https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101723
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebiggers3 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104439
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104439
--- Comment #3 from Eric Biggers ---
I ran a bisection and found that the following commit fixed this bug:
commit c1cdabe3aab817d95a8db00a8b5e9f6bcdea936f
Author: Richard Earnshaw
Date: Thu Jul 29 11:00:31 2021 +0100
arm:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95126
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104059
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0103c2e4082c5a342a6834d31ea52bc7e5498016
commit r12-7089-g0103c2e4082c5a342a6834d31ea52bc7e5498016
Author: liuhongt
Date: Mon Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104439
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104439
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like it was fixed on the trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104439
Bug ID: 104439
Summary: arm crc feature not enabled in assembly for function
with crc target attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104438
Bug ID: 104438
Summary: Combine optimization exposed after pro_and_epilogue
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++14+] Error inheriting |[C++17+] Error inheriting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104271
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
I think it's related to r12-2666 which caused load-to-store-forwarding stall
issue, and we're working on pr103734, try to improve ipa-inline.
w -param=inline-min-speedup=3, we observe both performance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88798
--- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Wojciech Mula from comment #8)
> Thank you for the answer. Thus my question is: is it possible to delay
> conversion from kmasks into ints? I'm not a language lawyer, but I guess a
> `x binop y`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84568
palmer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||palmer at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104437
--- Comment #1 from Jan Engelhardt ---
Due to http://eel.is/c++draft/diff.cpp17.class#2 , it's probably going to be
(b).
However, adding inline, i.e.
inline S() {}
makes it compile again, so that case.. might be improperly rejected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104338
--- Comment #3 from Patrick O'Neill ---
Created attachment 52368
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52368=edit
Initial patch
Patch submitted to mailing list.
Subject: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: Add support for inlining subword atomic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104437
Bug ID: 104437
Summary: Constructor of templated class with full instantiation
name rejected in -std=c++2a
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104436
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104436
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-07
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104436
Bug ID: 104436
Summary: spurious -Wdangling-pointer assigning local address to
a class passed by value
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103872
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104417
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104417
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0c04ac0e15830b94a9f1e0715d92a4a2558dda03
commit r12-7087-g0c04ac0e15830b94a9f1e0715d92a4a2558dda03
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103872
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d2c0fad59745bf67aa6471e8c9e96c351f0de59
commit r12-7086-g9d2c0fad59745bf67aa6471e8c9e96c351f0de59
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102952
--- Comment #40 from Andrew Cooper ---
I've given the GCC-11 branch a test and everything appears to be in order.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104435
Bug ID: 104435
Summary: Infinite recursion in
rust_demangle(mangled="_RYAvB2_l", options=259)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104434
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Seen on
https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/blob/c5f280a7f0e875d83833d895b2b8b0e341efabf4/lapack-netlib/LAPACKE/src/lapacke_cgbbrd_work.c
where the code has:
if( LAPACKE_lsame( vect, 'b' ) ||
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104434
Bug ID: 104434
Summary: Analyzer doesn't know about "pure" and "const"
functions
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104425
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426
--- Comment #4 from Peter Dimov ---
FWIW, I agree with everything Martin Sebor says in PR71962.
-fallow-address-zero is an entirely separate feature, and shouldn't be implied
by -fsanitize=undefined.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
--- Comment #4 from Fedor Chelnokov ---
I think `using B::B;` is not the same as redefining each constructor with the
explicit call of base class constructor `C(int a) : B{(int)a}{}`.
Please consider this example proving it:
```
struct A {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101515
--- Comment #6 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
the following patch fixed this bug:
[opc@qinzhao-aarch64-ol8 latest_gcc]$ git diff
diff --git a/gcc/cp/cxx-pretty-print.cc b/gcc/cp/cxx-pretty-print.cc
index 4f9a090e520d..744ed0add5ba 100644
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And PR 67762
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Maybe a dup of my PR 71962
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101515
--- Comment #5 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
the root cause for this bug is:
1. there is no NAME for the pointer to member function type as the following:
(in cp/decl.cc)
tree
build_ptrmemfunc_type (tree type)
{
10655
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED|RESOLVED
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
But this is invalid code with a similar error message:
struct B {
B(int) {}
B(int&&) {}
};
struct C : B {
C(int a) : B{(int)a}{}
};
So the question is how is default constructor done, is it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
--- Comment #2 from Fedor Chelnokov ---
My personal feeling is that if a compiler accepts `B b(i);` then it must accept
`C c(i);` as well because of [namespace.udecl] p13:
> Constructors that are named by a using-declaration are treated as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104415
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-07
: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220207 (experimental) (GCC)
$ g++-12 -fmodules-ts -x c++-system-header memory
$ g++-12 -fmodules-ts main.cpp
/usr/bin/ld: /tmp/cca9Gc2j.o: in function `std::_Sp_make_shared_tag::_S_ti()':
main.cpp:(.text
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104432
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104432
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104432
Bug ID: 104432
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in operator() from
filter_memfn_lookup since r12-6080
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
MSVC and ICC reject this for the same reason as GCC. Are you sure this is not a
bug in clang?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104431
--- Comment #2 from Eyal Rozenberg ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> How did configure GCC?
