[Bug target/59203] config/cris/cris.c:2491: possible typo ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59203 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #9 from bin.cheng --- Turns out my crossed bare-metal tool works after deleting all preprocessed "# xxx file" lines, but why these lines matter?

[Bug c++/59554] Errors with const and volatile in templates.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554 --- Comment #3 from Pavel --- Sorry, I am wrong. Gcc work right.

[Bug c++/59554] Errors with const and volatile in templates.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554 --- Comment #2 from Pavel --- if i edit code so: template void show(_T t) { *t = nullptr;// added printf("--_T\n"); mis_const<_T>::ch(); mis_volatile<_T>::ch(); mis_pointe

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #8 from bin.cheng --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #1) > Between r205951 and r205984. (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #7) > (In reply to bin.cheng from comment #6) > > Hi, > > Sorry I don't have m68k environment to do th

[Bug c++/59554] Errors with const and volatile in templates.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I don't see the problem with gcc's behavior here. The pointer type that you pass to the template is not not const or volatile. Only what the pointer points to is const and volatile. What output did you expec

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to bin.cheng from comment #6) > Hi, > Sorry I don't have m68k environment to do the bootstrap, could anyone help > dump "-fdump-tree-all-details -fdump-rtl-all-slim" with and without the > patch for me? O

[Bug c++/59554] New: Errors with const and volatile in templates.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554 Bug ID: 59554 Summary: Errors with const and volatile in templates. Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #6 from bin.cheng --- Hi, Sorry I don't have m68k environment to do the bootstrap, could anyone help dump "-fdump-tree-all-details -fdump-rtl-all-slim" with and without the patch for me? Otherwise I have to revert the patch and hold i

[Bug c++/59552] Warning when non-trivial type parameter is passed by value but not changed in function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59552 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Severity|normal

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 bin.cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 f

[Bug middle-end/59553] New: emit_library_call_value_1 generates usage of virtual_outgoint_args_rtx when virtuals_instantiated is 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59553 Bug ID: 59553 Summary: emit_library_call_value_1 generates usage of virtual_outgoint_args_rtx when virtuals_instantiated is 1 Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

.text .LHOTE0: .ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.9.0 20131218 (experimental)" .section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #13 from Thiago Macieira --- I can't confirm. trunk@206091: $ ~/gcc4.9/bin/gcc -mavx -S -o - -O3 -xc - <<<'#include int f(void *p1, void *p2) { __m128i d1 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i*)p1); __m128i d2 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i

[Bug c++/59552] New: Warning when non-trivial type parameter is passed by value but not changed in function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59552 Bug ID: 59552 Summary: Warning when non-trivial type parameter is passed by value but not changed in function Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug target/59551] ICE when compiling ImageMagick on hppa/linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59551 --- Comment #2 from Aaro Koskinen --- Created attachment 31475 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31475&action=edit Original source code triggering the bug.

[Bug target/59551] ICE when compiling ImageMagick on hppa/linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59551 --- Comment #1 from Aaro Koskinen --- Created attachment 31474 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31474&action=edit Preprocessed source triggering the bug.

[Bug fortran/59440] [4.9 Regression] ICE in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:20111 with -g

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59440 --- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus --- I see two not so pretty solutions: a) The simple way: Duplicate debug info by also emitting code for the original DECL. b) The hard & slow way: In tree-nested.c, add another walk_tree(), to be run after wa

[Bug target/59551] New: ICE when compiling ImageMagick on hppa/linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59551 Bug ID: 59551 Summary: ICE when compiling ImageMagick on hppa/linux Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: targe

[Bug other/59545] Signed integer overflow issues

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59545 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- Dup of PR 57324? (yes, I know, gcc vs clang)

[Bug rtl-optimization/59535] [4.9 regression] -Os code size regressions for Thumb1/Thumb2 with LRA

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59535 --- Comment #10 from Vladimir Makarov --- ./cc1 -Os -mthumb -mcpu=arm7tdmi -fno-short-enums test.i -m{no-}lra -fno-schedule-insns2 original reload reload with change lra with change reg moves 104 86 101 al

[Bug fortran/59440] [4.9 Regression] ICE in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:20111 with -g

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59440 --- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus --- The problem is the following code in tree-nested.c: /* A subroutine of convert_local_reference. Create a local variable in the parent function with DECL_VALUE_EXPR set to reference the field in FRAME.

