https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100854
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
I'm testing
diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
index a25d59fa77b..4dab4d60773 100644
--- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
+++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
@@ -8842,6 +8842,10 @@
gcc define __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ according to
builtin_define_with_int_value ("__FLT_EVAL_METHOD__",
c_flt_eval_method (true));
and guess we need to handle things like:
/* GCC only supports one interchange type right now, _Float16. If
we're evaluating _Float16 in 16-bit precision, then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38943
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-07-20 00:00:00 |2021-12-23
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82390
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.1.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50135
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|SUSPENDED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53777
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39094
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100854
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
On 12/10/2021 3:04 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
It happens that options are parsed and various diagnostics happen
in finish_options. That's a proper place as the function is also called
for optimize/target attributes (pragmas). However, it is possible that
target overwrites an option from command
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102595
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52053|0 |1
is obsolete|
On 12/8/2021 9:49 AM, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
Even with -Wno-system-headers enabled, the -Winvalid-memory-order
code tries to make sure calls to atomic functions with invalid
memory orders are diagnosed even though the C atomic functions
are defined as macros in the system
> I’m not sure what the fix should be, either. We could use fixinclude to make
> the darwin headers happy, but we don’t really have a macro to provide the
> right value. Like a __FLT_EVAL_METHOD_OLDSTYLE__ macro.
>
> What should be the float_t and double_t types for FLT_EVAL_METHOD == 16?
>
Hi,
> See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla//show_bug.cgi?id=100854 .
I found that, indeed, but what I struggle to see is: this behaviour of
__FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ has been around for several years now, so why aren’t there
more tests failing?
I’m not sure what the fix should be, either. We could use
On 12/17/2021 2:42 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
Since all computations in tree-object-size are now done in sizetype and
not HOST_WIDE_INT, comparisons after conversion to HOST_WIDE_INT would
be incorrect. Instead, truncate unknown (object_size_type) to sizetype
to compare with the computed
Snapshot gcc-9-20211223 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20211223/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80929
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 14:24 FX via Gcc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some recently introduced tests have been failing for several weeks on
> x86_64-apple-darwin.
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cond_op_maxmin__Float16-1.c
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr102464-copysign-1.c
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr102464-fma.c
> FAIL:
Hi,
Some recently introduced tests have been failing for several weeks on
x86_64-apple-darwin.
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cond_op_maxmin__Float16-1.c
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr102464-copysign-1.c
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr102464-fma.c
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr102464-maxmin.c
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103785
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 from
Restore i686 bootstrap by requiring TARGET_64BIT for any_mul_highpart
peephole.
PR bootstrap/103785
* config/i386/i386.md: Require TARGET_64BIT for any_mul_highpart
peephole.
---
gcc/config/i386/i386.md | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99620
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
l_7 = a$l_12 - _1;
k_8 = l_7 > a$l_12;
vs:
l_6 = a$l_11 - b$l_12;
k_7 = a$l_11 < b$l_12;
Hi David, hi everone,
I’m trying to understand how best to fix or silence the several failures in
gcc.dg/analyzer that occur on x86_64-apple-darwin. Some of them, according to
gcc-testresults, also occur on other non-Linux targets. See for example, the
test results at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99548
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
#include
#include
#if defined(_MSC_VER)
#include
#elif defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__i386__)
#include
#endif
using field_number =
std::conditional_t=8,std::array,std::array>;
namespace intrinsics
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99539
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99551
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
if-conversion succeeded through noce_try_cmove_arith
Removing jump 8.
deleting insn with uid = 8.
deleting insn with uid = 11.
deleting insn with uid = 10.
deleting block 3
Merging block 4 into block 2...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99228
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, the trunk no longer does the if conversion:
complex_sgn(std::complex const&):
.LFB2678:
.cfi_startproc
vmovsd xmm0, QWORD PTR [rdi]
vxorpd xmm1, xmm1, xmm1
vcomisd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103820
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
index 284b9507466..9d6786c5c2e 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
@@ -8588,7 +8588,8 @@ (define_peephole2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98977
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98977
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103820
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Roger Sayle from comment #3)
> Thanks for investigating this HJ (I'm having difficulty configuring my
You can bootstrap 32bit GCC on Linux/x86-64 if 32-bit libraries are
available.
> system to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103820
--- Comment #3 from Roger Sayle ---
Thanks for investigating this HJ (I'm having difficulty configuring my system
to reproduce this). Is the TARGET_64BIT guard needed by both peephole2s, or is
one sufficient to restore bootstrap? Your
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102595
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Comment on attachment 52053
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52053
patch
This patch fixes the problem in the PR and addresses a few
niggles I found as I poked gfortran. Some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103821
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103821
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103821
Bug ID: 103821
Summary: [12 Regression] huge compile time (jump threading) at
-O3 for simple code
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102595
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103785
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103820
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103820
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
caused:
make[5]: ***
[/export/gnu/import/git/sources/gcc/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Make-lang.in:167:
ada/exp_cg.o] Error 1
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 12.0.0 20211223 (experimental) (i686-linux) Storage_Error stack overflow or
erroneous memory access
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103818
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103819
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Summary|[12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103819
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103815
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note temp*temp is really ((int)temp)*((int)temp) due to interger promotion
rules in c/c++.
ome/dani/Projects/contributions/serenity/Build/i686/Root
--disable-nls --with-newlib --enable-shared --enable-languages=c,c++
--enable-default-pie --enable-lto --enable-threads=posix
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.0 20211223 (experimental) (
* gcc.target/i386/smuldi3_highpart.c: Replace long with long long.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/smuldi3_highpart.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/smuldi3_highpart.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/smuldi3_highpart.c
Sorry, sent an incomplete email. it was missing this part:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 03:12:32PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > +;; int fegetround(void)
> > +;;
> > +;; This expansion for the C99 function only expands for compatible
> > +;; target libcs. Because it needs to return one of
Hi Segher,
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 03:12:32PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 08:48:47PM -0300, Raoni Fassina Firmino wrote:
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > * builtins.c (expand_builtin_fegetround): New function.
> >
0 20211023 (experimental), gcc (GCC) 12.0.0
20211216 (experimental), and gcc (GCC) 12.0.0 20211223 (experimental) (current
version: commit ef26c151c14a87177d46fd3d725e7f82e040e89f) checking the fix of
bugs 102687 and 103073 there.
On 12/22/2021 5:57 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
I replaced and verified http:// links for various domains.
Ready to be installed?
Tahnks,
Martin
gcc/ada/ChangeLog:
* doc/share/gnu_free_documentation_license.rst: Replace http://
with https.
* gnat-style.texi: Likewise.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103817
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103817
Bug ID: 103817
Summary: Bootstrap broken on x86_64-apple-darwin21
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103816
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 2:22 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 12:38 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 11:44:08AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > The problem is in
> > >
> > > (define_memory_constraint "TARGET_MEM_CONSTRAINT"
> > > "Matches any valid memory."
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103816
Bug ID: 103816
Summary: ICE: in vect_build_slp_tree_2, at tree-vect-slp.c:1748
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52830
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
--- Comment #26 from David Edelsohn ---
As Bill mentioned, one can increase the alignment of a large constant, but
there is no way for the hooks that set alignment to recognize that the constant
will be assigned to variable with stricter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79724
--- Comment #4 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
The current situation is the result of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=864
Comment 20 by Dave Korn (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=864#c20)
is spot on:
> ... means that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79724
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48110
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103815
Bug ID: 103815
Summary: Misoptimization of a bounded do/while loop
Product: gcc
Version: og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10)
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92944
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||florin at iucha dot net
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103809
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 17:56, François Dumont via Libstdc++ <
libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> On 21/12/21 7:28 am, Daniel Krügler wrote:
> > Am Di., 21. Dez. 2021 um 07:08 Uhr schrieb François Dumont via
> > Libstdc++ :
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Is there a chance for this patch to be integrated for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103773
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ef26c151c14a87177d46fd3d725e7f82e040e89f
commit r12-6106-gef26c151c14a87177d46fd3d725e7f82e040e89f
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Thu
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 13:10, Martin Liška wrote:
> >> On 11/22/21 20:01, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >>> I've already reverted the change. So I will include a fix into the next
> >>> version.
> >>> Thanks for notifying.
> >>
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >> Am I correct that the patch set is installed again?
On 11/30/21 05:17, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 at 19:16, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/22/21 20:01, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
I've already reverted the change. So I will include a fix into the next version.
Thanks for notifying.
Hello.
Am I correct that the patch set is installed
On 12/22/21 22:09, Azat Khuzhin via Gcc-patches wrote:
So what is the right way here?
- migrate all tests
- write test only for setbuffer()
- do not add any tests, since they are covered in llvm repo
Hello.
Yes, we don't automatically sync sanitizer tests when we merge from master.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98662
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103797
--- Comment #17 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to hubicka from comment #16)
> > >
> > > It could be done, but I was under impression that the sequence to load
> > > 1.0f
> > > into topmost elements nullifies the benefit of operation to divide
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
--- Comment #25 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Before the gimplification change the initializer {1,} was promoted to a
> static const and given an alignment of 128; due to this part of the code:
>
> if (align > DECL_ALIGN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79724
--- Comment #2 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
It's puzzling, because although I've never read any Ada code, I can see there
is some logic in place that should deal with it. In make.adb there is:
Gcc : String_Access := Program_Name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79724
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98552
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98598
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98662
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Before GCC 6, we accepted the code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103797
--- Comment #16 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> >
> > It could be done, but I was under impression that the sequence to load 1.0f
> > into topmost elements nullifies the benefit of operation to divide two
>
> Sure, so perhaps we
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 10:35 AM Roger Sayle wrote:
>
> Hi Uros,
>
> A huge thanks for the list of suggested improvements to the -Oz related
> patches.
> I've combined them altogether in the submission below, which makes sense now
> that everything is implemented using peephole2. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91008
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Hi Uros,
A huge thanks for the list of suggested improvements to the -Oz related patches.
I've combined them altogether in the submission below, which makes sense now
that everything is implemented using peephole2. The implementation of
push/pop via peephole2 is exactly as you've suggested, also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98523
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98450
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103797
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #12)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > At least on your short testcase clang doesn't use divps either.
> > We do support mulv2sf3, addv2sf3 etc. but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 103814, which changed state.
Bug 103814 Summary: Internal error while compiling concepts, exception and
fstream modules.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103814
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 103814, which changed state.
Bug 103814 Summary: Internal error while compiling concepts, exception and
fstream modules.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103814
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99244
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||samuel.hangouet at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103814
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
From: LiaoShihua
because riscv32 not support __int128, so skip if int128 not support.
gcc/testsuite\ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/pr103302.c: skip if int128 not support
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr103302.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103797
--- Comment #14 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #13)
> Created attachment 52051 [details]
> Patch that implements v2sf division
This patch also enables vectorization of the testcase from Comment #7. Using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103797
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 52051
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52051=edit
Patch that implements v2sf division
Please try the attached patch, for the following testcase:
--cut here--
float
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103814
Bug ID: 103814
Summary: Internal error while compiling concepts, exception and
fstream modules.
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021, 06:07 Alessandro Baretta via Gcc,
wrote:
>
> How I might help diagnose and fix this bug? For instance, how does one
> run gcc from inside gdb? I know that gcc is just the driver and
> cc1plus is the actual compiler, so I presume I'd have to run cc1plus
> inside gdb, but as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103813
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103808
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
Summary|[12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103786
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103786
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ac0730c25b357b5fc75e18677cec27a546c1b64
commit r12-6104-g9ac0730c25b357b5fc75e18677cec27a546c1b64
Author: Feng Xue
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88842
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
