[Bug debug/58315] [4.9/5 Regression] Excessive memory use with -g

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315 Bug 58315 depends on bug 66688, which changed state. Bug 66688 Summary: [6 Regression] compare debug failure building Linux kernel on ppc64le https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66688 What|Removed |Add

[Bug debug/66688] [6 Regression] compare debug failure building Linux kernel on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66688 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug debug/68909] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |debug Target Milestone|---

[Bug c/68909] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/68908] inefficient code for _Atomic operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68908 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc64 | Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug debug/68909] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 Chengnian Sun changed: What|Removed |Added CC||chengniansun at gmail dot com --- Commen

[Bug testsuite/68629] FAIL: c-c++-common/attr-simd-3.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68629 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #3) > Hi Christophe, > > Could you paste the output of arm linux when compiling the testcase in > cilkplus effective target with -fcilkplus? The output is now:

[Bug c++/68782] [6 regression] bad reference member formed with constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68782 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #3) > Hmm, any element without TREE_CONSTANT should have caused us to return > the original CONSTRUCTOR. Perhaps the TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS stuff is not needed, but for TR

[Bug tree-optimization/68906] [6 Regression] ICE at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_ssa failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68906 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/68909] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- (In reply to Chengnian Sun from comment #2) > Is it related to this recently fixed bug? > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67778 Doesn't look like it, this one has been caused by: commit a196

[Bug debug/68909] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Thus, not a dup of PR65496.

[Bug tree-optimization/68906] [6 Regression] ICE at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_ssa failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68906 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug testsuite/68629] FAIL: c-c++-common/attr-simd-3.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68629 --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon --- After discussion on IRC, it seems better to keep your patch as-is, since cilk-plus is not supported on arm anyway.

[Bug c++/21802] Two-stage name lookup fails for operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21802 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/68845] -Werror=array-bounds=[12] doesn't turn warning into error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68845 --- Comment #3 from Franz Sirl --- Created attachment 37035 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37035&action=edit Alias -Warray-bounds to Warray-bounds= Tentative patch, no regressions. Please commit if OK, I don't have valid cr

[Bug debug/68909] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- This started with r229911, but it must be some RTL optimization bug instead.

[Bug c++/53223] [c++0x] auto&& and operator* don't mix inside templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/68910] New: SPARC/cypress: Poor code generation, huge stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68910 Bug ID: 68910 Summary: SPARC/cypress: Poor code generation, huge stack frame Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug rtl-optimization/66248] subreg truncation not hoisted from loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66248 --- Comment #2 from Jon Beniston --- Hi Steve. I'm not sure I'm follow your explanation. As I understand it, signed overflow is undefined behaviour (http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/120), so I'm not sure why we need to worry about changing the

[Bug target/68910] SPARC/cypress: Poor code generation, huge stack frame

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68910 --- Comment #1 from Sebastian Huber --- Code generation for leon3 is also quite bad.

[Bug target/68910] SPARC/cypress: Poor code generation, huge stack frame

Huber --- sparc-rtems4.12-gcc (GCC) 6.0.0 20151215 (experimental)

[Bug c++/63506] GCC deduces wrong return type of operator*() inside template functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63506 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com --- Comm

[Bug c++/63506] GCC deduces wrong return type of operator*() inside template functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63506 --- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: paolo Date: Tue Dec 15 10:18:13 2015 New Revision: 231646 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231646&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2015-12-15 Paolo Carlini PR c++/63506 * g++

[Bug c++/63506] GCC deduces wrong return type of operator*() inside template functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63506 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|paolo.carlin

[Bug target/68896] [ARM] target attribute ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68896 --- Comment #2 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org --- Currently not a bug, or rather implementation specified. According to the documentation 6.61.15 Function Specific Option Pragmas #pragma GCC target ("string"...) ... Each function that is defined

[Bug debug/68909] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2297

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/63628] [c++1y] cannot use decltype on captured arg-pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63628 --- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini --- The second and third variants work in mainline.