[Bug gcov-profile/59542] [4.9 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed during Firefox build with 'gold'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59542 --- Comment #3 from Teresa Johnson --- On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote: > Thanks, I am able to reproduce now with the gold linker option. > Investigating... > Teresa > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:52 AM, trippels at gcc dot

[Bug fortran/59493] [OOP] ICE: Segfault on Class(*) pointer association

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59493 --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Wed Dec 18 22:00:53 2013 New Revision: 206101 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206101&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2013-12-18 Janus Weil PR fortran/59493 * gfortran.h (

[Bug debug/59418] [4.9 regression] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2221

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59418 --- Comment #6 from Ryan Mansfield --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5) > Thanks for reporting the problem and distilling the testcase. No problem, thanks for fixing.

[Bug c++/59550] New: compiler crash when forming a pointer to a reference would be needed in std::initalizer_list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59550 Bug ID: 59550 Summary: compiler crash when forming a pointer to a reference would be needed in std::initalizer_list Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/52794] gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr52027.c fails on x86_64/i386-apple-darwin*

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52794 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- This seems to be fixed by a change between r206040 and r206072. Due to pr59541 you need to revert r206070 for the file gcc/config/darwin.c.

[Bug bootstrap/59541] [4.9 Regression] Revision 206070 breaks bootstrap on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59541 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > The new failing tests are still there. I was wrong: gcc.dg/tree-prof/crossmodule-indircall-1.c passes.

[Bug bootstrap/59541] [4.9 Regression] Revision 206070 breaks bootstrap on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59541 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- I have reverted the changes in gcc/config/darwin.c done by r 206070 and bootstrap went fine. The new failing tests are still there.

[Bug target/59549] New: [SH] __builtin_return_address causes push/pop of PR

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59549 Bug ID: 59549 Summary: [SH] __builtin_return_address causes push/pop of PR Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Comp

[Bug fortran/59547] [OOP] Problem with using tbp specification function in multiple class procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59547 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|una

[Bug fortran/59547] [OOP] Problem with using tbp specification function in multiple class procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59547 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- The following should be sufficient (regtesting now): Index: gcc/fortran/class.c === --- gcc/fortran/class.c(revision 206083) +++

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #12 from Thiago Macieira --- Thanks, rebuilding!

[Bug fortran/59547] [OOP] Problem with using tbp specification function in multiple class procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59547 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid C

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/59226] [4.9 Regression] ICE: in record_target_from_binfo, at ipa-devirt.c:661

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59226 --- Comment #15 from David Kredba --- I am sorry, I can't. When I did -nostdlib link on all object files, it linked. Only full link command with all libraries causes ICE for me and I do not now how to reduce it/identify.

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Dec 18 16:50:06 2013 New Revision: 206090 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206090&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/59539 * config/i386/sse.md (_loadu, _loaddqu): Ne

[Bug libfortran/59513] [4.7/4.8/4.9] Fortran runtime error: Sequential READ or WRITE not allowed after EOF marker, possibly use REWIND or BACKSPACE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Fortran runtime error: |[4.7/4.8/4.9] Fortran

[Bug c++/59548] Abort after copying std::unordered_map in debug mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59548 --- Comment #3 from Max Kellermann --- This is a regression by svn r195253. >From the commit message: "* include/debug/unordered_map.h: Undo previous commit. Default copy and move constructors."

[Bug target/59460] [4.9 Regression] ICE with -mips16 and __attribute__((nomips16))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59460 --- Comment #1 from Robert Suchanek --- Ping Where should I look at or what else could be done to resolve this without reverting the patch for pr58115?

[Bug libfortran/59513] Fortran runtime error: Sequential READ or WRITE not allowed after EOF marker, possibly use REWIND or BACKSPACE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513 --- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres --- I also see the problem with gfortran 4.7.3.

[Bug c++/59548] Abort after copying std::unordered_map in debug mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59548 --- Comment #2 from Max Kellermann --- Created attachment 31473 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31473&action=edit Delete the implicit copy constructor in C++11 mode to detect bugs like this one

[Bug c++/59548] Abort after copying std::unordered_map in debug mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59548 --- Comment #1 from Max Kellermann --- Created attachment 31472 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31472&action=edit Bug fix: call only _Base constructor, no implicit _Safe_sequence_base copy

[Bug c++/59548] New: Abort after copying std::unordered_map in debug mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59548 Bug ID: 59548 Summary: Abort after copying std::unordered_map in debug mode Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug rtl-optimization/59535] [4.9 regression] -Os code size regressions for Thumb1/Thumb2 with LRA

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59535 Vladimir Makarov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Sounds just like uncovering a latent bug in cselib?

