[Bug c++/95618] [11 Regression] ICE in remap_type_1, at tree-inline.c:607

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95618 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/95621] Add CET(PTA_SHSTK) to march=tigerlake

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95621 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-10 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug lto/95620] [10/11 Regression] relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC32 against `.bss'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95620 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/95621] New: Add CET(PTA_SHSTK) to march=tigerlake

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95621 Bug ID: 95621 Summary: Add CET(PTA_SHSTK) to march=tigerlake Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug fortran/95613] ICE in main_block_label, at tree-cfg.c:1455

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95613 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/93121] std::bit_cast missing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93121 Lyberta changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lyberta at lyberta dot net --- Comment #2 from

[Bug c++/93638] [concepts] Dependent names in requires clause reported as different types when function definition is not inline

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93638 Lyberta changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 93638, which changed state. Bug 93638 Summary: [concepts] Dependent names in requires clause reported as different types when function definition is not inline https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93638

[Bug c/95588] No warning in -Wformat for narrowing formats

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95588 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org S

[Bug middle-end/95189] [10/11 Regression] memcmp being wrongly stripped like strcmp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95189 --- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor --- The priority is up to the GCC release managers but raising it won't make the fix available before 10.2 (except on trunk). Regardless, I should have a patch soon.

[Bug c++/95559] GCC fails to compile "{{}}" in some versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95559 --- Comment #3 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Haoxin Tu from comment #2) > $g++-8 test.cc ; ./a.out > 0 Here is > $g++-8 bug.cc ; ./a.out > 0

[Bug c++/95559] GCC fails to compile "{{}}" in some versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95559 --- Comment #2 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1) > I can't find a version of GCC that compiled this. Hi, so sorry I might use the wrong test case. Please try this case bug.cc instead #include int main(){ int

[Bug c++/95564] GCC rejects lambda expression with "noexcept(1+1)"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95564 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/95559] GCC fails to compile "{{}}" in some versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95559 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/95562] [10/11 Regression] ICE when using noexcept depending on boolean template parameter since r10-1280-g78f7607db4c53f8c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95562 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2

[Bug fortran/95614] ICE in build_field, at fortran/trans-common.c:301

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95614 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug sanitizer/95617] [11 regression] many excess errors starting with r11-1117

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95617 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška

[Bug lto/95620] New: [10/11 Regression] relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC32 against `.bss'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95620 Bug ID: 95620 Summary: [10/11 Regression] relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC32 against `.bss' Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rej

[Bug c++/95609] span could have better layout

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95609 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Niall Douglas from comment #0) > I would assume that the ABI ship has sailed, as usual Nope.

[Bug c++/95610] bogus error: "global qualification of class name is invalid"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95610 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|GCC fails to get global |bogus error: "global

[Bug c++/95345] Fold expressions don't work properly when pack expression has co_await

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95345 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/95345] Fold expressions don't work properly when pack expression has co_await

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95345 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57ae358584f402145bad6fede8c539a225f90966 commit r10-8266-g57ae358584f402145bad6fede8c539a225f90966 Author: Iain Sandoe Dat

[Bug c++/93638] [concepts] Dependent names in requires clause reported as different types when function definition is not inline

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93638 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug middle-end/95619] New: apparently in-bounds subscript in -Warray-bounds message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95619 Bug ID: 95619 Summary: apparently in-bounds subscript in -Warray-bounds message Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug sanitizer/95617] [11 regression] many excess errors starting with r11-1117

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95617 --- Comment #2 from Bill Seurer --- oops, thought I had included that: wn-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu -I/home/seurer/gcc/git/build/gcc-test/powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include -I/home/seurer/gcc/git/gc

[Bug c++/95618] New: [11 Regression] ICE in remap_type_1, at tree-inline.c:607

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95618 Bug ID: 95618 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in remap_type_1, at tree-inline.c:607 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug middle-end/95552] [11 Regression] VLA ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95552 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug sanitizer/95617] [11 regression] many excess errors starting with r11-1117

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95617 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/95617] New: [11 regression] many excess errors starting with r11-1117

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95617 Bug ID: 95617 Summary: [11 regression] many excess errors starting with r11-1117 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug sanitizer/95137] Sanitizers seem to be missing support for coroutines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137 --- Comment #24 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:006f28aefeb3be575239beddc7febe56dff463a2 commit r11-1129-g006f28aefeb3be575239beddc7febe56dff463a2 Author: Iain Sandoe Date: Tue

