[Bug target/96857] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr95488-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmullw[^\n]*zmm 2 on Linux/x86_64 (-m64 -march=cascadelake)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96857 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[r11-1301 Regression] FAIL: |[11 Regression] FAIL:

[Bug target/96855] [11 Regression] r11-571 regression FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92658-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96855 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|r11-571 regression FAIL:|[11 Regression] r11-571

[Bug target/96856] [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92645-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "VEC_PACK_TRUNC" 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96856 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Summary|[r11-571 Regres

[Bug fortran/94672] [10/11 Regression] gfortran/OpenMP chokes on PRESENT(array) despite of SHARED(array): Error: ‘array’ not specified in enclosing ‘parallel’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94672 --- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Tomáš Trnka from comment #12) > The fix for this broke assumed length optional character arguments. I have > noticed this on 10.2.1 20200723, which is currently used by Fedora 32. Thanks for th

[Bug target/96854] [10 Regression] avx vectorizer breaks complex arithmetic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug fortran/96859] New: Wrong answer with intrinsic merge_bits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96859 Bug ID: 96859 Summary: Wrong answer with intrinsic merge_bits Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug c++/96840] [11 Regression] Recursive substitution in constrained commutative operator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96840 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Target Milestone|---

[Bug analyzer/96841] [11 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected integer_cst, have nop_expr in to_wide, at tree.h:5904

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96841 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/94672] [10/11 Regression] gfortran/OpenMP chokes on PRESENT(array) despite of SHARED(array): Error: ‘array’ not specified in enclosing ‘parallel’

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94672 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ac4f77d2563828324bb6a4f08b52aae3410702ea commit r10-8691-gac4f77d2563828324bb6a4f08b52aae3410702ea Author: Tobias Burnus

[Bug c/96858] New: Many i386 testcases failed with different configured gcc on different hosts.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96858 Bug ID: 96858 Summary: Many i386 testcases failed with different configured gcc on different hosts. Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug target/96789] x264: sub4x4_dct() improves when vectorization is disabled

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/96855] r11-571 regression FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92658-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96855 --- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #1) > Add -mprefer-vector-width=512 to avoid impact of different failure. Typo: different mtune.

[Bug target/96855] r11-571 regression FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92658-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96855 --- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu --- Add -mprefer-vector-width=512 to avoid impact of different failure.

[Bug target/96857] New: [r11-1301 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr95488-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmullw[^\n]*zmm 2 on Linux/x86_64 (-m64 -march=cascadelake)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96857 Bug ID: 96857 Summary: [r11-1301 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-pr95488-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmullw[^\n]*zmm 2 on Linux/x86_64 (-m64 -march=cascade

[Bug target/96856] New: [r11-571 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92645-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "VEC_PACK_TRUNC" 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96856 Bug ID: 96856 Summary: [r11-571 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92645-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "VEC_PACK_TRUNC" 1 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFI

[Bug target/96855] New: r11-571 regression FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92658-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96855 Bug ID: 96855 Summary: r11-571 regression FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92658-1.c Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug target/96551] [10/11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/vectorize8.c (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96551 --- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu --- a patch is posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-August/552230.html

[Bug target/96849] [11 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2294 (error: unrecognizable insn) since r11-2623

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96849 Hongtao.liu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||crazylht at gmail dot com --- Comment #3 f

[Bug tree-optimization/96669] Failure to optimize shift by variable+and by 1 to test for 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96669 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/96672] Missing -Wclobbered diagnostic, or: __attribute__((returns_twice)) does not inhibit constant folding across call site

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96672 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Most likely the patch which moves the warning to gimple would help here: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-October/530995.html But I have not seen any movement on it since last year but I could

[Bug tree-optimization/96674] Failure to optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96674 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/96807] Division by zero produces zero with gcc -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96807 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/96854] New: avx vectorizer breaks complex arithmetic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854 Bug ID: 96854 Summary: avx vectorizer breaks complex arithmetic Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug c++/96853] New: Explicit template instantiation & thread_local interaction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96853 Bug ID: 96853 Summary: Explicit template instantiation & thread_local interaction Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug libgomp/96837] A false if clause in "omp parallel" seriously affects the performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96837 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- The standard describes in detail what parallel if (false) creates, and what the various APIs should return for that. It does create a parallel region, albeit an inactive one. So, e.g. for the question wheth

[Bug libgomp/96837] A false if clause in "omp parallel" seriously affects the performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96837 --- Comment #2 from Olaf Krzikalla --- This raises the question, if a false "if" clause creates a parallel region anyway. I haven't found a explicit statement in the OpenMP standard. However note, that the assertion "!omp_in_parallel()" in my e

[Bug c++/66360] thread_local variable needs copy constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66360 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/67135] [thread_local] heap-use-after-free (OS X 10.10.4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67135 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/59994] [meta-bug] thread_local

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59994 Bug 59994 depends on bug 67135, which changed state. Bug 67135 Summary: [thread_local] heap-use-after-free (OS X 10.10.4) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67135 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c/96842] enhancement: copy clang Wheader-guard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96842 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Blocks|

[Bug middle-end/96838] missing warning on integer overflow in calls to allocation functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96838 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-08-30 Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug c++/81880] thread_local static member template initialisation fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81880 Toby Brull changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tobias.bruell at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/96850] format missing from std

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96850 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes, as documented. And also stated at https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support

[Bug c++/96852] New: Missing diagnostic message for friend declaration with wrong number of template arguments.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96852 Bug ID: 96852 Summary: Missing diagnostic message for friend declaration with wrong number of template arguments. Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/96849] [11 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2294 (error: unrecognizable insn) since r11-2623

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96849 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug target/96849] [11 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2294 (error: unrecognizable insn) since r11-2623

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96849 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[11 Regression] ICE: in |[11 Regression] ICE: in

[Bug tree-optimization/96820] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest with array and out of bounds reference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96820 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug d/96157] d: No NRVO when returning an array of a non-POD struct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96157 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b30aeaa173b6886cda15570a2e23eac1136665bf commit r10-8689-gb30aeaa173b6886cda15570a2e23eac1136665bf Author: Iain Buclaw Date:

[Bug libstdc++/96851] operator< on std::array does not work in constexpr, for sizeof(T) == 1, and N > 1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96851 --- Comment #1 from milasudril at gmail dot com --- Apparently, std::lexicographical_compare works https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/E1ETh1

[Bug libstdc++/96851] New: operator< on std::array does not work in constexpr, for sizeof(T) == 1, and N > 1

int8_t; constexpr auto Count = 2; // Below does not compile constexpr auto value = test(std::array{}, std::array{}); The problem exists in gcc 10.1 and trunk. /opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20200830/include/c++/11.0.0/array:262:32: error: '__builtin_memcmp(((std::array::const_pointer)(&am

[Bug c++/96850] format missing from std

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96850 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/96850] New: format missing from std

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96850 Bug ID: 96850 Summary: format missing from std Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee:

[Bug target/96847] Code size increase +42% depending on memory size allocated on stack for ARM Cortex-M3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96847 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Looks like there is some IV-OPTs issue and that the limited registers is causing spilling and that add range is causing the need for more register usage.