[Bug fortran/59547] Problem with using tbp specification function in multiple class procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59547 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/57681] Possible missing break in cp-array-notation.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57681 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libfortran/59513] Fortran runtime error: Sequential READ or WRITE not allowed after EOF marker, possibly use REWIND or BACKSPACE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513 --- Comment #9 from ARuopp --- BTW: "At line 652 of file"is correct. Line 655 was including some comments from my side... I didn't want to confuse

[Bug fortran/59450] [OOP] ICE for type-bound-procedure expression in module procedure interface

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59450 --- Comment #9 from b...@miller-mohr.de --- Hi, verified that the ICE is gone in gcc version 4.9.0 20131217 (experimental). Thanks a lot. However, there is still a problem. As it is no longer an ICE I filed a new bug 59547 Cheers Marcus

[Bug fortran/59547] New: Problem with using tbp specification function in multiple class procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59547 Bug ID: 59547 Summary: Problem with using tbp specification function in multiple class procedures Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug libfortran/59513] Fortran runtime error: Sequential READ or WRITE not allowed after EOF marker, possibly use REWIND or BACKSPACE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/59436] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- Doesn't seem to be related to make -jN, I can reproduce it every few iterations of: rm i686-pc-linux-gnu/bits/stdc++.h.gch/O2ggnu++0x.gch; /usr/src/gcc/obj825/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc -B/usr/src/gcc/obj825/.

[Bug libfortran/59513] Fortran runtime error: Sequential READ or WRITE not allowed after EOF marker, possibly use REWIND or BACKSPACE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513 --- Comment #7 from ARuopp --- Execute with: xfoil < xfoil.naca.run1

[Bug libfortran/59513] Fortran runtime error: Sequential READ or WRITE not allowed after EOF marker, possibly use REWIND or BACKSPACE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513 --- Comment #6 from ARuopp --- Hi, thank you very much for your effort. Compiling is not the problem. Try to execute the script, which I attached. Without the "backspace" modification, xfoil ends with the error message: At line 655 of file ../

[Bug libfortran/59513] Fortran runtime error: Sequential READ or WRITE not allowed after EOF marker, possibly use REWIND or BACKSPACE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513 --- Comment #5 from ARuopp --- Created attachment 31469 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31469&action=edit test script for running xfoil with output in file this is a test script for testing xfoil in running in batch mode. what

[Bug c++/59111] [4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE on invalid usage of auto in return type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59111 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/59111] [4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE on invalid usage of auto in return type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59111 --- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek --- *** Bug 59110 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c++/59110] [4.9 Regression] [c++1y] ICE using auto in cast

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59110 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Target|m68k-linux |m68k-*-* CC|

[Bug gcov-profile/59542] [4.9 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed during Firefox build with 'gold'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59542 --- Comment #2 from Teresa Johnson --- Thanks, I am able to reproduce now with the gold linker option. Investigating... Teresa On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:52 AM, trippels at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=595

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- Created attachment 31468 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31468&action=edit Preprocessed source

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab --- Between r205951 and r205984.

[Bug fortran/59493] [OOP] ICE: Segfault on Class(*) pointer association

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59493 --- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- The fix has been committed to trunk and the 4.8 branch, so that it will be included in the upcoming releases 4.9.0 and 4.8.3.

[Bug c++/59083] -fisolate-erroneous-paths produces illegal instruction with enabled -fprofile-generate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59083 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/59436] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 --- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Also seen on x86_64-apple-darwin13 at r206072 (only once). Note that on x86_64-apple-darwin13 I see random PCH failures when I do the check with -j8, e.g.: WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.dg/pc

[Bug libgomp/59546] wrong behavior with reduction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59546 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- i is uninitialized before the reduction, so if you add some number of threads to an uninitialized value, you can get pretty much anything. Also, there is no guarantee !$omp parallel will create exactly omp_ge

[Bug fortran/58991] ICE with associate and character string constant

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58991 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libgomp/59546] New: wrong behavior with reduction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59546 Bug ID: 59546 Summary: wrong behavior with reduction Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgomp As

[Bug other/59545] New: Signed integer overflow issues

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59545 Bug ID: 59545 Summary: Signed integer overflow issues Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other Ass

[Bug fortran/59493] [OOP] ICE: Segfault on Class(*) pointer association

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59493 --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Wed Dec 18 12:36:00 2013 New Revision: 206085 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206085&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2013-12-18 Janus Weil Backport from mainline 2013-12-1

[Bug fortran/59411] [F03] Problem with TYPE(C_PTR) constant initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59411 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/22007] Stack overflow in g++.dg/eh/cleanup1.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22007 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/59544] New: Vectorizing store with negative stop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59544 Bug ID: 59544 Summary: Vectorizing store with negative stop Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimiza

function cast leads to gcc abort command

hi, in the following code: func.c i tried to cast an int(int,int) function into an int(int) function an got the gcc warning and note: func.c:13:32: warning: function called through a non-compatible type [enabled by default] func.c:

[Bug fortran/55207] [F08] Variables declared in the main program should implicitly get the SAVE attribute