[Bug middle-end/95552] [11 Regression] VLA ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95552 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:77103685ff4b50b3c4d7ee76688bdf452acc82c7 commit r11-1127-g77103685ff4b50b3c4d7ee76688bdf452acc82c7 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Fr

[Bug c/95588] No warning in -Wformat for narrowing formats

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95588 --- Comment #1 from Nick Desaulniers --- In https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41467#c4, the code owner for Clang seems to indicate that we could move the warnings for narrowing prints (ie. printing an `int` with `%hh`) to a new warning flag w

[Bug c++/95616] [coroutines] coroutines with potentially-throwing 'co_await promise.final_suspend()' expressions should be ill-formed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95616 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09 Keywords|

[Bug c++/95615] [coroutines] Coroutine frame and promise is leaked if exception thrown from promise.initial_suspend()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95615 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/95616] New: [coroutines] coroutines with potentially-throwing 'co_await promise.final_suspend()' expressions should be ill-formed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95616 Bug ID: 95616 Summary: [coroutines] coroutines with potentially-throwing 'co_await promise.final_suspend()' expressions should be ill-formed Product: gcc Version:

[Bug fortran/95612] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_pointer_assign, at fortran/expr.c:4274

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95612 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug c++/95615] New: [coroutines] Coroutine frame and promise is leaked if exception thrown from promise.initial_suspend()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95615 Bug ID: 95615 Summary: [coroutines] Coroutine frame and promise is leaked if exception thrown from promise.initial_suspend() Product: gcc Version: 10.1.1 Status: UNCONFIR

[Bug c++/85270] Trivial assignment operator not considered such

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85270 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/95612] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_pointer_assign, at fortran/expr.c:4274

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95612 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/95614] ICE in build_field, at fortran/trans-common.c:301

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95614 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09 Status|UNC

[Bug fortran/95613] ICE in main_block_label, at tree-cfg.c:1455

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95613 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug fortran/95611] ICE in access_attr_decl, at fortran/decl.c:9075

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95611 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug fortran/95614] New: ICE in build_field, at fortran/trans-common.c:301

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95614 Bug ID: 95614 Summary: ICE in build_field, at fortran/trans-common.c:301 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/95613] New: ICE in main_block_label, at tree-cfg.c:1455

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95613 Bug ID: 95613 Summary: ICE in main_block_label, at tree-cfg.c:1455 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortra

[Bug target/95581] [11 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3260 since r11-959-gb825a22890740f341eae566af27e18e528cd29a7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |target --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor

[Bug fortran/95612] New: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_pointer_assign, at fortran/expr.c:4274

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95612 Bug ID: 95612 Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_pointer_assign, at fortran/expr.c:4274 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug fortran/95611] New: ICE in access_attr_decl, at fortran/decl.c:9075

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95611 Bug ID: 95611 Summary: ICE in access_attr_decl, at fortran/decl.c:9075 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fo

[Bug fortran/84245] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in delete_root, at fortran/bbt.c:150

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84245 --- Comment #5 from G. Steinmetz --- A few more disrupted cases : $ cat z03.f90 select type (n%& $ cat z04.f90 select type (n%m& $ cat z05.f90 select type (n( $ cat z06.f90 select type (n(& $ cat z07.f90 select type (n(m $ cat z08.f90 sele

[Bug c++/95610] New: GCC fails to get global variable via "::" in class specifier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95610 Bug ID: 95610 Summary: GCC fails to get global variable via "::" in class specifier Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug target/95381] [11 Regression]: Bootstrap on m68k fails with ICE: in operator[], at vec.h:867

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95381 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #4 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/95581] [11 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3260 since r11-959-gb825a22890740f341eae566af27e18e528cd29a7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581 --- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Bill Seurer from comment #6) > I tried the patch and it allowed me to build gcc on a power7 system. but AFAIU the discussion - the builtin has the wrong signature (and needs to be fixed)? or did I

[Bug fortran/94377] Won't compile when deallocating a parameterized derived type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94377 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/95581] [11 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3260 since r11-959-gb825a22890740f341eae566af27e18e528cd29a7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581 --- Comment #6 from Bill Seurer --- I tried the patch and it allowed me to build gcc on a power7 system.

