[Bug tree-optimization/87952] New: Missed optimization for std::get_if on std::variant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87952 Bug ID: 87952 Summary: Missed optimization for std::get_if on std::variant Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug c++/87951] New: GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87951 Bug ID: 87951 Summary: GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Vitali from comment #6) > Actually as of C++17 it's undefined behaviour. > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#1766 > > so at the very least when compiled with C++17

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Vitali changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/12849] testing divisibility by constant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12849 krux changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hoganmeier at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 from k

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Vitali changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 --- Comment #2 from Vitali --- Why has clang made a different decision? Also, this warning is present in C++ code too.

[Bug c/87950] GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch cases are completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/87950] New: GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87950 Bug ID: 87950 Summary: GCC warns about reaching end of non-void function when all switch is completely handled Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/78351] comma not terminating READ of formatted input field - ok in 4.1.7, not 4.4.7- maybe related to 25419?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351 --- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Nov 9 02:46:03 2018 New Revision: 265946 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265946&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-08 Jerry DeLisle PR libfortran/78351 * io

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner --- What do you think we can do about that? The call clobbers the ABI defined non-volatile CR regs, so we have to save/restore them. I don't think we have any other option, other than telling GCC to never use t

[Bug rtl-optimization/87948] LRA register allocator does not support HARD_REGNO_CALLER_SAVE_MODE returning VOIDmode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87948 --- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner --- I entered bug 87949 as the bug I was trying to fix when I encountered the HARD_REGNO_CALLER_SAVE issue.

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 44981 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44981&action=edit Bzip2 assembly file from the fortran source In the assembly file, at line 1262, there is a store from a MFCR

[Bug target/87949] PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 --- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 44980 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44980&action=edit Fortran file showing problem from gamess Compile this file with the '-Ofast -g -S -std=legacy -mcpu=power9'

[Bug c++/43105] Document restrictions on mixing -fno-rtti and -frtti

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43105 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Works for me.

[Bug c++/87947] Symbol Does Not Appear in Object File

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87947 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/87949] New: PowerPC saves CR registers across calls

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87949 Bug ID: 87949 Summary: PowerPC saves CR registers across calls Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug rtl-optimization/87948] New: LRA register allocator does not support HARD_REGNO_CALLER_SAVE_MODE returning VOIDmode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87948 Bug ID: 87948 Summary: LRA register allocator does not support HARD_REGNO_CALLER_SAVE_MODE returning VOIDmode Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Seve

[Bug rtl-optimization/87600] Fix for PRs 86939 and 87479 causes build issues for several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87600 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/87600] Fix for PRs 86939 and 87479 causes build issues for several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87600 --- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner --- Author: bergner Date: Thu Nov 8 22:39:45 2018 New Revision: 265942 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265942&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/ PR rtl-optimization/87600 * cfgexpand.c (expand_asm

[Bug tree-optimization/87931] [9 Regression] ICE in vectorizable_reduction, at tree-vect-loop.c:6193 since r265876

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87931 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/87947] New: Symbol Does Not Appear in Object File

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87947 Bug ID: 87947 Summary: Symbol Does Not Appear in Object File Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug other/36572] Documentation for some options starting with “no-” not clear

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36572 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug other/36572] Documentation for some options starting with “no-” not clear

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36572 --- Comment #1 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: sandra Date: Thu Nov 8 22:02:38 2018 New Revision: 265939 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265939&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-11-08 Sandra Loosemore PR other/36572

[Bug c++/87814] [9 Regression] ICE in in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15962 with range-v3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87814 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- I actually still see an ICE in tsubst_copy: h.C: In instantiation of ‘constexpr adaptor_cursor::adaptor_cursor(Args&& ...) [with Args = {int*}][inherited from compressed_tuple_]’: h.C:24:43: required from

[Bug c++/87137] [8/9 Regression] Non-virtual member function increases struct size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/87814] [9 Regression] ICE in in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15962 with range-v3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87814 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug c++/87269] [9 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15475 starting from r261802

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87269 --- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell --- Martin, this isn't icing now.

[Bug rtl-optimization/87902] [9 Regression] Shrink-wrapping multiple conditions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87902 --- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool --- All instructions that depend on the new registers can start later, too, if you move all new registers down. If you move copies from hard registers down it is much worse: you are extending the lifetime o

[Bug c++/43105] Document restrictions on mixing -fno-rtti and -frtti

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43105 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug sanitizer/87837] [8/9 Regression] -O2 -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow misses overflows on x86-64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87837 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/87917] ICE in initialize_matrix_A at gcc/tree-data-ref.c:3150

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87917 Sebastian Pop changed: What|Removed |Added CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug fortran/87946] New: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_walk_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:10506

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87946 Bug ID: 87946 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_walk_array_ref, at fortran/trans-array.c:10506 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug fortran/87945] New: [9 Regression] ICE in var_element, at fortran/decl.c:281

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87945 Bug ID: 87945 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in var_element, at fortran/decl.c:281 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priorit

[Bug fortran/56423] F08/0071: Shall reject invalid Vector subscript target with Pointer assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56423 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gs...@t-online.de --- Comment #2 from G.