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55207 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED Assignee|una

[Bug c/59520] a possible inconsistency in error diagnostics with "-pedantic -std=c99"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59520 --- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > The main concerns for diagnostics in such cases are (a) that they are > > meaningful and (b) that invalid code gets at least one error

[Bug rtl-optimization/58668] [4.8/4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cond_exec_process_insns, at ifcvt.c:339

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58668 --- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou --- > So like this? Note, the USE/CLOBBER change for flow_find_cross_jump > has been added in 2011 for 4.7 as PR43920 fix: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg02246.html Yes, let's try that, but use

[Bug rtl-optimization/58668] [4.8/4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cond_exec_process_insns, at ifcvt.c:339

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58668 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 31466 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31466&action=edit gcc49-pr58668.patch So like this? Note, the USE/CLOBBER change for flow_find_cross_jump has been added in 2011 f

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8) > Because otherwise it can generate an aligned load, and I thought when user > explicitly writes he wants an unaligned load we should honor it, perhaps for > some reas

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Because otherwise it can generate an aligned load, and I thought when user explicitly writes he wants an unaligned load we should honor it, perhaps for some reason the alignment info can't be trusted etc. ix86

[Bug c/59520] a possible inconsistency in error diagnostics with "-pedantic -std=c99"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59520 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/57422] [4.9 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in dominated_by_p with custom flags

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57422 Andrey Belevantsev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassign

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) > Created attachment 31464 [details] > gcc49-pr59539.patch > > So like this instead? The half-merged AVX512f support makes any changes > hard, it isn't clear if the

[Bug debug/59418] [4.9 regression] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2221

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59418 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/22007] Stack overflow in g++.dg/eh/cleanup1.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22007 --- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #5 from Kai Tietz --- > Issue seems to be solved for 32-bit and 64-bit windows on cygwin-host. I > can't > reproduce issue there anymore for 4.9 and 4.8. > > Is issue stil

[Bug debug/59418] [4.9 regression] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2221

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59418 --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Wed Dec 18 10:34:00 2013 New Revision: 206084 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206084&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR debug/59418 * dwarf2cfi.c (dwarf2out_frame_debug_cfa_offset):

[Bug middle-end/35545] virtual call specialization not happening with FDO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #11

[Bug c++/35535] stl_vector.h Compilation error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35535 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug tree-optimization/50955] [4.7 Regression] IVopts incorrectly rewrite the address of a global memory access into a local form.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 --- Comment #19 from bin.cheng --- > > >not about an iv use appearing in memory reference while not marked as > >address_p, and can be fixed by revise the existing check condition, is > >it true? > > No, even expressing an address this way is br

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 31464 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31464&action=edit gcc49-pr59539.patch So like this instead? The half-merged AVX512f support makes any changes hard, it isn't clear

[Bug lto/59543] [4.9 Regression] lto1: fatal error: Cgraph edge statement index out of range

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59543 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #1) > Thank you, > can you, please, check that the problem appears still after > 2013-12-17 Jan Hubicka > > * ipa-utils.h (possible_polymorphic_call_tar

[Bug rtl-optimization/58668] [4.8/4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cond_exec_process_insns, at ifcvt.c:339

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58668 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou --- > Perhaps we can ignore those always in flow_find_head_matching_sequence? Yes, that seems to be the most sensible thing to do, so that count_bb_insns, flow_find_cross_jump and flow_find_head_matching_sequence

[Bug rtl-optimization/58668] [4.8/4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cond_exec_process_insns, at ifcvt.c:339

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58668 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #6) > > I think the problem is that ifcvt relies on consistent counting of insns, > > but the various functions count different things. > > What kind of insns is respon

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > > From a quick look at the patch, the proposed patch doesn't support masked > > insns. > > > > I think it is better to introduce corresponding sse.md expanders for

[Bug lto/59543] [4.9 Regression] lto1: fatal error: Cgraph edge statement index out of range

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59543 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug target/59539] Missed optimisation: VEX-prefixed operations don't need aligned data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59539 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > > Created attachment 31463 [details] > > gcc49-pr59539.patch > > From a quick look at the patch, the proposed patch do

[Bug tree-optimization/50955] [4.7 Regression] IVopts incorrectly rewrite the address of a global memory access into a local form.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 --- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de --- "amker.cheng at gmail dot com" wrote: >http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 > >bin.cheng changed: > > What|Removed |Added >-

[Bug rtl-optimization/58668] [4.8/4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cond_exec_process_insns, at ifcvt.c:339

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58668 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou --- > I think the problem is that ifcvt relies on consistent counting of insns, > but the various functions count different things. What kind of insns is responsible for the discrepancy that leads to the ICE? >

  1   2   >