[Bug c++/95609] New: span could have better layout

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95609 Bug ID: 95609 Summary: span could have better layout Product: gcc Version: 10.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assi

[Bug middle-end/95552] [11 Regression] VLA ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95552 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ef41587df9839d1dfc77dbc48a0830e42b36626e commit r11-1122-gef41587df9839d1dfc77dbc48a0830e42b36626e Author: Jason Merrill Date: Sa

[Bug c++/95608] New: c++20 wrong code for defaulted equality comparison on array member variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95608 Bug ID: 95608 Summary: c++20 wrong code for defaulted equality comparison on array member variables Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug c++/95607] New: Inconsistent treating of default argument instantiation as immediate context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95607 Bug ID: 95607 Summary: Inconsistent treating of default argument instantiation as immediate context Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug c++/95599] [coroutines] destructor for temporary operand to co_yield expression called before end of full-expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95599 --- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Lewis Baker from comment #3) > Also, I'm not sure why GCC is evaluating the second operand to operator,() > first and why it is constructing resource{1} _after_ the coroutine has > suspended. Noth

[Bug c++/95599] [coroutines] destructor for temporary operand to co_yield expression called before end of full-expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95599 --- Comment #3 from Lewis Baker --- I don't think that whether or not the awaitables or operands to co_yield are captured by reference / aliased should play into the sequencing of calls to the destructor. The destructors of temporaries should al

[Bug target/95469] [11 regression] several vperm test case failures after r11-736 on power 9 (only)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95469 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/95567] Defaulted virtual <=> has the wrong behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95567 --- Comment #1 from Barry Revzin --- To follow up on this, it's not the operator<=> being virtual that's significant but rather the class itself being polymorphic. This exhibits the same behavior: #include struct B { B(int i) : i(i) {} VIR

[Bug fortran/95215] [OMP] internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14079

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95215 --- Comment #2 from John Donners --- thanks for reviewing this. Indeed, the compiler bug does not occur when using the intelmicemul target: gfortran -foffload=x86_64-intelmicemul-linux-gnu -g -fopenmp -O3 bla.f90 /lib/../lib64/crt1.o: In functi

[Bug target/95347] rs6000 mcpu=future generating stfs instead of pstfs for pc-relative references

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95347 acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/95138] ICE on transfer to unlimited polymorphic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95138 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug libstdc++/71579] type_traits miss checks for type completeness in some traits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71579 kuzniar95 at o2 dot pl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kuzniar95 at o2 dot pl --- Comme

[Bug fortran/95215] [OMP] internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:14079

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95215 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/94235] worse debug info with O0 than with O2 with flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94235 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/95606] New: [10/11 regression] conflicts with std::is_constructible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95606 Bug ID: 95606 Summary: [10/11 regression] conflicts with std::is_constructible Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug tree-optimization/95056] [11 Regression] slp-perm-9.c fails on aarch64 after gbc484e250990393e887f7239157cc85ce6fadcce

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95056 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug debug/94235] worse debug info with O0 than with O2 with flto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94235 Pedro Alves changed: What|Removed |Added CC||palves at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 fr

[Bug c++/95596] string literal wrong overload resolution (char* vs std::string)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95596 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- gcc/cp/typeck.c does: if (cxx_dialect >= cxx11) pedwarn (loc, OPT_Wwrite_strings, "ISO C++ forbids converting a string constant to %qT", totype); else

[Bug c++/95596] string literal wrong overload resolution (char* vs std::string)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95596 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/93979] missing context in error message due to inheriting template constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93979 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09 CC|

[Bug middle-end/95189] [10/11 Regression] memcmp being wrongly stripped like strcmp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95189 --- Comment #5 from gcc at pkh dot me --- I'd like to point out that this regression impacts badly a production app. We're using this pattern to compare an input vector of floats to a vector of zeros, but the comparison always returns 0 now, which

[Bug tree-optimization/95056] [11 Regression] slp-perm-9.c fails on aarch64 after gbc484e250990393e887f7239157cc85ce6fadcce

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95056 Alex Coplan changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/95562] [10/11 Regression] ICE when using noexcept depending on boolean template parameter since r10-1280-g78f7607db4c53f8c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95562 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/95154] [11 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/abi/pure-virtual1.C -std=c++14 (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95154 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Target|ia64-*-*,*-*-darwin*|ia64-*-* Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/95560] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in comptypes, at cp/typeck.c:1498 since r10-4254-ge0d91792eec490d1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11 Regression] ICE in |[8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE

[Bug lto/95605] LTO and object files generated by dtrace -G

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95605 --- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose --- dtrace -G calls gcc to generate the .o file, and you can use the CC and CFLAGS environment vars to inject the options you need. Ugly, but you can avoid that by passing the appropriate options.