[Bug middle-end/51019] unclear documentation on -fomit-frame-pointer default for -Os and different platforms

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51019 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/54615] unclear documentation on -fomit-frame-pointer for -O

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54615 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/87944] Wrong code with LRA pushing stack local variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87944 --- Comment #2 from pkoning at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 44979 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44979&action=edit Test program source

[Bug c/87944] Wrong code with LRA pushing stack local variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87944 --- Comment #1 from pkoning at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 44978 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44978&action=edit Reload dump

[Bug c/87944] New: Wrong code with LRA pushing stack local variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87944 Bug ID: 87944 Summary: Wrong code with LRA pushing stack local variable Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug rtl-optimization/87902] [9 Regression] Shrink-wrapping multiple conditions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87902 --- Comment #3 from Ilya Leoshkevich --- Judging by the following comment in lra-coalesce.c, RA doesn't do this intentionally: Here we coalesce only spilled pseudos. Coalescing non-spilled pseudos (with different hard regs) might result i

[Bug tree-optimization/78969] bogus snprintf truncation warning due to missing range info

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78969 Jeremy Sheaffer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc at sheaffer dot ws --- Comment #13

[Bug ipa/86395] add support of -fopt-info-inline in inliner

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86395 --- Comment #5 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Thu Nov 8 15:38:30 2018 New Revision: 265920 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265920&root=gcc&view=rev Log: ipa-inline.c/tree-inline.c: port from fprintf to dump API (PR ipa/86395

[Bug c++/87934] [8/9 regression] struct with NSDMI of enum makes initialization a non-constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87934 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/87916] [9 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_abstract_function, at dwarf2out.c:22479 since r264943

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87916 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5) > Thanks for the reduced testcase. I thank you for the quick fix.

[Bug fortran/87943] New: [6.5 regression] severe regression on iso_varying_string (?)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87943 Bug ID: 87943 Summary: [6.5 regression] severe regression on iso_varying_string (?) Product: gcc Version: 6.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug middle-end/87916] [9 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_abstract_function, at dwarf2out.c:22479 since r264943

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87916 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/87916] [9 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_abstract_function, at dwarf2out.c:22479 since r264943

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87916 --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Thu Nov 8 14:57:47 2018 New Revision: 265916 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265916&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR middle-end/87916 * cgraphclones.c (duplicate_thunk_

[Bug c/87942] every int seems to be unaligned in packed structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87942 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug c/87942] New: every int seems to be unaligned in packed structure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87942 Bug ID: 87942 Summary: every int seems to be unaligned in packed structure Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug rtl-optimization/87941] New: by_pieces infra does not use movmisalign optab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87941 Bug ID: 87941 Summary: by_pieces infra does not use movmisalign optab Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/87940] [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/warn-strlen-no-nul.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87940 Bernd Edlinger changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug gcov-profile/87442] Add options to filter files we want to instrument for code coverage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87442 --- Comment #10 from Martin Liška --- > > Few things: > i) I use ';' as regex separator (to avoid issues under windows with C:\...) > ii) if exclude is empty and filename is matching any of the regexes in > filter then instrument it. > iii) i

[Bug tree-optimization/87940] New: [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/warn-strlen-no-nul.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87940 Bug ID: 87940 Summary: [9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/warn-strlen-no-nul.c Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tr

[Bug middle-end/87899] [9 regression]r264897 cause mis-compiled native arm-linux-gnueabihf toolchain

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87899 --- Comment #6 from Renlin Li --- Created attachment 44975 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44975&action=edit IRA dump

[Bug middle-end/87899] [9 regression]r264897 cause mis-compiled native arm-linux-gnueabihf toolchain

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87899 --- Comment #5 from Renlin Li --- Created attachment 44974 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44974&action=edit IRA dump The code you want to check is the following in ira pass: insn 10905: r1 = r2040 insn 208: use and update r

[Bug ada/87936] gnatlink fails with -pie

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87936 --- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > I suppose it works when using -fPIC/-pic? Using -fPIC: ... $ rm -f hello.ali hello.o hello ; gnatmake -fPIC hello.adb gcc -c -fPIC hello.adb gnatbind -x hello.a

[Bug ada/87936] gnatlink fails with -pie

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87936 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- I suppose it works when using -fPIC/-pic?

[Bug fortran/87937] [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/87939] New: Support STAT= and ERRMSG= specifiers to CRITICAL and TEAM statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87939 Bug ID: 87939 Summary: Support STAT= and ERRMSG= specifiers to CRITICAL and TEAM statements Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/87937] [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 --- Comment #4 from Tomáš Trnka --- Created attachment 44973 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44973&action=edit Original tree dump after removing the offending check

[Bug fortran/87937] [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 --- Comment #3 from Tomáš Trnka --- Created attachment 44972 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44972&action=edit Original tree dump from 8.2.1 20181011

[Bug fortran/87937] [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 --- Comment #2 from Tomáš Trnka --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1) > > The code to allocate t%x is simply never generated. > > How do you see that? > > WORKSFORME on darwin. Weird, I wouldn't expect the frontend to behave i

[Bug fortran/87625] [OOP] (re)allocate on assignment fails for polymorphic array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87625 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #5 from Domin

[Bug fortran/87937] [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/87937] [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > The code to allocate t%x is simply never generated. How do you see that? WORKSFORME on darwin.

[Bug ada/87938] New: libgnat.a not compiled with -fno-PIC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87938 Bug ID: 87938 Summary: libgnat.a not compiled with -fno-PIC Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada

[Bug c++/87935] [9 regression] new failures on arm since r265788

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87935 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- It also causes: FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/pr83734.C -std=gnu++14 (internal compiler error) FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/pr83734.C -std=gnu++17 (internal compiler error)

[Bug fortran/87937] New: [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87937 Bug ID: 87937 Summary: [8/9 Regression] LHS reallocation broken inside "select type" Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug ada/87936] New: gnatlink fails with -pie

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87936 Bug ID: 87936 Summary: gnatlink fails with -pie Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada Assignee:

[Bug rtl-optimization/86438] [8/9 Regression] wrong code at -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438 --- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva --- https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-11/msg00533.html

[Bug tree-optimization/87929] ICE in verify_gimple failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87929 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/87929] ICE in verify_gimple failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87929 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug target/87928] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in ix86_compute_frame_layout, at config/i386/i386.c:11161 since r228607

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87928 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC|

[Bug c++/87935] [9 regression] new failures on arm since r265788

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87935 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Ver

[Bug c++/87935] New: [9 regression] new failures on arm since r265788

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87935 Bug ID: 87935 Summary: [9 regression] new failures on arm since r265788 Product: gcc Version: 6.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --- Using: diff --git a/gcc/doc/install.texi b/gcc/doc/install.texi index be9b07b5d23..b82594bd28e 100644 --- a/gcc/doc/install.texi +++ b/gcc/doc/install.texi @@ -2,7 +2,6 @@ @c @ifnothtml @c %**start of heade

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 --- Comment #7 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #5) > Nope, the first one is unconditional. You're right: ... define = indexhtml /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/doc/install.texi:14: warning: multiple @settitle defi

[Bug middle-end/50481] builtin to reverse the bit order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50481 --- Comment #4 from krux --- +1 The builtins already produce better code than a generic bitreverse implementation: https://godbolt.org/z/Um2Tit But using special hardware instructions automatically is even more important imho.

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 --- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab --- Most like this is a texinfo 4 vs 5+ difference.

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 --- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab --- Nope, the first one is unconditional.

[Bug tree-optimization/87917] ICE in initialize_matrix_A at gcc/tree-data-ref.c:3150

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87917 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sebpop at gmail dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab --- The first @settitle wins. $ grep @settitle gcc/doc/install.texi @settitle Installing GCC @settitle Installing GCC @settitle Host/Target specific installation notes for GCC @settitle Prerequisites for GCC @s

[Bug tree-optimization/87925] [missed-optimization] Distinct-value if-then-else chains treated differently than switch statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87925 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #5) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3) > > Currently we only do switch -> balanced decision tree (read series of > > if-then-else statements). Well definitely

[Bug tree-optimization/87925] Missed optimization: Distinct-value if-then-else chains treated differently than switch statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87925 --- Comment #5 from Eyal Rozenberg --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3) > Currently we only do switch -> balanced decision tree (read series of > if-then-else statements). Well definitely a potentially enhancement, > question is whether

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Hm, then it looks title after ':' is stripped: $ grep 'Installing GCC: ' gcc/doc/install.texi @settitle Installing GCC: Configuration @settitle Installing GCC: Building @settitle Installing GCC: Testing @sett

[Bug web/87933] Bad headers and titles for:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87933 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||documentation --- Comment #1 from Richa

[Bug c++/87934] [8/9 regression] struct with NSDMI of enum makes initialization a non-constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87934 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Status|UNCONF

[Bug tree-optimization/87931] [9 Regression] ICE in vectorizable_reduction, at tree-vect-loop.c:6193 since r265876

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87931 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/87925] Missed optimization: Distinct-value if-then-else chains treated differently than switch statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87925 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #0) > Have a look at this GodBolt example: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/zR03rA > > On one hand, we have: > > void foo(int i) { > switch (i) { > c

[Bug tree-optimization/87925] Missed optimization: Distinct-value if-then-else chains treated differently than switch statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87925 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #3 from Martin Li

[Bug tree-optimization/87929] ICE in verify_gimple failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87929 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/87928] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in ix86_compute_frame_layout, at config/i386/i386.c:11161 since r228607

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87928 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.4

[Bug tree-optimization/87926] bad array-index warning breaks --disable-checking bootstrap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87926 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Blocks|

[Bug tree-optimization/87925] Missed optimization: Distinct-value if-then-else chains treated differently than switch statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87925 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|

[Bug tree-optimization/87917] ICE in initialize_matrix_A at gcc/tree-data-ref.c:3150

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87917 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/86438] [8/9 Regression] wrong code at -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #44970|0 |1 is obsolete|

  1   2   >