[Bug c++/68071] Generic lambda variadic argument pack cannot be empty

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68071 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/68819] Invalid "-Wmisleading-indentation" warning if location_t >=LINE_MAP_MAX_LOCATION_WITH_COLS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug ipa/66616] [4.9/5/6 regression] fipa-cp-clone ignores thunk

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66616 --- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor --- No, I'm still in the process of testing a slightly modified patch for 4.9.

[Bug c/68845] -Werror=array-bounds=[12] doesn't turn warning into error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68845 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #3) > Created attachment 37035 [details] > Alias -Warray-bounds to Warray-bounds= > > Tentative patch, no regressions. Please commit if OK, I don't have valid > cre

[Bug tree-optimization/68862] [6 Regression] g++.dg/torture/pr59163.C FAILs with -flive-range-shrinkage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68862 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/58796] throw nullptr not caught by catch(type*)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58796 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes, it's on my list. That's why I changed the target milestone to 6.0 a week ago.

[Bug target/24012] [4.9/5/6 regression] #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE breaks #include

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|5.4 |7.0 --- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wake

[Bug rtl-optimization/67477] [6 Regression] ICE in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2388

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67477 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||renlin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug rtl-optimization/67715] [6 Regression][ARM] ICE in cselib.c during reload_cse_regs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67715 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/67477] [6 Regression] ICE in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2388

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67477 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/68862] [6 Regression] g++.dg/torture/pr59163.C FAILs with -flive-range-shrinkage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68862 --- Comment #3 from Zdenek Sojka --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Started with r229086. > That said, I think it looks like an i386 backend problem. True, I have 7 FAILs of pr59163.C on x86 (x86_64 and *x32), but none on other ar

[Bug middle-end/68870] [6 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O1, -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68870 --- Comment #8 from Arseny Solokha --- I believe the following reproducer is for the issue reported here. Its further minimization yields backtrace listed in #c0. The only difference is that w/ the following not minimized snippet gcc ICEs in tre

[Bug target/66171] [6 Regression]: gcc.target/cris/biap.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66171 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug c/68911] New: wrong code at -Os and above on x86-64-linux-gnu (in 32- and 64-bit modes)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68911 Bug ID: 68911 Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86-64-linux-gnu (in 32- and 64-bit modes) Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/68863] Regular expressions: Backreferences don't work in negative lookahead

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68863 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4 Known to fail|

[Bug c++/68903] missing default initialization of member when combined with virtual imheritance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68903 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|blocker |normal

[Bug c++/68903] missing default initialization of member when combined with virtual inheritance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68903 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug rtl-optimization/67477] [6 Regression] ICE in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2388

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67477 --- Comment #7 from Renlin Li --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > The ICE has been on > (insn 105 746 971 5 (parallel [ > (set (reg:V16QI 60 d22 [720]) > (unspec:V16QI [ > (reg:V16

[Bug c/68911] [6 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above on x86-64-linux-gnu (in 32- and 64-bit modes)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68911 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/68905] [DR496] __is_trivially_copyable returns True for volatile class types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68905 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/68912] New: Wrong value category used in _Bind functor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68912 Bug ID: 68912 Summary: Wrong value category used in _Bind functor Product: gcc Version: 4.9.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rejects-valid Severity: normal Prior

[Bug libstdc++/68912] Wrong value category used in _Bind functor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68912 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/68911] [6 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above on x86-64-linux-gnu (in 32- and 64-bit modes)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68911 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- This goes wrong during vrp1. Analyzing # of iterations of loop 2 exit condition [e_6, + , 1] <= 93 bounds on difference of bases: -4294967202 ... 93 result: zero if e_6 > 94 # of iterations 94 -

[Bug tree-optimization/68862] [6 Regression] g++.dg/torture/pr59163.C FAILs with -flive-range-shrinkage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68862 --- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Not sure what to do about this though, most of the SSE* arithmetic > instructions use nonimmediate_operand or similar predicates, we'd have to > switch all of them

[Bug tree-optimization/68654] [6 Regression] CoreMark Pro performance degradation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654 --- Comment #11 from Alexander Fomin --- Created attachment 37037 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37037&action=edit Detailed dumps Attached the detailed dumps for optimized SSA tree.

