On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 8:11 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:26 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:39 AM liuhongt wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hmm, I would suggest you put reg_needed into the class and accumulate
> > > > over all vec_construct, with your
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 8:41 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The following testcase ICEs with RTL checking, because it sets if
> XINT (SET_SRC (set), 1) is UNSPEC_SET_GOT without checking if SET_SRC (set)
> is actually an UNSPEC, so any time we see any other insn with PARALLEL
> and a SET in
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 8:35 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The following testcase ICEs, because the signbit2 expander uses an
> explicit SUBREG in the pattern around match_operand with register_operand
> predicate. If we are unlucky enough that expansion tries to expand it
> with some
gcc/ChangeLog:
* common/config/riscv/riscv-common.cc
(riscv_subset_list::check_conflict_ext): Check zcd conflicts
with zcmt and zcmp.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/arch-29.c: New test.
* gcc.target/riscv/arch-30.c: New test.
---
RISC-V newlib patch send, one for libgloss and another one for libm,
the libm issue is because we don't have right long double support,
however newlib has supported that few months ago, and porting effort
is minor, so I just port that to fix the issue :)
Hi!
The following testcase ICEs with RTL checking, because it sets if
XINT (SET_SRC (set), 1) is UNSPEC_SET_GOT without checking if SET_SRC (set)
is actually an UNSPEC, so any time we see any other insn with PARALLEL
and a SET in it which is not an UNSPEC we ICE during RTL checking or
access
On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 10:43:57AM -0700, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 12/1/23 10:33, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Shall we tweak that somehow? If the argument names are unimportant, perhaps
> > it is fine to leave that out, but shouldn't we always use @var{...} around
> > the parameter names when
Hi!
The following testcase ICEs, because the signbit2 expander uses an
explicit SUBREG in the pattern around match_operand with register_operand
predicate. If we are unlucky enough that expansion tries to expand it
with some SUBREG as operands[1], we have two nested SUBREGs in the IL,
which is
Committed! Thanks Kito.
BR,
Fei
On 2023-12-04 15:01 Kito Cheng wrote:
>
>LGTM again :)
>
>On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 2:44 PM Feng Wang wrote:
>>
>> Rebase and resend this patch due to it was not added into patchwork
>> before. Kito had already reviewed it. Please refer to
>>
On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:26 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:39 AM liuhongt wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm, I would suggest you put reg_needed into the class and accumulate
> > > over all vec_construct, with your patch you pessimize a single v32qi
> > > over two separate v16qi for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112830
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I think the assert can be relaxed to make truncation OK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108473
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112827
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112818
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
that's in my bisect range, yeah, got a few steps to go..
Like r14-5990-gb4a7c1c8c59d19, but the patch optimized for udot_prod.
Since (zero_extend) (unsigned char)-> int is equal
to (zero_extend)(unsigned char) -> short
+ (sign_extend) (short) -> int
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,}.
Ready push to trunk.
It should be safe to
LGTM again :)
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 2:44 PM Feng Wang wrote:
>
> Rebase and resend this patch due to it was not added into patchwork
> before. Kito had already reviewed it. Please refer to
> https://www.mail-archive.com/gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org/msg327499.html
>
> This patch add the Zvkb subset
Committed. Thanks Kito and Jeff.
BR
Fei
On 2023-11-28 13:03 Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
>On 11/27/23 20:09, Kito Cheng wrote:
>> Personally I don't like to play with the pattern order to tweak the
>> code gen since it kinda introduces implicit relation/rule here, but I
>> guess the only way to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112822
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112820
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112819
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112818
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112836
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Thanks for chasing this down. This has been driving me nuts for a while but I
hadn't dug into it yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112841
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note clang also gets this "wrong".
You can see that from:
```
const char* const animals[] = {
"aardvark",
"bluejay",
"catte",
};
int main (int argc, char* argv[]) {
const char* animals2_array1[3];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112814
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112813
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Rebase and resend this patch due to it was not added into patchwork
before. Kito had already reviewed it. Please refer to
https://www.mail-archive.com/gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org/msg327499.html
This patch add the Zvkb subset of crypto vector extension. The
corresponding test cases have aslo been
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112841
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
x280 is one of SiFive core, and it release for a while, also
upstream LLVM already support that.
[1] https://www.sifive.com/cores/intelligence-x280
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv-cores.def: Add sifive-x280.
* doc/invoke.texi (RISC-V Options): Add sifive-x280
RISC-V ISA implication rules become little bit complicated than before,
it may come with condition, so this commit extend the capability of
riscv_implied_info_t, also make it more...C++ize.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* common/config/riscv/riscv-common.cc (riscv_implied_predicator_t): New.
Extract the logic of checking conflict extensions to a standard alone
function, prepare to add more checking logic.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* common/config/riscv/riscv-common.cc
(riscv_subset_list::check_conflict_ext): New.
