1 from Vincent Lefèvre --- Note: This actually means that a program that switches from __thread to _Thread_local (which could be regarded as more portable) could suddenly fail to build with "-std=c99 -pedantic -Werror".

[Bug target/69969] [5/6 Regression] Function attribute no-vsx

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69969 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c/69981] -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69981 --- Comment #3 from David L. --- Poking around a bit, in wrapup_global_declaration_2() in gcc/toplev.c, the check for else if (TREE_READONLY (decl) && !TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (optimize ||

[Bug c/69982] New: missing warning when using __thread with -std=c99 -pedantic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69982 Bug ID: 69982 Summary: missing warning when using __thread with -std=c99 -pedantic Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/69981] -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69981 --- Comment #4 from David L. --- Argh, for some reason this submitted in the middle of editing... Poking around a bit, in wrapup_global_declaration_2() in gcc/toplev.c, the check for else if (TREE_READONLY (decl) && !TREE_PUBLIC (decl)

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 --- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor --- I am currently bootstrapping and testing the fix I posted as: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01656.html I am confident it will fix all of these problems (provided the issue is a SSA_NAME

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 --- Comment #9 from Dominik Vogt --- (Fails only with -m31.)

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 Dominik Vogt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---

[Bug c/69796] [6 Regression] ICE on invalid code in useless_type_conversion_p, at gimple-expr.c:83

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69796 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||helloqirun at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c/69974] [6 Regression] gcc ICE on invalid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "create_tmp_from_val"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69974 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/69889] [6 Regression] ICE: in assign_temp, at function.c:961

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69889 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/69980] [6 regression] Supposedly wrong SLP code emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69980 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug fortran/67451] [5/6 Regression] [F08] ICE with sourced allocation from coarray.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67451 --- Comment #15 from Dominik Vogt --- The problem is gone on today's trunk for s390 and s390x.

[Bug middle-end/69920] [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Target|i?86-*-*|i?86-*-* powerpc*-*-*

[Bug c/69981] -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69981 --- Comment #2 from David L. --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > I disagree, removing static consts is an optimization, if you tell the > compiler not to optimize, it doesn't perform the optimizations. Documentation bug then? It

[Bug c/69981] -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69981 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c/69981] New: -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69981 Bug ID: 69981 Summary: -f[no]keep-static-consts has no effect Product: gcc Version: 5.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug tree-optimization/69980] [6 regression] Supposedly wrong SLP code emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69980 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/69980] New: [6 regression] Supposedly wrong SLP code emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69980 Bug ID: 69980 Summary: [6 regression] Supposedly wrong SLP code emitted Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/69979] New: ARM naked function attribute not handling structs bigger than 32 bits correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69979 Bug ID: 69979 Summary: ARM naked function attribute not handling structs bigger than 32 bits correctly Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/69958] sizeof... computes wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69958 --- Comment #3 from Ibrahim Gokhan YANIKLAR --- *** Bug 69978 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c++/69978] Invalid sizeof... value for variadic template arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69978 Ibrahim Gokhan YANIKLAR changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/69958] sizeof... computes wrong size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69958 Ibrahim Gokhan YANIKLAR changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yanikibo at yandex dot com

  1   2   >