[Bug libstdc++/68350] std::uninitialized_copy overly restrictive for trivially_copyable types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68350 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug libstdc++/68276] ios_base::_M_grow_words should use new (std::nothrow)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68276 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/66693] [C++17] std::tuple_size fails with const std::array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66693 Ville Voutilainen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug debug/66869] [6 regression] -Wunused-function no longer warns for static declarations without definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66869 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug debug/66869] [6 regression] -Wunused-function no longer warns for static declarations without definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66869 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Another possibility would be for warn_unused_function to add even the seemingly unused decls into the cgraph and let the cgraph code actually complain.

[Bug ipa/68851] [6 Regression] ICE: in set_comdat_group, at ipa-comdats.c:213

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68851 --- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor --- Author: jamborm Date: Tue Dec 15 13:07:15 2015 New Revision: 231648 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231648&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [PR 68851] Do not collect thunks in collect_callers 2015-12-15 Martin

[Bug debug/66869] [6 regression] -Wunused-function no longer warns for static declarations without definition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66869 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug other/66827] [6 Regression] left shifts of negative value warnings due to C++14 switch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66827 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug ipa/68851] [6 Regression] ICE: in set_comdat_group, at ipa-comdats.c:213

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68851 --- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor --- So the bug is basically fixed but I'd like to commit the patch to gcc 5 branch and an equivalent to 4.9 branch. Testing is in progress, I 'll close the bug after the patches are in.

[Bug bootstrap/66304] [6 Regression] Can't bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu with gcc 4.3.4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66304 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug bootstrap/66304] [6 Regression] Can't bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu with gcc 4.3.4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66304 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- Yes, it's fixed.

[Bug ipa/68913] New: gcc.dg/lto/pr61886 FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68913 Bug ID: 68913 Summary: gcc.dg/lto/pr61886 FAILs Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ipa Assignee: un

[Bug ipa/68913] gcc.dg/lto/pr61886 FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68913 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug tree-optimization/68914] New: [6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr45752.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68914 Bug ID: 68914 Summary: [6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr45752.c FAILs Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-opt

[Bug tree-optimization/68914] [6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr45752.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68914 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug tree-optimization/68915] gcc.dg/vect/pr46032.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68915 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug tree-optimization/68915] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr46032.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68915 Bug ID: 68915 Summary: gcc.dg/vect/pr46032.c FAILs Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/68916] [6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68916 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0

[Bug tree-optimization/68916] New: [6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68916 Bug ID: 68916 Summary: [6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c FAILs Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-

[Bug tree-optimization/67283] GCC regression over inlining of returned structures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67283 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sch...@linux-m68k.org --- Comment #14 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/67283] GCC regression over inlining of returned structures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67283 Bug 67283 depends on bug 67390, which changed state. Bug 67390 Summary: [6 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr64312.C -O1 (test for excess errors) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67390 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/67390] [6 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr64312.C -O1 (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67390 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/66867] Suboptimal code generation for atomic_compare_exchange

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66867 --- Comment #3 from Sebastian Huber --- clang 3.7 generates optimal code on x86 in both cases: .text .file "test.c" .globl f .align 16, 0x90 .type f,@function f:

[Bug c/68917] New: test suite failure for builtin-bitops-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68917 Bug ID: 68917 Summary: test suite failure for builtin-bitops-1.c Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug tree-optimization/67781] [5/6 Regression] wrong code generated on big-endian with -O1 -fexpensive-optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67781 --- Comment #8 from Thomas Preud'homme --- Looking more into find_bswap_or_nop, it became clear that the rsize loop is fine for both endianness because it operates on the result of the expression being analyzed and that result lies in register.

[Bug c++/58796] throw nullptr not caught by catch(type*)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58796 --- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt --- Apologies, Jonathan, I didn't see that. I was led here from some internal tracking and wasn't previously CC'd on the bug. Sorry for the noise.

