[Bug testsuite/88290] [9 regression] 23_containers/deque/erasure.cc fails after r266672

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88290 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug tree-optimization/88285] [9 Regression] gcc.dg/predict-22.c fails on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88285 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Version|6.4.1 |9.0 Target Milestone|---

[Bug libgomp/88303] libgomp does not repect RUNTESTFLAGS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88303 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- Libgomp certainly does respect RUNTESTFLAGS, I use make check-target-libgomp RUNTESTFLAGS=c.exp=atomic-2.c and similar very often. Isn't the problem that toplevel check-fortran depends on check-target-libgom

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug tree-optimization/88283] ICE in try_improve_iv_set, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:6677

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88283 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/88291] [9 Regression] asan ICE in asan_clear_shadow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88291 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug tree-optimization/71109] gcc ICE at -O3 on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "maybe_record_trace_start"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71109 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #10

[Bug target/65496] ICE: in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2318 with -O3 -fsched2-use-superblocks -mavx512dq --param=max-pending-list-length=0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65496 Arseny Solokha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asolokha at gmx dot com --- Comment #5

[Bug lto/88297] [9 Regression] Assembler Error: symbol `_Z41__static_initialization_and_destruction_0ii.constprop.0' is already defined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- So before the patch we were just lucky, right? When seeing the patches I wondered whether we instead want to add a clone_count member to cgraph_node (which we could stream) and use that for the .NUM suffix.

[Bug tree-optimization/88309] New: ICE: Floating point exception (in is_miss_rate_acceptable)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88309 Bug ID: 88309 Summary: ICE: Floating point exception (in is_miss_rate_acceptable) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code

[Bug c++/88258] [9 Regression] Infinite loop emitting diagnostics in the C++ front-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88258 --- Comment #5 from Arseny Solokha --- Should this PR be closed now?

[Bug debug/88308] New: ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2309

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88308 Bug ID: 88308 Summary: ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2309 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/88299] [9 Regression] COMMON in a legacy module produces bogus warnings in dependent code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88299 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/88278] Fails to elide zeroing of upper vector register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88278 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 --- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 45138 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45138&action=edit QEMU traces for --with-cpu=cortex-m3 / QEMU --cpu cortex-m3

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 45137 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45137&action=edit QEMU traces for --with-cpu=default / QEMU --cpu arm926

[Bug middle-end/88246] Abort signal terminated program collect2 - munmap_chunk(): invalid pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88246 Andreas Krebbel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED --- Comment #11 from Andreas Kr

[Bug c++/88258] [9 Regression] Infinite loop emitting diagnostics in the C++ front-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88258 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/88291] [9 Regression] asan ICE in asan_clear_shadow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88291 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/88301] [8/9 Regression] Optimization regression with undefined unsigned overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Keywords|

[Bug target/80080] S390: Isses with emitted cs-instructions for __atomic builtins.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80080 --- Comment #16 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: iii Date: Mon Dec 3 09:49:02 2018 New Revision: 266734 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266734&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Repeat jump threading after combine Consider the following RTL: (

[Bug tree-optimization/88301] [8/9 Regression] Optimization regression with undefined unsigned overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug middle-end/88302] __gcov_indirect_call_profiler_v2 and first_run profiling can be cheaper with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88302 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Doesn't that mean to instrument at link-time instead?

[Bug libgomp/88303] libgomp does not repect RUNTESTFLAGS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88303 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libquadmath/88306] lgammaq_r

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88306 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug fortran/88304] [9 Regression] ICE in use_pointer_in_frame, at tree-nested.c:267

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Target Mil

[Bug target/88282] [9 Regression] ICE in df_install_refs at gcc/df-scan.c:2379

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88282 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ra Target Milestone|---

[Bug fortran/88304] [9 Regression] ICE in use_pointer_in_frame, at tree-nested.c:267

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88304 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Prior

[Bug target/88282] [9 Regression] ICE in df_install_refs at gcc/df-scan.c:2379

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88282 --- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina --- > I'll see what can I do in RA. I have an idea. If it works the patch will > be ready on the next week. Thanks Vladimir!

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- I do see different output with and without r266620 (attaching vcond_1.s.ok and vcond_1.s.ko). They are now checking different condition codes: $ diff vcond_1.s.ok vcond_1.s.ko1014c1014 < cmplt p1.b

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 45140 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45140&action=edit vcond_1.s.ko (after r266620)

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 45139 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45139&action=edit vcond_1.s.ok (before r266620)

[Bug libquadmath/88307] lgammaq incorrectly sets signgam

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88307 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libquadmath/88307] lgammaq incorrectly sets signgam

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88307 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug target/88309] ICE: Floating point exception (in is_miss_rate_acceptable), target assigning alignent of 4 bits(!) to vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88309 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/88305] Implement P0019R8, C++20 std::atomic_ref

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88305 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/88302] __gcov_indirect_call_profiler_v2 and first_run profiling can be cheaper with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88302 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug testsuite/88310] New: [9 Regression] Guarded profile use + reorder tests have become UNSUPPORTED

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88310 Bug ID: 88310 Summary: [9 Regression] Guarded profile use + reorder tests have become UNSUPPORTED Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug testsuite/88310] [9 Regression] Guarded profile use + reorder tests have become UNSUPPORTED

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88310 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-linux-gnu, |

[Bug middle-end/88302] __gcov_indirect_call_profiler_v2 and first_run profiling can be cheaper with LTO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88302 --- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka --- > The way GCC exports internal API for plugins, all functions are externally > visible. Unless plugins are disabled, the linker receives -rdynamic and so all > non-static functions appear in the ELF dynamic tab

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 45141 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45141&action=edit gcc9-pr88287.patch Ok, reproduced in my incomplete cross with that option (no binutils), but can't reproduce on

[Bug rtl-optimization/88311] New: mlongcall indirections are optimised away

mr 1,11 # 33 [c=4 l=4] stack_restore_tie/0 .cfi_restore 31 .cfi_def_cfa_register 1 blr # 34 [c=4 l=4] simple_return .cfi_endproc .LFE0: .size main,.-main .ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.0 20181203 (experiment

[Bug c++/88312] New: [9 regression] Mishandled explicitly provided parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88312 Bug ID: 88312 Summary: [9 regression] Mishandled explicitly provided parameter pack Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- Ha, yes the testcase checks whether the assembler supports .arch_extension sve, that's why it's unsupported in your testcase. Here is the full list of regressions I noticed: g++.target/aarch64/sve/vcond_1

[Bug testsuite/85368] [8 regression] phi-opt-11 test fails on IBM Z

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85368 --- Comment #16 from Christophe Lyon --- Yes, it's OK on my side. Thanks!

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45141|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon --- Yes, that works, thanks!

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Dec 3 13:04:57 2018 New Revision: 266736 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266736&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/88287 * g++.target/aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C: Adjus

[Bug tree-optimization/71109] gcc ICE at -O3 on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "maybe_record_trace_start"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71109 --- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool --- So should we close it as WORKSFORME?

[Bug c++/88312] [9 regression] Mishandled explicitly provided parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88312 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Target Milestone|---

[Bug testsuite/88310] [9 Regression] Guarded profile use + reorder tests have become UNSUPPORTED

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88310 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ibhagatgnu at gmail dot com Target Mi

[Bug c++/88313] New: generic lambda in default template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88313 Bug ID: 88313 Summary: generic lambda in default template argument Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug tree-optimization/71109] gcc ICE at -O3 on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "maybe_record_trace_start"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71109 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Dec 3 13:30:41 2018 New Revision: 266738 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266738&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/71109 * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr7110

[Bug tree-optimization/71109] gcc ICE at -O3 on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in "maybe_record_trace_start"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71109 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/88314] New: range calculation of shift

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88314 Bug ID: 88314 Summary: range calculation of shift Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/88301] [8 Regression] Optimization regression with undefined unsigned overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||9.0 Summary|[8/9 Regression]

[Bug tree-optimization/88301] [8 Regression] Optimization regression with undefined unsigned overflow

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Dec 3 13:38:20 2018 New Revision: 266739 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266739&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-12-03 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/88301

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- So fixed?

[Bug target/88287] [9 Regression] aarch64/sve/vcond_1.C fails since r266620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88287 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/88297] [9 Regression] Assembler Error: symbol `_Z41__static_initialization_and_destruction_0ii.constprop.0' is already defined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka --- Originally we maintained things safe by having the global counter and not using same suffixes (i.e. constprop/wpa etc.) during early, wpa and late optimization, so things did not conflict. I wonder how the con

[Bug tree-optimization/88314] range calculation of shift

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88314 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|

[Bug c++/88312] [9 regression] Mishandled explicitly provided parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88312 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/88315] New: SAD and DOT_PROD SLP reductions with initial value != 0 create wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88315 Bug ID: 88315 Summary: SAD and DOT_PROD SLP reductions with initial value != 0 create wrong code Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/85598] [7/8/9 Regression] Incorrect warning only at -O2 and -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85598 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org --- Com

[Bug target/88316] New: numerous big-endian issues with compatibility implementations of vector intrinsics for powerpc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88316 Bug ID: 88316 Summary: numerous big-endian issues with compatibility implementations of vector intrinsics for powerpc Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libgomp/88303] libgomp does not repect RUNTESTFLAGS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88303 --- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 09:56:21AM +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88303 > > Richard Biener changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu --- The testcase failed on many targets.

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug fortran/87919] Incorrect fortran handling of -fno-* options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87919 --- Comment #2 from Fritz Reese --- Author: foreese Date: Mon Dec 3 15:42:51 2018 New Revision: 266745 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266745&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-12-03 Fritz Reese Mark Eggleston PR fortran/8791

[Bug tree-optimization/88315] SAD and DOT_PROD SLP reductions with initial value != 0 create wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88315 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- I wonder about following, on i686-linux it FAILs with older trunk and succeeds with current trunk. Without the (useless) stack realignment the right value of stack pointer happened to be in exactly that slo

[Bug libgomp/88303] libgomp does not repect RUNTESTFLAGS

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88303 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 08:37:32AM +, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88303 > > --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- > Libgomp certainly does respect RUNTES

[Bug rtl-optimization/88317] New: ICE: Segmentation fault (in split_reg -> bitmap_set_bit -> bitmap_list_link_element)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88317 Bug ID: 88317 Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault (in split_reg -> bitmap_set_bit -> bitmap_list_link_element) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Ke

[Bug c++/88313] generic lambda in default template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88313 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug other/88318] New: new test case gcc.dg/independent-cloneids-1.c fails on big endian

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88318 Bug ID: 88318 Summary: new test case gcc.dg/independent-cloneids-1.c fails on big endian Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libitm/88319] New: all-target and all-target-libitm build targets fail for libitm.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88319 Bug ID: 88319 Summary: all-target and all-target-libitm build targets fail for libitm. Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/88320] New: GCC suggests variables that don't exist yet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320 Bug ID: 88320 Summary: GCC suggests variables that don't exist yet Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/88320] GCC suggests variables that don't exist yet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320 --- Comment #1 from Jonny Grant --- Created attachment 45144 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45144&action=edit test case

[Bug inline-asm/87984] [7/8/9 Regression] wrong code for local reg var input to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87984 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #13

[Bug target/81266] FAIL: 30_threads/thread/native_handle/typesizes.cc execution test on darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81266 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/88321] New: Crosscompiled gcc does not use precompiled as

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88321 Bug ID: 88321 Summary: Crosscompiled gcc does not use precompiled as Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: boo

[Bug inline-asm/87984] [7/8/9 Regression] wrong code for local reg var input to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87984 --- Comment #14 from Alexander Monakov --- With -fno-tree-fre it's still broken. How long will GCC play this sort of whack-a-mole with ad-hoc restrictions to gimple optimizations (PR 29877, PR 42491, PR 61572)? And this: > for fixed registers

[Bug fortran/87919] Incorrect fortran handling of -fno-* options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87919 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Dec 3 17:10:50 2018 New Revision: 266761 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266761&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR fortran/87919 * options.c (SET_FLAG, SET_BITFLAG, SET_B

[Bug inline-asm/87984] [7/8/9 Regression] wrong code for local reg var input to asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87984 --- Comment #15 from Alexander Monakov --- Typo: PR 42491 should have said PR 43491. Hopefully more obviously-broken testcase with an inline function: static inline void ff(int *o) { register int a asm("eax"); a = 1; asm("add %1, %0

[Bug libstdc++/88322] New: Implement C++20 library features.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88322 Bug ID: 88322 Summary: Implement C++20 library features. Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug c++/88323] New: implement C++20 language features.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323 Bug ID: 88323 Summary: implement C++20 language features. Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug bootstrap/88321] Crosscompiled gcc does not use preinstalled as

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88321 --- Comment #1 from Daniel Fruzynski --- Update: there is workaround for this, pass "--with-ld=/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-ld --with-as=/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-as" to configure script. I also tried to use "--with-ld=x86_64-w64-mingw32-ld --with-as=x

[Bug c++/88320] GCC suggests variables that don't exist yet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #1) > Created attachment 45144 [details] > test case Reproduced here, as it's tiny and more convenient in a comment than as an attachment: // g++ -Wall -O2 -o suggest

[Bug c++/88320] GCC suggests variables that don't exist yet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #0) > Suggestion on line 5 of a variable which is acutally the return value, and > doesn't exist yet. Better to only suggest alternative as variables that > exist alrea

[Bug c++/88324] New: segfault with constexpr lambda in template arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88324 Bug ID: 88324 Summary: segfault with constexpr lambda in template arguments Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/64242] Longjmp expansion incorrect

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 --- Comment #14 from Wilco --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13) > I wonder about following, on i686-linux it FAILs with older trunk and > succeeds with current trunk. Without the (useless) stack realignment the > right value of stack

[Bug c++/88323] implement C++20 language features.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||meta-bug Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/88102] Implement P0542R5, C++20 contracts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88102 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug lto/88297] [9 Regression] Assembler Error: symbol `_Z41__static_initialization_and_destruction_0ii.constprop.0' is already defined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297 --- Comment #5 from michael.ploujnikov at oracle dot com --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > So before the patch we were just lucky, right? When seeing the patches I > wondered whether we instead want to add a clone_count member to

[Bug c++/88320] GCC suggests variables that don't exist yet

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88320 --- Comment #4 from Jonny Grant --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > (In reply to Jonny Grant from comment #0) > > Suggestion on line 5 of a variable which is acutally the return value, and > > doesn't exist yet. Better to only sug

[Bug libstdc++/88101] Implement P0528R3, C++20 cmpxchg and padding bits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88101 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug lto/88297] [9 Regression] Assembler Error: symbol `_Z41__static_initialization_and_destruction_0ii.constprop.0' is already defined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297 --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka --- > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297 > > --- Comment #5 from michael.ploujnikov at oracle dot com --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > So before the patch we were just lucky,

[Bug libstdc++/88322] Implement C++20 library features.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88322 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||meta-bug Status|UNCONFIRMED

  1   2   >