[Bug target/87285] New: [9 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in tree_class_check (tree.h:3235) with -O2 -std=gnu++11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87285 Bug ID: 87285 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in tree_class_check (tree.h:3235) with -O2 -std=gnu++11 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/87282] Invalid use of 'void', in unevaluated context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87282 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug middle-end/87276] Buggy tree-ssa optimization introduced in revision 263875

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87276 --- Comment #3 from Vincent Lefèvre --- Note: This may yield security issues since basically, this makes integer overflow detection fail. In the testcase, after unsigned long uc; uc = (unsigned long) sum + (unsigned long) ps->e; uc

[Bug middle-end/87276] Buggy tree-ssa optimization introduced in revision 263875

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87276 Vincent Lefèvre changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Buggy code with -O2 in |Buggy tree-ssa optimization

[Bug middle-end/87237] __atomic_load on 4-byte-sized, 1-byte-aligned struct is not atomic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87237 --- Comment #4 from Richard Smith --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #3) > With GCC size/align are 3/1 while with Clang it's 4/4 as you said Oh sorry, you're right, I'd forgotten about this ABI discrepancy. We really need to get

[Bug c++/86946] ice: canonical types differ for identical types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86946 --- Comment #2 from David Binderman --- Still going wrong nearly a month later on revision 264210.

[Bug middle-end/87237] __atomic_load on 4-byte-sized, 1-byte-aligned struct is not atomic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87237 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov --- (In reply to Richard Smith from comment #2) > I think that's only true for objects whose size corresponds to that of a > fundamental type. Consider: > > struct B { char c[3]; }; > > Here, an atomic

[Bug middle-end/87237] __atomic_load on 4-byte-sized, 1-byte-aligned struct is not atomic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87237 --- Comment #2 from Richard Smith --- (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #1) > GCC assumes the access is sufficiently aligned for an atomic object of > corresponding type I think that's only true for objects whose size corresponds to

[Bug middle-end/87237] __atomic_load on 4-byte-sized, 1-byte-aligned struct is not atomic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87237 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/87284] New: [7/8/9 Regression] Allocation of class arrays with mold results in "conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87284 Bug ID: 87284 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] Allocation of class arrays with mold results in "conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value" Product: gcc

[Bug fortran/87172] [9 Regression] Spurious "Derived type 'c_funptr' at (1) has not been declared" error after r263782

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87172 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Tue Sep 11 17:44:04 2018 New Revision: 264214 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264214=gcc=rev Log: fix PR 87172 2018-09-11 Janus Weil PR fortran/87172

[Bug c++/87274] -std=c++11 breaks quadmath macros

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87274 --- Comment #3 from Patrick J. LoPresti --- Yes, is an extension. But it would be nice, IMO, if it were a standard-compatible extension. So this is, as you say, a feature request somehow to enable quad-precision literals in standard

[Bug fortran/87277] [8/9 regression] Segfault on using array component of class scalar pointer as an actual argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87277 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/87283] [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in remove, at alloc-pool.h:433

-64 -auxbase-strip gromacs.ltrans2.ltrans.o -O2 -O2 -version -fno-openmp -fno-openacc -fno-pie -ffast-math -fwhole-program -fuse-linker-plugin -fltrans /tmp/gromacs.ltrans2.o -o gromacs.ltrans2.s GNU GIMPLE (GCC) version 9.0.0 20180911 (experimental) (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) compiled by GN

[Bug lto/87283] [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in remove, at alloc-pool.h:433

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87283 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/87277] [8/9 regression] Segfault on using array component of class scalar pointer as an actual argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87277 --- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Tue Sep 11 17:18:13 2018 New Revision: 264213 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264213=gcc=rev Log: 2018-09-11 Paul Thomas PR fortran/87277 * expr.c

[Bug lto/87283] [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in remove, at alloc-pool.h:433

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87283 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/86623] constexpr evaluation fails to give an error for modifying a const object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86623 Jö changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jorrit at jorrit dot de --- Comment #1 from Jö

[Bug lto/87283] New: [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in remove, at alloc-pool.h:433

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87283 Bug ID: 87283 Summary: [9 Regression] internal compiler error: in remove, at alloc-pool.h:433 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/87282] New: Invalid use of 'void', in unevaluated context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87282 Bug ID: 87282 Summary: Invalid use of 'void', in unevaluated context Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/87277] [8/9 regression] Segfault on using array component of class scalar pointer as an actual argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87277 --- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Tue Sep 11 15:59:07 2018 New Revision: 264210 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264210=gcc=rev Log: 2018-09-11 Paul Thomas PR fortran/87277 * expr.c

[Bug c/66658] missing -Wunused-value negating a function result in a comma expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66658 Michal Malecki changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ethouris at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c/87242] optimize -O2 incorrect output

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87242 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/87276] Buggy code with -O2 in trunk revision 264170: MPFR test tstrtofr fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87276 --- Comment #1 from Vincent Lefèvre --- I could simplify the code: #include #include struct s { long e; }; static void f (struct s *ps) { volatile long m = 9223372036854775807; const char *str = "11E"; int r; long sum; ps->e = 0;

[Bug bootstrap/56703] problems with strsignal and maybe strstr due to varying const on return type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56703 --- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely --- > Jay, is the original problem on SunOS still happening? > > Rainer, any insight into that build failure? Are some Solaris patches needed? I

[Bug target/87281] qsort checking ICE in ia64_reorg building libgo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87281 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- Probably a dup of the various scheduler related qsort ICEs.