(riscv_subset_list::parse): Move checking conflict ext.
2023-12-04 11:37 juzhe.zhong wrote:
Will split again as you mentioned. Thanks.
Feng Wang
>Hi, eswin.
>
>Thanks for contributing vector crypto support.
>
>It seems patches mess up. Could you rebase your patch to the trunk GCC cleanly
>and send it again.
>
>The patches look
.i.e. for below cases.
a[0] = b1;
a[1] = b2;
..
a[n] = bn;
There're extra dependences when contructing the vector, but not for
scalar store. According to experiments, it's generally worse.
The patch adds an cut-off heuristic when vec_stmt is just
vec_construct and vector store. It
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112841
Bug ID: 112841
Summary: typeof_unqual is not removing qualifiers from array
types
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
In serious high register pressure case (appended in this patch):
We see vluxei8.v v0,(s1),v1,v0.t which is not allowed.
Since according to RVV ISA:
+;; The destination vector register group for a masked vector instruction
cannot overlap the source mask register (v0),
+;; unless the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112816
liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101017
liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112583
--- Comment #9 from JuzheZhong ---
=== gfortran: Unexpected fails for rv64gcv lp64d medany ===
FAIL: gfortran.dg/dollar_edit_descriptor_3.f -O0 output pattern test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/dollar_edit_descriptor_3.f -O1 output
On 12/2/23 05:51, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
foo in the unroll-5.C testcase ICEs because cp_parser_pragma_unroll
during parsing calls maybe_constant_value unconditionally, which is
fine if !processing_template_decl, but can ICE otherwise.
While just calling fold_non_dependent_expr there instead
On 12/1/23 17:42, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/1/23 12:32, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/14/23 11:10, Patrick Palka wrote:
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for
trunk?
-- >8 --
Wait, I got this on my machine?
../../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain-trunk/gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi:29774: misplaced }
../../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain-trunk/gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi:29786: misplaced }
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 10:43 AM Kito Cheng wrote:
>
> LGTM
>
> On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 5:16 AM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112824
liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot
Hi, eswin.
Thanks for contributing vector crypto support.
It seems patches mess up. Could you rebase your patch to the trunk GCC cleanly
and send it again.
The patches look odd to me, for example:
// ZVBB
-DEF_VECTOR_CRYPTO_FUNCTION (vandn, zvbb, full_preds, u_vvv_ops, zvkb_or_zvbb)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112822
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
Created attachment 56784
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56784=edit
creduce minimized test case
Attached creduce minimized test case. Use -O3 -mcpu=power10 to recreate.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59390
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56536
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56536
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112813
--- Comment #2 from JuzheZhong ---
https://godbolt.org/z/8bovzxYox
Confirm it has been fixed now.
Could you send a patch with test pr112813.c ? To avoid future regression.
Thanks.
This patch add the intrinsic functions(according to https://github.com/
riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/blob/eopc/vector-crypto/auto-generated/
vector-crypto/intrinsic_funcs.md) for crypto vector Zvksh extension. And all
the test cases are added for api-testing.
Co-Authored by: Songhe Zhu
This patch add the intrinsic functions(according to https://github.com/
riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/blob/eopc/vector-crypto/auto-generated/
vector-crypto/intrinsic_funcs.md) for crypto vector Zvknh[ab] extension. And all
the test cases are added for api-testing.
Co-Authored by: Songhe Zhu
This patch add the intrinsic functions(according to https://github.com/
riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/blob/eopc/vector-crypto/auto-generated/
vector-crypto/intrinsic_funcs.md) for crypto vector Zvksed extension. And all
the test cases are added for api-testing.
gcc/ChangeLog:
*
This patch add the intrinsic functions(according to https://github.com/
riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/blob/eopc/vector-crypto/auto-generated/
vector-crypto/intrinsic_funcs.md) for crypto vector Zvkned extension. And all
the test cases are added for api-testing.
gcc/ChangeLog:
*
This patch add the intrinsic functions(according to https://github.com/
riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/blob/eopc/vector-crypto/auto-generated/
vector-crypto/intrinsic_funcs.md) for crypto vector Zvkg extension. And all
the test cases are added for api-testing.
Co-Authored by: Songhe Zhu
This patch add the intrinsic functions(according to https://github.com/
riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/blob/eopc/vector-crypto/auto-generated/
vector-crypto/intrinsic_funcs.md) for crypto vector Zvbc extension. And all
the test cases are added for api-testing.
Co-Authored by: Songhe Zhu
On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 3:04 AM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> Jakub Jelinek writes:
> > Hi!
> >
> > The following testcase ICEs on x86_64-linux since df_note_add_problem ()
> > call has been added to mode switching.
> > The problem is that the pro_and_epilogue pass in
> > prepare_shrink_wrap ->
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112572
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
LGTM
On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 5:16 AM Christoph Müllner <
christoph.muell...@vrull.eu> wrote:
> This patch documents the optimization parameter
> riscv-strcmp-inline-limit, which can be used to tweak the behaviour
> of -minline-strcmp and -minline-strncmp.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112829
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
Hi Ajit,
on 2023/12/1 17:10, Ajit Agarwal wrote:
> Hello Kewen:
>
> On 24/11/23 3:01 pm, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> Hi Ajit,
>>
>> Don't forget to CC David (CC-ed) :), some comments are inlined below.
>>
>> on 2023/10/8 03:04, Ajit Agarwal wrote:
>>> Hello All:
>>>
>>> This patch add new pass to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112788
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112825
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112825
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4e5f5a8ae82c5f4f714102d2437175ec366f644c
commit r14-6100-g4e5f5a8ae82c5f4f714102d2437175ec366f644c
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112829
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Zaitsev ---
Am I right that right now in GCC there are no ready-to-use alternatives to "int
__llvm_profile_write_buffer(char *Buffer)" from LLVM and it should be
implemented somehow manually (as you described)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112829
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
One way is to simple replace all of the functions in gcov-io.c and implement
them, gcov_open, etc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108473
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
gitlab works but savannah URLs still do not. (the URL I tested is in bug 107333
).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108473
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #7 from Mark
The recent change to represent language and target attribute tables using
vec.h's array_slice template class triggers an issue/bug in older g++
compilers, specifically the g++ 4.8.5 system compiler of older RedHat
distributions. This exhibits as the following compilation errors during
bootstrap:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108473
--- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard ---
Also looking at f944c5b2a894f866fc50e06ba90fb5dbd902ba36 "Bug 1167919: See
Also: support debbugs.gnu.org tracker"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112825
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Committed as it is obvious fix.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv.md: Rostify the constraints.
---
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md | 19 +--
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
index
Snapshot gcc-14-20231203 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/14-20231203/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 14 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112837
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112825
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gaius at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112825
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
Following up on commit: 301dec8533460152c4dd61f46c8e9276e169c49a.
Indeed m2 shouldn't attempt to generate target libraries when performing make
all-gcc. Currently it generates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112830
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112837
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101017
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-12-19 00:00:00 |2023-12-3
--- Comment #4 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100988
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91354
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89270
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||saaadhu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112840
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This seems more like something for analyzier rather than a generic warning due
to it requires keeping track of the path where the access is located.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112840
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112840
Bug ID: 112840
Summary: feature request: warn on incorrect tagged union value
access
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112831
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112831
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102199
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||luigighiron at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112839
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
On 12/3/23 05:23, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi!
On 2023-12-03T08:41:59+0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Jeff Law:
Anyway, this test was the one I was most concerned about. Basically
we're testing that on a !dfp target that the builtins are not available.
It expects a warning, but gets an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112839
Bug ID: 112839
Summary: Unable to default initialize member variable in
specific circumstances
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112838
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Ahmad Nour from comment #2)
>
> Thanks for confirmation.
> I tried with clang-12 -Wall -Wextra main.cpp, but I didn't get that
> hint/note. Am I missing something?
Oh I tried with -std=c++20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112828
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112838
--- Comment #2 from Ahmad Nour ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Confirmed, I thought I had saw an issue filed that is very smilar to this.
>
>
> Note clang provides the context:
>
> :5:7: note: in instantiation of member
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112835
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112838
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-12-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112838
Bug ID: 112838
Summary: Compiler is unable to show the exact error location
when calling copy ctor for a non-copyable object
Product: gcc
Version: 10.5.0
Status:
203175403-geef6aea3052-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20231203 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112836
--- Comment #1 from Bruno Haible ---
Created attachment 56779
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56779=edit
proposed fix
Although the error is not easily reproducible, it is easy to analyze
and fix:
The piece of error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112836
Bug ID: 112836
Summary: gcc fails when job control is used
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
Did you know it's possible to read my post and ruminate upon its meaning
without responding this way? I bet you didn't know that.
I'm not asking for any of your 'help', in case it wasn't obvious. I'm quite
used to solving the GCC project's problems myself by now, since the GCC project
seems
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023, 18:19 Dave Blanchard, wrote:
> Hello all, while bootstrapping GNAT onto my cross compiled system with GCC
> 10.x I found that the make script leaves something to be desired.
>
> First off it doesn't add the host prefix to the cross compiler binaries;
> it calls gnatmake,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112406
--- Comment #25 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c0dc30099d39ef6d1b6c8c81418c726aa660768
commit r14-6096-g4c0dc30099d39ef6d1b6c8c81418c726aa660768
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