[Bug lto/95605] LTO and object files generated by dtrace -G

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95605 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|WAITING

[Bug testsuite/81058] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-vpmovu?swb-1.c scan-assembler-times vpmovu?swb.*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81058 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/95560] [10/11 Regression] ICE in comptypes, at cp/typeck.c:1498 since r10-4254-ge0d91792eec490d1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560 --- Comment #4 from Bernd Edlinger --- don't know if it helps, but with -Wshadow=compatible-local the regression begins probably earlier.

[Bug lto/95604] LTO doesn't pick up -fcf-protection flag for the link step

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95604 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #2) > Really? The documentation states: > > The macro "__CET__" is defined when -fcf-protection is used. > > so it's a preprocessor option as well? __CET__ check isn't

[Bug lto/95604] LTO doesn't pick up -fcf-protection flag for the link step

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95604 --- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose --- Really? The documentation states: The macro "__CET__" is defined when -fcf-protection is used. so it's a preprocessor option as well?

[Bug lto/95605] LTO and object files generated by dtrace -G

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95605 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug lto/95604] LTO doesn't pick up -fcf-protection flag for the link step

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95604 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #0) > Building the example from PR93966 with the -fcf-protection flag in the > compile step, but not in the link step, I get the error triggered by the -z > option. > > $ c

[Bug lto/95605] New: LTO and object files generated by dtrace -G

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95605 Bug ID: 95605 Summary: LTO and object files generated by dtrace -G Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto

[Bug lto/95604] New: LTO doesn't pick up -fcf-protection flag for the link step

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95604 Bug ID: 95604 Summary: LTO doesn't pick up -fcf-protection flag for the link step Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug c++/95560] [10/11 Regression] ICE in comptypes, at cp/typeck.c:1498 since r10-4254-ge0d91792eec490d1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95560 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Host|x86_64-w64-mingw32 | Ever confirmed|0

[Bug sanitizer/95603] [11 Regression] sanitizer_linux.cpp:1880:16: error: missing terminating ' character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95603 --- Comment #3 from Zdenek Sojka --- Thanks, all the rounds with asking at gcc-help, waiting for reply, and even recompiling this morning took too much time.

[Bug sanitizer/95603] [11 Regression] sanitizer_linux.cpp:1880:16: error: missing terminating ' character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95603 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug sanitizer/95603] [11 Regression] sanitizer_linux.cpp:1880:16: error: missing terminating ' character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95603 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Didn't r11-1083-g942a384ef9f38777df25b2bfa421ce6a07553a98 fix this?

[Bug fortran/95501] ICE in gfc_match_pointer_assignment, at fortran/match.c:1422

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95501 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug fortran/95502] ICE in gfc_check_do_variable, at fortran/parse.c:4446

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95502 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug sanitizer/95603] New: [11 Regression] sanitizer_linux.cpp:1880:16: error: missing terminating ' character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95603 Bug ID: 95603 Summary: [11 Regression] sanitizer_linux.cpp:1880:16: error: missing terminating ' character Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywor

[Bug c++/95562] [10/11 Regression] ICE when using noexcept depending on boolean template parameter since r10-1280-g78f7607db4c53f8c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95562 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||9.3.0 Known to fail|

[Bug tree-optimization/95569] ICE in tmmark：verify_ssa failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95569 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/95570] ICE: Segmentation fault in vect_loop_versioning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95570 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/95582] [11 Regression] LTO lean + PGO bootstrap is broken in Ada

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95582 --- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou --- > Yeah, that was for vector components. Not that I like it much. Can > the middle-end assume that the Ada boolean types only contain 0 or 1 > or are there other values that are supposed to be well-defined

[Bug target/95602] [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95602 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Resolut

  1   2   >