I used:
./configure --disable-gnat --disable-fortran
(although I'm not sure --disable-fortran does anything).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104422
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104431
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104431
Bug ID: 104431
Summary: Provide better error message when GCC "multilib" is
missing
Product: gcc
Version: 8.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104427
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104427
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE with|ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104430
Bug ID: 104430
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_component_ref,
at fortran/trans-expr.cc:2742
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104427
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>Started between 2024 and 20211121 :
Started when __builtin_assoc_barrier support was added
(r12-5368-gefb7c51024ccad9df2) so this is not a regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104429
Bug ID: 104429
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_variable, at
fortran/trans-expr.cc:3056
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104428
Bug ID: 104428
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_trans_omp_declare_variant,
at fortran/trans-openmp.cc:7648
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104427
Bug ID: 104427
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gimplify_expr, at
gimplify.cc:15759
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104385
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104271
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #1)
> I think this patch has already been reverted by
> r12-3011-g1db70e61a92978377a648bbd90e383859fc0126b.
Unfortunately that revision does not help.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104419
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426
Bug ID: 104426
Summary: -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88798
--- Comment #8 from Wojciech Mula ---
Thank you for the answer. Thus my question is: is it possible to delay
conversion from kmasks into ints? I'm not a language lawyer, but I guess a `x
binop y` has to be treated as `(int)x binop (int)y`. If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104425
Bug ID: 104425
Summary: SFINAE hard error on failed resolution of << for
defined class in namespace
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
Swaroop Tekale changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |WORKSFORME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's not there because it was removed in GCC 3.4:
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/changes.html
You will get an error if you try to use it with 4.3.3
There is no bug report here, so I think it would have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
--- Comment #2 from Swaroop Tekale ---
It seems to be there on or before gcc-3.3.6:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3.6/gcc/Option-Summary.html#Option-Summary
Code Generation Options
See Options for Code Generation Conventions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
Such a flag never existed, there is only -Wvolatile.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104380
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5d2a330dee37ed10daa424d33ab1bcd5727c187b
commit r12-7084-g5d2a330dee37ed10daa424d33ab1bcd5727c187b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104424
Bug ID: 104424
Summary: -fvolatile, not documented in gcc-4.3.3
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24021
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104382
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #2)
> crayftn 11 & 12 output:
>
> destructor4(complicated) 2*2.
> destructor5 (simple2) 5
> destructor5 (simple2) 6
> destructor2(simple) 2*1
> destructor4(complicated)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104382
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
crayftn 11 & 12 output:
destructor4(complicated) 2*2.
destructor5 (simple2) 5
destructor5 (simple2) 6
destructor2(simple) 2*1
destructor4(complicated) 4., 5.
destructor5 (simple2) -1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104423
Bug ID: 104423
Summary: [libgomp, testsuite] Add means to do accelerator-only
testing in libgomp
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104422
Bug ID: 104422
Summary: nvptx: for-3.exe fail with driver 390.x
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103641
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.0
Summary|[11/12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102596
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104154
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Given we've run this code on a pretty wide variety of targets, I'm not too
concerned. The arc issue was the last one I'm aware of related to your ifcvt
changes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104410
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104379
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104421
Bug ID: 104421
Summary: The Ada.Directories.Modification_Time procedure does
not work for non-ASCII filenames in the Windows
environment.
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97006
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
This fixes it:
...
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ss
a/builtin-sprintf.c
index f90558e9b7ee..9368a2e0e50a 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104420
Bug ID: 104420
Summary: [12 Regression] Inconsistent checks for X * 0.0
optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104419
Bug ID: 104419
Summary: [[no_unique_address]] interaction with
is_standard_layout
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97006
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
> I'll try to rebuild with
> --enable-newlib-io-c99-formats.
And we run into:
...
In file included from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104413
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104396
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104300
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104327
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97006
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
With -fno-builtin, mimimized further to:
...
char buffer[100];
int
main (void)
{
unsigned int i = 0xdeadbeef;
__builtin_sprintf (buffer, "%hhx", i);
__builtin_printf ("%s\n", buffer);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103641
--- Comment #30 from Tamar Christina ---
No problem during nightlies. No real changes in other workloads in compile time
nor runtime.
can confirm no perf change for xxhash and compile time decreased from 8 to 1
sec.
tree vectorization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
Bug ID: 104418
Summary: Error inheriting base class constructors by
using-declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104382
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #0)
> Created attachment 52349 [details]
> Testcase for the problems
>
> With all branches that feature finalization, the attached testcase outputs:
> final_count after
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97005
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
I've tried the workaround (posting here only the patch for trunchiqi2, the
pattern that was actually triggered):
...
@@ -424,9 +436,21 @@
[(set (match_operand:QI 0 "nvptx_nonimmediate_operand" "=R,m")
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104407
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52362|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104407
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104407
>
> --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Ah, you're right, I thought the rtl is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104407
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, you're right, I thought the rtl is used in the native_encode_initializer
case but it is not.
So, if the point of r11-2834 was to mangle the referenced symbols, then we
shouldn't call rtl_for_decl_init
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104408
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #4)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> > match.pd just does canonicalization here. SLP discovery could handle this
> > in the existing swap operands
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104417
Bug ID: 104417
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in check_dynamic_size_for_taint,
at analyzer/sm-taint.cc:1058
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
