[Bug c++/90550] ICE in determine_visibility, at cp/decl2.c:2567

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90550 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/90550] ICE in determine_visibility, at cp/decl2.c:2567

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90550 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Started with r145440. Before that: 90550.C: In function ‘void f() [with = int]’: 90550.C:9: instantiated from here 90550.C:5: error: ‘b’ has incomplete type

[Bug fortran/90536] Spurious (?) warning when using -Wconversion with -fno-range-check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90536 --- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 03:06:32PM +, sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90536 > > --- Comment #11 from Steve Kargl --- > On Mon, May 20, 2019 a

[Bug middle-end/89371] missed vectorisation with "#pragma omp simd collapse(2)"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89371 --- Comment #3 from Arnaud Desitter --- Considering: #include #include #include void ff(double* res, double const* a, double const* b, int n1, int n2) { #pragma omp simd collapse(2) for(int i1=0; i1 < n1; ++i1) { for(int i2=0; i2 < n2

[Bug c++/61663] [DR 976] Deduction for const T& conversion functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61663 Nick Krempel changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ndkrempel at gmail dot com --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/87847] spec_hasher::hash does not match with spec_hasher::equal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87847 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 46387 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46387&action=edit patch to ignore type_canonical for TTP Does this work better?

[Bug libfortran/90038] execute_command_line should not use fork()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90038 --- Comment #11 from Janne Blomqvist --- Author: jb Date: Mon May 20 17:43:05 2019 New Revision: 271427 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271427&root=gcc&view=rev Log: libfortran/90038 Use posix_spawn, reap dead children when wait=.false. Ba

[Bug target/90530] [9/10 Regression] Invalid SUBREG insn generated by reload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90530 --- Comment #17 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2019-05-20 8:37 a.m., rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > AFAICS pa is using LRA now. I wish.

[Bug c++/83431] -Wformat-truncation may incorrectly report truncation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83431 --- Comment #3 from Matteo Croce --- I can reproduce it with this snippet: void f() { const char *dir = "a"; const char file[50] = "b"; char buf[4]; snprintf(buf, si

[Bug c++/88335] Implement P1073R3, C++20 immediate functions (consteval).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88335 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/88335] Implement P1073R3, C++20 immediate functions (consteval).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88335 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug testsuite/90551] New: New test case gcc.c-torture/compile/pr90263.c from r271400 reports unresolved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90551 Bug ID: 90551 Summary: New test case gcc.c-torture/compile/pr90263.c from r271400 reports unresolved Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: no

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig --- I think I have an idea what might be the problem. Does the code do something like call foo(a) ... subroutine foo(a) real, dimension(:) :: a call bar(a,size(n)) ... subroutine bar

[Bug c/90552] New: attribute((optimize(3))) not overriding -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90552 Bug ID: 90552 Summary: attribute((optimize(3))) not overriding -Os Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c++/83431] -Wformat-truncation may incorrectly report truncation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83431 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug c++/85679] [DR2094] __is_trivially_copyable returns false with volatile scalar type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85679 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Mon May 20 19:10:57 2019 New Revision: 271435 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271435&root=gcc&view=rev Log: CWG 2094 - volatile scalars are trivially copyable. PR

[Bug c++/85679] [DR2094] __is_trivially_copyable returns false with volatile scalar type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85679 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/90525] Wrong offsets in warning text for -Warray-bounds (with subobject)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90525 --- Comment #2 from Miguel Ojeda --- I see. About offset 1: even if it is not (formally) out of bounds, memset will end up dereferencing it. In the end, what users care about is that b and c are being overwritten (even users that know about the o

[Bug middle-end/89765] [9/10 Regression] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 --- Comment #15 from kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kelvin Date: Mon May 20 20:07:12 2019 New Revision: 271436 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271436&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/ChangeLog: 2019-05-20 Kelvin Nilsen Backport

[Bug c++/90548] [9/10 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy_and_build, at cp/pt.c:18877

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90548 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- We ended up with an empty call_args vec because the pack expanded here: 18842 /* Expand the pack expansion and push each entry onto 18843CALL_ARGS. */ 18844

[Bug c++/90548] [9/10 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy_and_build, at cp/pt.c:18877

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90548 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug libgomp/90527] alloc.c:72:7: error: implicit declaration of function ‘posix_memalign’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90527 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon May 20 21:29:17 2019 New Revision: 271438 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271438&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libgomp/90527 * alloc.c (_GNU_SOURCE): Define. Modifie

[Bug target/89424] __builtin_vec_ext_v1ti (v, i) results in ICE with variable i (RS6000)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89424 kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|-

[Bug libgomp/90527] alloc.c:72:7: error: implicit declaration of function ‘posix_memalign’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90527 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon May 20 21:29:49 2019 New Revision: 271439 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271439&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR libgomp/90527 * alloc.c (_GNU_SOURCE): Define. Modifie

[Bug middle-end/89765] [9/10 Regression] Multiple problems with vec-insert implementation on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89765 kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|-

[Bug c++/59813] tail-call elimination didn't fire for left-shift of char to cout

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59813 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon May 20 21:33:46 2019 New Revision: 271440 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271440&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/59813 PR target/90418 * function.h (struct

[Bug bootstrap/90418] [10 Regression] powerpc-darwin9 bootstrap fails after r271013

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90418 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon May 20 21:33:46 2019 New Revision: 271440 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271440&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/59813 PR target/90418 * function.h (struct

[Bug c++/55442] G++ uses up all my RAM when compiling a constexpr with exponential call graph

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55442 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug target/90547] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gen_lowpart_general, at rtlhooks.c:63

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90547 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/90418] [10 Regression] powerpc-darwin9 bootstrap fails after r271013

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90418 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/90500] ICE error in copy_forbiden

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90500 --- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- The copy attribute is intended to copy attributes that are properties of the function itself (e.g. "pure"), but not those that are properties of a particular symbol for the function (e.g.

[Bug target/90503] [10 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr22076.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90503 --- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Mon May 20 22:01:32 2019 New Revision: 271442 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271442&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR testsuite/90503 * gcc.target/i386/pr22076.c (dg

[Bug testsuite/90503] [10 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr22076.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90503 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Target|i?86, x86_64|x86_64 Status|NEW

[Bug testsuite/90503] [10 regression] gcc.target/i386/pr22076.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90503 --- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Mon May 20 22:24:38 2019 New Revision: 271445 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271445&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR testsuite/90503 * gcc.target/i386/pr22076.c (dg

[Bug c/80592] gcc fails to detect overflow in shift statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80592 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c/59753] -Woverflow warning inconsistency with signed constant conversion between T_MAX+1 and UT_MAX vs larger than UT_MAX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59753 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c/80502] Provide macro to indicate OpenMP SIMD support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80502 --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Evan Nemerson from comment #3) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > > _OPENMP_SIMD is a bad idea, that namespace is reserved for OpenMP, so unless > > it shows up in the OpenMP standar

[Bug middle-end/90553] New: Register allocation allocates post-incremented address-load of call to call-clobbered register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90553 Bug ID: 90553 Summary: Register allocation allocates post-incremented address-load of call to call-clobbered register Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/90553] Register allocation allocates post-incremented address-load of call to call-clobbered register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90553 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/90553] Register allocation allocates post-incremented address-load of call to call-clobbered register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90553 --- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- (JFTR the cutnpaste got tangled with paste and tape everywhere; the newlib function in newlib/libc/misc/init.c is named __libc_init_array)

[Bug target/63545] ICE when building GCC for ia64-hp-hpux11.23 in hash_table::find_slot_with_hash

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63545 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dave.anglin at bell dot net --- Comment

[Bug c/90552] attribute((optimize(3))) not overriding -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90552 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug middle-end/90549] missing -Wreturn-local-addr maybe returning an address of a local array plus offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90549 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/90545] [10 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c fails starting with r271022

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90545 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug translation/40883] [meta-bug] Translation breakage with trivial fixes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40883 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug tree-optimization/90525] Wrong offsets in warning text for -Warray-bounds (with subobject)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90525 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- The part of -Warray-bounds that checks offsets in calls to built-ins (as opposed to the subscript operator) is a part of the -Wrestrict implementation. It exists mainly to avoid some pathological instances of

[Bug middle-end/90549] missing -Wreturn-local-addr maybe returning an address of a local array plus offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90549 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/90252] PSTL test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90252 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Rodgers --- Author: rodgertq Date: Tue May 21 04:37:45 2019 New Revision: 271451 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271451&root=gcc&view=rev Log: tbb-backend effective target should check ability to link TBB

[Bug fortran/90539] [10 Regression] 481.wrf slowdown by 25% on Intel Kaby with -Ofast -march=native starting with r271377

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90539 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #4 from Thomas Koeni

[Bug testsuite/90551] New test case gcc.c-torture/compile/pr90263.c from r271400 reports unresolved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90551 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Author: marxin Date: Tue May 21 06:55:07 2019 New Revision: 271454 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271454&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Move a test-case (PR testsuite/90551). 2019-05-21 Martin Liska

[Bug testsuite/90551] New test case gcc.c-torture/compile/pr90263.c from r271400 reports unresolved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90551 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

<    1   2