https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:61fc5e098e76c9809f35f449a70c9c8d74773d9d
commit r12-7317-g61fc5e098e76c9809f35f449a70c9c8d74773d9d
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103353
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104628
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
--- Comment #32 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #31)
> A straightforward backport of that gives
>
> In file included from /home/segher/src/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:28765:
> ./gt-rs6000.h:143:6: error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104610
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #5)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3)
> > > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> > > > in Gimple, there're
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104610
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #4)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> > > in Gimple, there're
> > >
> > > _1 = __builtin_memcmp_eq (a_5(D),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104610
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> > in Gimple, there're
> >
> > _1 = __builtin_memcmp_eq (a_5(D), [0], 32);
> > _2 = _1 == 0;
> > _6 = (int) _2;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104610
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> in Gimple, there're
>
> _1 = __builtin_memcmp_eq (a_5(D), [0], 32);
> _2 = _1 == 0;
> _6 = (int) _2;
>
>
> So it's related to codegen optimization with
from the link error:
$ gfortran module.f90 submodule.f90 main.f90
/usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccEycu6t.o: in function `__moda_MOD_foo':
gfortran-20220221-submodule.f90:(.text+0x17): undefined reference to
`__moda_MOD_bar'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
If the 3 program units are combined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104629
--- Comment #1 from Alex Trotta ---
Created attachment 52487
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52487=edit
compiler configuration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104629
Bug ID: 104629
Summary: Constexpr static functions and variables in templates,
in the wrong order and under specific circumstances
produces ICEs under some versions, compiles (but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104628
Bug ID: 104628
Summary: Error when bootstrapping CMake: Problem while running
make
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103069
--- Comment #14 from Thiago Macieira ---
I'd restrict relaxations to loops emitted by the compiler. All other atomic
operations shouldn't be modified at all, unless the user asks for it. That
includes non-looping atomic operations (like LOCK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104610
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
in Gimple, there're
_1 = __builtin_memcmp_eq (a_5(D), [0], 32);
_2 = _1 == 0;
_6 = (int) _2;
So it's related to codegen optimization with vectorized codes for
__builtin_memcmp_eq, guess we can start
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104609
--- Comment #2 from Deng Shi ---
I know the option -freal-4-real-8, but this options affects both REAL variable
and constant. While this request is to one option ONLY applied for REAL
constant number like 1.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103069
--- Comment #13 from Hongyu Wang ---
All above glibc cases are now both relaxed by an load/cmp to skip cmpxchg under
-mrelax-cmpxchg-loop,
but for
> do
> {
> flags = THREAD_GETMEM (self, cancelhandling);
> newval =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103069
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hongyu Wang :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0435b978f95971e139882549f5a1765c50682216
commit r12-7316-g0435b978f95971e139882549f5a1765c50682216
Author: Hongyu Wang
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104623
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104622
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104618
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104627
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Summary|New failure in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104627
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It started somewhere in the last four days:
-Compiler version: 12.0.1 20220217 (experimental) (GCC)
+Compiler version: 12.0.1 20220221 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
--- Comment #31 from Segher Boessenkool ---
A straightforward backport of that gives
In file included from /home/segher/src/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:28765:
./gt-rs6000.h:143:6: error: 'atomic_update_decl' was not declared in this scope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104618
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This started between Feb 13 and today even.
Reducing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104626
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104627
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't see any changes in the C front-end that would have caused this
diagnostic difference even.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104627
Bug ID: 104627
Summary: New failure in deprecated.c
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104608
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104619
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104608
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reducing ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104626
Bug ID: 104626
Summary: ICE in gfc_format_decoder, at fortran/error.cc:1071
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104625
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104625
Bug ID: 104625
Summary: ICE in fixup_array_ref, at fortran/resolve.cc:9275
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104624
Bug ID: 104624
Summary: [10/11/12 Regression] ICE in standard_conversion, at
cp/call.cc:1213
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104623
Bug ID: 104623
Summary: [11/12 Regression] ICE in
cp_parser_skip_to_pragma_eol, at cp/parser.cc:4107
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104622
Bug ID: 104622
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in compare_ics, at
cp/call.cc:11419
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104602
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We can make that more readable:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/source_location
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/source_location
@@ -43,12 +43,13 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
{
private:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104618
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104606
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See https://wg21.link/lwg3566 which is what the PR98842 fix does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104608
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104608
--- Comment #2 from Antonio Trande ---
Created attachment 52485
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52485=edit
Bug report
Full bug report
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104619
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104617
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Untested fix:
> 2022-02-21 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR lto/104617
> * simple-object-elf.c (simple_object_elf_match): Fix up URL
> in comment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104621
Bug ID: 104621
Summary: [OpenMP] Issues with 'declare variant'
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: accepts-invalid, openmp
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104617
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Untested fix:
2022-02-21 Jakub Jelinek
PR lto/104617
* simple-object-elf.c (simple_object_elf_match): Fix up URL
in comment.
(simple_object_elf_copy_lto_debug_sections):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104620
Bug ID: 104620
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/cpp23/consteval-if2.C -std=gnu++20
(test for errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104609
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-21
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104619
Bug ID: 104619
Summary: ICE on list comprehension with default derived type
constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Hello,
In the code below I am trying to explicitly instantiate two different
partial specializations of a template struct with static function and
I expect to see two global weak symbols (W) that correspond to
different instantiations of that function in the object file. But for
some reason I see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104618
Bug ID: 104618
Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 20220221 on x86_64-linux-gnu
ICEs building sh.cc for sh4-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104617
Bug ID: 104617
Summary: Bug in handling of 64k+ sections
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104616
Bug ID: 104616
Summary: -Wconversion diagnostic on operator `/` with short
ints, only when -fsanitize=undefined is passed
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104615
Bug ID: 104615
Summary: [Concepts] ICE in explicit instantiation when multiple
candidates are valid (CWG2421)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104614
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw ---
This case is also wrong:
mhard-float
Target RejectNegative Alias(mfloat-abi=, hard) Undocumented
produces:
-mhard-floatSame as -mfloat-abi=hard.
Which, while not inaccurate, means
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104614
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Note the manual says for 'Undocumented'
@item Undocumented
The option is deliberately missing documentation and should not
be included in the @option{--help} output.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104614
Bug ID: 104614
Summary: "Undocumented" option flag ignored with --help=target
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85487
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100657
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #27 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Thanks for the explanation. Sounds like you should send the config/gnu.h patch
to the x86 maintainers (and CC gcc-patches).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104613
Bug ID: 104613
Summary: ICE in dwarf2out_frame_debug_adjust_cfa, at
dwarf2cfi.c:1189
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #26 from Svante Signell ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #25)
> > Hopefully someone knows hot to modify Makefile.tpl/Makefile.def to generate
> > the correct dependencies in Makefile.in.
>
> I suggest that you open a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tom de Vries :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02aedc6f269b5e3c1f354edcf5b84d27b0a15946
commit r12-7312-g02aedc6f269b5e3c1f354edcf5b84d27b0a15946
Author: Tom de Vries
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104534
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
--- Comment #20 from Qing Zhao ---
> On Feb 21, 2022, at 1:56 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
> wrote:
>>
>> my question is, is the "info" in __builtin_clear_padding() a REAL use
>> of "info"? is it correct to report the uninitialized use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104602
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
No, with auto it doesn't work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98179
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |WORKSFORME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
--- Comment #30 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #28)
> Huh, yes - I assumed that had been fixed. Segher? Can you please fix that
> GTY bug?
I'll look at it. It's over three years old, will need some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104602
--- Comment #4 from James Y Knight ---
Yea that should work. Or even just `auto`.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54366
Bug 54366 depends on bug 85493, which changed state.
Bug 85493 Summary: decltype can use deleted constructor and deleted template
function in template function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85493
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85493
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85493
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e74d764e172fa6afdbd194ce57decc80237631dc
commit r12-7311-ge74d764e172fa6afdbd194ce57decc80237631dc
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104595
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
bool patterns are to distinguish flag uses from data uses since a vectorized
flag true will be -1 while the unvectorized flag is 1 but of course any
data uses have to be retained. What we are missing here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104595
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
The patch doesn't really work, it regresses some AVX512 stuff in i386.exp,
notably
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512vl-vdivps-2.c (internal compiler error: in
vect_get_
vec_defs_for_operand, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104530
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
What could be done in passes like evrp or vrp* but not in unrelated other
passes that use the range infrastructure would be to set uids on stmts
depending on presence of calls that might not always return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104604
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=104604
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104612
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 52482
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52482=edit
gcc12-pr104612.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95999
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104611
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104612
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104612
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104612
Bug ID: 104612
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in mark_jump_label_1 since
r12-3435
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104498
avieira at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104611
Bug ID: 104611
Summary: memcmp/strcmp/strncmp can be optimized when the result
is tested for [in]equality with 0 on aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104610
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note even without avx512f, LLVM does:
movdqu (%rdi), %xmm0
movdqu 16(%rdi), %xmm1
pcmpeqb .LCPI0_0(%rip), %xmm1
pcmpeqb .LCPI0_1(%rip), %xmm0
pand%xmm1, %xmm0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104610
Bug ID: 104610
Summary: memcmp () == 0 can be optimized better for avx512f
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
--- Comment #29 from Arseny Solokha ---
Let me clarify: I cannot reproduce that ICE from comment 5 as well, but
probably because of the same underlying reason that "fixed" the ICE from
comment 0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104595
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
index 217bdfd7045..ff9a628321f 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
@@ -4450,18 +4450,16 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104606
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104498
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andre Simoes Dias Vieira
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d34cdec56728ddbdfacabd9f80598b17d1c6ff54
commit r12-7310-gd34cdec56728ddbdfacabd9f80598b17d1c6ff54
Author: Andre Vieira
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104604
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104601
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104599
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104597
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
--- Comment #27 from Arseny Solokha ---
Does it make sense to commit the patch from comment 17 (or comment 18)
nonetheless?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104506
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104506
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e01530ec1e33f7df9c2acd0489d6d1f766cb1921
commit r12-7309-ge01530ec1e33f7df9c2acd0489d6d1f766cb1921
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