[Bug c++/87279] gcc violates §17.1.10

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87279 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug libstdc++/87278] [8/9 Regression] GCC 8 fails to compile make_shared()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87278 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/87278] [8/9 Regression] GCC 8 fails to compile make_shared()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87278 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Tue Sep 11 11:51:10 2018 New Revision: 264208 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264208=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/87278 restore support for std::make_shared() PR

[Bug libstdc++/87278] [8/9 Regression] GCC 8 fails to compile make_shared()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87278 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Tue Sep 11 11:50:39 2018 New Revision: 264207 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264207=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/87278 restore support for std::make_shared() PR

[Bug target/87281] New: qsort checking ICE in ia64_reorg building libgo

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87281 Bug ID: 87281 Summary: qsort checking ICE in ia64_reorg building libgo Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/87280] New: [9 Regression] ICE in set_ssa_val_to, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:3647

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87280 Bug ID: 87280 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in set_ssa_val_to, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:3647 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code

[Bug libstdc++/87278] [8/9 Regression] GCC 8 fails to compile make_shared()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87278 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/82982] [8/9 Regression] ICE: qsort checking failed (error: qsort comparator non-negative on sorted output: 5) in ready_sort_real in haifa scheduler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82982 --- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool --- Erm, not Will. Everyone :-)

[Bug middle-end/82407] [meta-bug] qsort_chk fallout tracking

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82407 Bug 82407 depends on bug 82982, which changed state. Bug 82982 Summary: [8/9 Regression] ICE: qsort checking failed (error: qsort comparator non-negative on sorted output: 5) in ready_sort_real in haifa scheduler

[Bug rtl-optimization/82982] [8/9 Regression] ICE: qsort checking failed (error: qsort comparator non-negative on sorted output: 5) in ready_sort_real in haifa scheduler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82982 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/87279] New: gcc violates §17.1.10

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87279 Bug ID: 87279 Summary: gcc violates §17.1.10 Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee:

[Bug tree-optimization/87042] UBSAN: poly-int.h:1095:5: runtime error: signed integer overflow: 9223372036854775807 * 8 cannot be represented in type 'long int'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87042 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug libstdc++/87278] GCC 8 fails to compile make_shared()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87278 Olivier Kannengieser changed: What|Removed |Added CC||okannen at gmail dot com ---

[Bug libstdc++/87278] New: GCC 8 fails to compile make_shared()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87278 Bug ID: 87278 Summary: GCC 8 fails to compile make_shared() Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug tree-optimization/87259] [9 Regression] ICE: error: definition in block 3 does not dominate use in block 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87259 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last

[Bug c++/87274] -std=c++11 breaks quadmath macros

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87274 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/87274] -std=c++11 breaks quadmath macros

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87274 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- This is not a bug. If you want to use the non-standard extensions in then either use -std=gnu++11 instead of -std=c++11, or use -fext-numeric-literals to enable the non-standard suffixes, as suggested.

[Bug c++/87275] unsequenced writes not diagnosed in constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87275 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Clang and EDG also compile it without error.

[Bug bootstrap/84554] make check: FAIL: tversion: ERROR! The versions of gmp.h (5.0.5) and libgmp (4.3.1) do not match.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84554 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- So it got way past stage 2 then: (In reply to matthew.hambley from comment #1) > It looks like it gets to stage 2 of the bootstrapping process, then it fails > in > the MPFR self-test in the way

[Bug bootstrap/86615] gcc build failure: auto-host.h error: declaration does not declare anything [-fpermissive]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86615 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug other/82590] auto-host.h error: declaration does not declare anything

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82590 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug bootstrap/56954] Bootstrap failure: ./auto-host.h:1994:16: error: declaration does not declare anything [-fpermissive]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56954 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mdenber at gmx dot com

[Bug bootstrap/56954] Bootstrap failure: ./auto-host.h:1994:16: error: declaration does not declare anything [-fpermissive]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56954 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mdenber at gmx dot com

[Bug bootstrap/84554] make check: FAIL: tversion: ERROR! The versions of gmp.h (5.0.5) and libgmp (4.3.1) do not match.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84554 --- Comment #6 from matthew.hambley at metoffice dot gov.uk --- > That does look like a problem. But why are the mpfr tests running as part of > bootstrap? I don't think they do for me. In which case I think I have misunderstood how the build

[Bug rtl-optimization/87273] [8/9 Regression] ICE in merge_fences, at sel-sched-ir.c:708

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87273 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

Virtual Office & Virtual Assistant

BuBleik SAL Virtual Office & Virtual Assistant Virtual Office: Business Address, Safe Locker, Remote Assistance, Meeting Room, Telephone

[Bug fortran/86830] [8/9 Regression] Contiguous array pointer function result not recognized as contiguous

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86830 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Tue Sep 11 06:33:39 2018 New Revision: 264201 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264201=gcc=rev Log: fix PR 86830 2018-09-11 Janus Weil PR fortran/86830

[Bug fortran/87277] New: [8/9 regression] Segfault on using array component of class scalar pointer as an actual argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87277 Bug ID: 87277 Summary: [8/9 regression] Segfault on using array component of class scalar pointer as an actual argument Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED