https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780
--- Comment #10 from Mikael Persson ---
Thats great.
Saw the dates on the other pr, jikes this has been around a while.
Testing
z.containers_[0]->i is clever, ill add a test for that ( or more generally
z.containers_[0]->begin(), static_assert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103766
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103766
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I tried to reproduce it with the following GNU C code but it still
worked:struct __st_parameter_dt
{
const char *filename ;
int linenum;
int flags;
int unit;
};
[[gnu::noinline,
On December 18, 2021 11:56:48 PM GMT+01:00, apinski--- via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>From: Andrew Pinski
>
>Before match-and-simplify was used in phiot, the location of the
>new stamtents were all of that of the conditional, this adds that
>back as I did not realize gimple_simplify didn't do that for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65289
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86120
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67946
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49910
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53928
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||6.3.0, 7.1.0
Target Milestone|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755
--- Comment #6 from Dmitry Prokoptsev ---
That would also work, I suppose (it even outperforms my original approach by a
tiny bit -- 33 ns for v2 vs 36 for my original implementation).
There are a few build errors in the alternative
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53928
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755
--- Comment #5 from Dmitry Prokoptsev ---
Created attachment 52029
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52029=edit
Build fix for alternative implementation v2.
Hi Ruoyao,
Thank you for your attention.
> GCC 12 development cycle is at stage 3 (general bugfixing) now. So a
> new port have to wait until stage 1 of GCC 13 begins (in mid 2022, I
> guess).
I know it is stage3, but we are a new target, it's ok for GCC 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103767
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103767
Bug ID: 103767
Summary: libiberty.a built with -fPIC is never going to be
installed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80126
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-19
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67441
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69557
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37471
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
I Notice LLVM does similarly on this testcase too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37471
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 5:59 PM Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This fixes
>
> gcc/cp/parser.c:4618:41: warning: narrowing conversion of '(char)(*(str +
> ((sizetype)i)))' from 'char' to 'unsigned char' [-Wnarrowing]
> 4618 | unsigned char s[3] = { '\'', str[i], '\'' };
> |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68150
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am shocked I have not seen this yet on aarch64 where
HARD_REGNO_CALL_PART_CLOBBERED is done for the vector/fpu registers as we only
save the bottom 64bits ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49157
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53861
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|middle-end
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101926
Bug 101926 depends on bug 65912, which changed state.
Bug 65912 Summary: x_rtl.x_frame_offset not updated after frame related insn
deleted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65912
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47562
Bug 47562 depends on bug 65912, which changed state.
Bug 65912 Summary: x_rtl.x_frame_offset not updated after frame related insn
deleted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65912
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65912
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54585
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|middle-end
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103765
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103765
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jeremy R. from comment #0)
> This would be a good enhancement, and I'd also be interested to learn why
> this strange behavior is occurring.
The reason for the difference is most likely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103766
--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
example optimised tree dump:
O0
;; Function sub (sub.0, funcdef_no=1, decl_uid=2979, cgraph_uid=1,
symbol_order=0)
__attribute__((fn spec (". ")))
void sub ()
{
struct __st_parameter_dt dt_parm.0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103766
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.0, 11.1.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103766
Bug ID: 103766
Summary: [12 Regression] Initialization of variable passed via
static chain is lost.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103765
Bug ID: 103765
Summary: Missed arithmetic simplification for multiplication +
division
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52000
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50037
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
On the trunk, I see no loop at all for the original testcase at -O3.
At -O2 -ftree-vectorize, I do see the loop but when I add -funroll-loops, the
loop is completely unrolled at the gimple level.
So maybe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #9)
> glibc cannot easily work around such unexpected relocations for static or
> hidden variables. Static PIE currently requires PI_STATIC_AND_HIDDEN, and
> with the GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103764
--- Comment #3 from Jean-Michaël Celerier ---
Wops, sorry for the noise, forgot that shared libs were "executable"
From: Andrew Pinski
Before match-and-simplify was used in phiot, the location of the
new stamtents were all of that of the conditional, this adds that
back as I did not realize gimple_simplify didn't do that for you.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64 with no regressions.
gcc/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103760
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
Snapshot gcc-11-20211218 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20211218/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103764
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And as expected, Clang gives the same results.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103412
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
Dear all,
committed as obvious after discussion with Steve: SIZEOF() cannot
accept a BOZ argument which has no defined type.
Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Thanks,
Harald
From fd74a2ee40456a1d1621e88738f8e57536194080 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Harald Anlauf
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2021
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103412
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd74a2ee40456a1d1621e88738f8e57536194080
commit r12-6059-gfd74a2ee40456a1d1621e88738f8e57536194080
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103764
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103745
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't think so. What -Wexceptions warns about is almost always a bug (why
would you write a shadowed catch handler that can never catch anything?).
But the choice of whether to only throw things
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 12:12:28AM +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch extends AC_PROG_GDC so that as well as checking for the
> existence of a GDC compiler, also validate that it has also been built
> with libphobos, otherwise warn or fail with the message that GDC is
> required to
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 10:33:12PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 9:43 PM HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
> > +(define_insn "rs6000_mffscrni"
> > + [(set (match_operand:DF 0 "gpc_reg_operand" "=d")
> > + (unspec_volatile:DF [(match_operand:DF 1 "u2bit_cint_operand" "n")]
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 10:13 AM Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 9:57 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/17/2021 9:10 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> > ---
>> > gcc/config.gcc | 1 +
>> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc
>>
On Fri, 2021-12-10 at 15:43 +0800, Chenghua Xu wrote:
> +#undef TARGET_ASM_CODE_END
> +#define TARGET_ASM_CODE_END loongarch_code_end
/* snip */
> +static void
> +loongarch_code_end (void)
> +{
> + if (NEED_INDICATE_EXEC_STACK)
> +/* Add .note.GNU-stack. */
> +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103764
Bug ID: 103764
Summary: Global std::string constructor not called
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103763
Bug ID: 103763
Summary: [12 regression]
gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splat-floatdouble.c fails
after r12-5988
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
LRA
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 9:57 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 12/17/2021 9:10 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > ---
> > gcc/config.gcc | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc
> > index c8824367b13..fe93a72a16c 100644
> > --- a/gcc/config.gcc
> > +++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103760
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82894
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Good __tunables_init code:
.L35:
movq$-88, %rax
leaqtunable_list(%rip), %rbx
movq%r8, %r12
subq%rbx, %rax
movq%rax, %r15
Bad __tunables_init
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 52028
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52028=edit
A testcase
There are dl-tunables.i good.s bad.s. Compiler options are
-std=gnu11 -fgnu89-inline -O2 -g -Wall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Good:
There are 16 section headers, starting at offset 0x21d8:
Section Headers:
[Nr] Name TypeAddress OffSize ES Flg
Lk Inf Al
[ 0] NULL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
elf/dl-tunables.c is miscompiled by -fpie.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
Bug ID: 103762
Summary: [12 Regression] glibc master branch is miscompiled by
r12-897
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103611
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31048012db98f5ec9c2ba537bfd850374bdd771f
commit r12-6058-g31048012db98f5ec9c2ba537bfd850374bdd771f
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80286
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31048012db98f5ec9c2ba537bfd850374bdd771f
commit r12-6058-g31048012db98f5ec9c2ba537bfd850374bdd771f
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32803
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e742722f76c70be303248da7ca4842198d4fd1cc
commit r12-6057-ge742722f76c70be303248da7ca4842198d4fd1cc
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103358
--- Comment #2 from Net Can ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #1)
> There was a long discussion about this between the various WG21 paper
> authors.
>
> The stated intend was that 'this' pointer and the 'lambda object pointer'
> were
On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 at 08:10, Navidullah Mehrtash wrote:
>
> I nedd gcc downloads link, may I have please!
Look where it says "Download" at https://gcc.gnu.org/
We only provide the sources, which you have to build yourself, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/InstallingGCC for help with that.
There
Allow returning dynamic expressions from ADDR_EXPR for
__builtin_dynamic_object_size and also allow offsets to be dynamic.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* tree-object-size.c (size_valid_p): New function.
(size_for_offset): Remove OFFSET constness assertion.
(addr_object_size): Build
Handle non-constant expressions in GIMPLE_CALL arguments. Also handle
alloca.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* tree-object-size.c (alloc_object_size): Make and return
non-constant size expression.
(call_object_size): Return expression or unknown based on
whether dynamic object
Handle GIMPLE_PHI and conditionals specially for dynamic objects,
returning PHI/conditional expressions instead of just a MIN/MAX
estimate.
This makes the returned object size variable for loops and conditionals,
so tests need to be adjusted to look for precise size in some cases.
Handle hints provided by __attribute__ ((access (...))) to compute
dynamic sizes for objects.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* tree-object-size.c: Include tree-dfa.h.
(parm_object_size): New function.
(collect_object_sizes_for): Call it.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
*
This patchset enhances the __builtin_dynamic_object_size builtin to
produce dynamic expressions for object sizes to improve coverage of
_FORTIFY_SOURCE.
Testing:
This series has been tested with build and test for i686, bootstrap with
ubsan and full bootstrap and test with x86_64. I
> Yes, but please put this ^^ explanation into the git commit log, and prepend
> the title line with Darwin:
Thanks, committed.
FX
From: Sören Tempel
The -fsplit-stack option requires the pthread_t TCB definition in the
libc to provide certain struct fields at specific hardcoded offsets. As
far as I know, only glibc provides these fields at the required offsets.
Most notably, musl libc does not have these fields. However,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99756
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96054
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to H. Peter Anvin from comment #0)
> __attribute__((error)) and __attribute__((warning)) are useful, but have, in
> some places, poor semantics.
__attribute__((error)) produces an error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103745
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30368
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 3:13 AM Sören Tempel wrote:
>
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > I think it should check OPTION_MUSL at runtime instead of
> > TARGET_GLIBC_MAJOR at compile time.
> > or rather opts->x_linux_libc == LIBC_MUSL
> > The others should be done similarly too.
>
> Thanks for pointing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62029
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||87403
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103759
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Siddhesh Poyarekar
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc032ec1ecb34b006f42e170ccb9d76aa42fd8eb
commit r12-6056-gcc032ec1ecb34b006f42e170ccb9d76aa42fd8eb
Author: Siddhesh Poyarekar
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> I think it should check OPTION_MUSL at runtime instead of
> TARGET_GLIBC_MAJOR at compile time.
> or rather opts->x_linux_libc == LIBC_MUSL
> The others should be done similarly too.
Thanks for pointing this out, I wasn't aware of OPTION_MUSL and
OPTION_GLIBC. However, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69929
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 2:44 AM soeren--- via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> From: Sören Tempel
>
> The -fsplit-stack option requires the pthread_t TCB definition in the
> libc to provide certain struct fields at specific hardcoded offsets. As
> far as I know, only glibc provides these fields at the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95165
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note one thing I Noticed is the with the testcase in comment #0 to reproduce
the PHI-OPT issue I need to use the following options: "-O2 -Wall -g0
-fdisable-tree-threadfull1". jump threading actually is
From: Sören Tempel
The -fsplit-stack option requires the pthread_t TCB definition in the
libc to provide certain struct fields at specific hardcoded offsets. As
far as I know, only glibc provides these fields at the required offsets.
Most notably, musl libc does not have these fields. However,
On Fri, 2021-12-17 at 15:45 +0800, Paul Hua via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> Thanks for your suggestion, Those macros can be removed, we will send
> the v4 version soon.
>
> Are there any problems in this series of patches?
I'm not a compiler expert, but I'll bootstrap it once my 5th
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 12:24:48PM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> Since all computations in tree-object-size are now done in sizetype and
> not HOST_WIDE_INT, comparisons with HOST_WIDE_INT based unknown and
> initval would be incorrect. Instead, use the sizetype trees directly to
> generate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103724
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103725
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.1.0, 7.5.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103725
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
#1 0x018fa008 in simplify_using_ranges::vrp_evaluate_conditional
(this=0x7fffd510, code=LE_EXPR, op0=,
op1=, stmt=) at
/home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/vr-values.c:2383
#2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95177
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