[Bug libstdc++/68912] Wrong value category used in _Bind functor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68912 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Tue Dec 15 14:17:17 2015 New Revision: 231652 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231652&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix cv-qualifiers in std::bind invocation PR libstdc++/68912

[Bug other/66259] Combined gcc and binutils build from git-master fails, with gas/as-new not existing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66259 Roger Orr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rogero at howzatt dot demon.co.uk --- Comme

[Bug middle-end/21273] gensupport.c:collect_insn_data doesn't consider the constraints of match_scratch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21273 --- Comment #2 from Bernd Schmidt --- Author: bernds Date: Tue Dec 15 14:34:01 2015 New Revision: 231654 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231654&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Fix PR21273 PR middle-end/21273 * gensupport.c (collect_

[Bug c++/68918] New: spurious "invalid use of incomplete type" in trailing return type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68918 Bug ID: 68918 Summary: spurious "invalid use of incomplete type" in trailing return type Product: gcc Version: 5.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/68919] New: Null-pointer store not removed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68919 Bug ID: 68919 Summary: Null-pointer store not removed Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug bootstrap/68404] [6 Regression] PGO/LTO bootstrap failure on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68404 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCO

[Bug ipa/66616] [4.9/5/6 regression] fipa-cp-clone ignores thunk

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66616 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #13 fro

[Bug bootstrap/68404] [6 Regression] PGO/LTO bootstrap failure on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68404 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- While bisecting I also observed gcc spinning when building libgcc during phase-profile-feedback.

[Bug c/68907] bogus warning: right-hand operand of comma expression has no effect on an atomic_int preincrement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68907 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/68908] inefficient code for _Atomic operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68908 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amacleod at redhat dot com --- Comment #

[Bug c/68907] bogus warning: right-hand operand of comma expression has no effect on an atomic_int preincrement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68907 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Tue Dec 15 15:13:49 2015 New Revision: 231656 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231656&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c/68907 * c-typeck.c (build_atomic_assign): Set TREE

[Bug target/68674] ARM attribute target neon warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68674 --- Comment #5 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 37041 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37041&action=edit testcase without arm_neon parts more concise to avoid mixing the arm_neon intrinsincs

[Bug target/68908] inefficient code for _Atomic operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68908 --- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson --- I think we should rather handle this in the front end than with quite complex pattern matching. If we want to do any complex logic with atomics in the middle-end, we should change their representation so

[Bug c/68908] inefficient code for _Atomic operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68908 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Component|target |c --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---

[Bug libitm/68591] trans-mem: missing transactional read in transaction when using -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68591 --- Comment #3 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org --- This might be related to bug 68616.

[Bug rtl-optimization/68920] New: [6 Regression] Undesirable if-conversion for a rarely taken branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68920 Bug ID: 68920 Summary: [6 Regression] Undesirable if-conversion for a rarely taken branch Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/68763] [6 Regression] ICE: in verify_unstripped_args, at cp/pt.c:1132

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68763 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/68763] [6 Regression] ICE: in verify_unstripped_args, at cp/pt.c:1132

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68763 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Resolution|WORKSFORME

[Bug c/68908] inefficient code for _Atomic operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68908 --- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Doesn't seem to be ppc64le specific in any way, and doesn't affect just > preincrement. The inefficiency I was pointing out was the redundant syncs above the loop

[Bug tree-optimization/68906] [6 Regression] ICE at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_ssa failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68906 --- Comment #3 from Yuri Rumyantsev --- I've prepared simple fix which cures ICE. I will send it for review tomorrow. 2015-12-15 12:50 GMT+03:00 jakub at gcc dot gnu.org : > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68906 > > Jakub Jelinek c

[Bug libfortran/68867] numeric formatting problem in the fortran library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/63628] [c++1y] cannot use decltype on captured arg-pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63628 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #3) > The second and third variants work in mainline. Yes, they were fixed by the patch for bug 68309. We need a further fix to handle the original testcase.

  1   2   >