https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10396
David changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gccbugzilla@limegreensocks.
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66138
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66138
--- Comment #4 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Sat Nov 7 01:25:43 2015
New Revision: 229908
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229908&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/66138
reflect, encoding/json, encoding/xml: fix u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66138
--- Comment #3 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Sat Nov 7 01:24:57 2015
New Revision: 229907
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229907&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/66138
reflect, encoding/json, encoding/xml: fix u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67295
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68178
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52673
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #36 from Evandro ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #35)
> (In reply to Evandro from comment #32)
> > Because of side effects of the Haiffa scheduler, the loads now pile up, and
> > the ADRPs may affect the load issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68216
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I think that a meta-bug would be an excellent idea.
It is pr68241.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #35 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Evandro from comment #32)
> (In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #31)
> > (In reply to Evandro from comment #30)
> > > The performance impact of always referring to constants as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug ID: 68241
Summary: [meta-bug] Deferred-length character
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54221
Bug 54221 depends on bug 54224, which changed state.
Bug 54224 Summary: Warn for unused internal procedures
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54224
--- Comment #31 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Fri Nov 6 21:49:18 2015
New Revision: 229894
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229894&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-06 Dominique d'Humieres
PR fortran/54224
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66728
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #34 from Evandro ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #33)
> (In reply to Evandro from comment #32)
> ADRP latency to load-address should be zero on any OoO core - ADRP is
> basically a move-immediate, so can execute early and hide any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68240
Bug ID: 68240
Summary: compilation hangs on valid code at -O1 and above on
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #33 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Evandro from comment #32)
> (In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #31)
> > (In reply to Evandro from comment #30)
> > > The performance impact of always referring to constants as if they were
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66728
--- Comment #8 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mrs
Date: Fri Nov 6 20:16:06 2015
New Revision: 229885
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229885&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/66728
* dwarf2out.c (get_full_len): Return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #32 from Evandro ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #31)
> (In reply to Evandro from comment #30)
> > The performance impact of always referring to constants as if they were far
> > away is significant on targets which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #31 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Evandro from comment #30)
> The performance impact of always referring to constants as if they were far
> away is significant on targets which do not fuse ADRP and LDR together.
What ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68239
Bug ID: 68239
Summary: libbacktrace allocation is sometimes very slow
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #30 from Evandro ---
The performance impact of always referring to constants as if they were far
away is significant on targets which do not fuse ADRP and LDR together. What's
the status of the solution that evaluates the function si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68106
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Nov 6 17:33:01 2015
New Revision: 229868
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229868&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-06 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/68106
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68220
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 Regression]|[5 Regression]
|Devirtua
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67056
Bug 67056 depends on bug 68057, which changed state.
Bug 68057 Summary: [6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68220
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Fri Nov 6 16:04:38 2015
New Revision: 229859
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229859&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/68057
PR ipa/68220
* ipa-polymorphic-call.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68057
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Fri Nov 6 16:04:38 2015
New Revision: 229859
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229859&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/68057
PR ipa/68220
* ipa-polymorphic-call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68231
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #7 from Dominique
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50221
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Note that the output for comment 0 is
array=xxyyzz 2 3
when compiled with
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/opt/gcc/gcc6a-222042/bin/gfortran
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/opt/gcc/gcc6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67942
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Nov 6 15:42:41 2015
New Revision: 229857
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229857&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Correct entry for PR c++/67942.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
--- Comment #6 from Martin Reinecke ---
Ah, my bad ... I still had an old m1.smod lying on disk from earlier tests!
This slightly changed test case should demonstrate the problem:
module m1
interface
module subroutine bar
end subroutine
end in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68216
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Paul, I'm delighted than someone is finally working on this long-standing
> problem.
Seconded!
> I hope you're also taking a look at all the other related PRs that Dominique
> pointed out; I suspec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68231
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Note that bootstrap fails also with
../../work/gcc/cp/init.c: In function 'void warn_placement_new_too_small(tree,
tree, tree, tree)':
../../work/gcc/cp/init.c:2454:17: error: format '%lu' expects
a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I still get the error with revision r229832 (2015-11-06).
> gcc version 6.0.0 20151106 (experimental) [trunk revision
> 2aebc1a:abfaa95:74905ec39301718edde3609ddd97ef8e0f9eb934] (GCC)
ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> Which revision are you using (gfortran -v). I get
>
> pr68237.f90:4:13:
>
> submodule (m1) m2
> 1
> Fatal Error: Can't open module file 'm1.s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68229
--- Comment #4 from Todd Allen ---
It appears to have been fixed in gcc-4.9.0 by Sterling Augustine, 2013-07-25,
with the new include_pubname_in_output function. I don't have a 4.9.0
compiler, but I did test it with gcc-4.9.2 on Fedora 21, and t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65963
--- Comment #4 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I confirm the testcase fails execution on armeb-none-eabi (also at -O0), but it
does so both with and without the patch to tree-scalar-evolution.c, which did
not change codegen (at -O2 -ftree-vec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68231
--- Comment #6 from David Edelsohn ---
This seems to be fixed after Martin's second patch. Although the placement new
size test in the testsuite fails on AIX.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
--- Comment #3 from Martin Reinecke ---
Sorry, I update my sources via git... I hope this still helps.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
--- Comment #2 from Martin Reinecke ---
I'm using
gcc version 6.0.0 20151106 (experimental) [trunk revision
2aebc1a:abfaa95:74905ec39301718edde3609ddd97ef8e0f9eb934] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68238
Bug ID: 68238
Summary: Vector cost model overestimates prologue cost for
SLPed code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
Bug ID: 68237
Summary: ICE on invalid with submodules
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68236
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44491
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> Compiling the test in comment 0 with 5.2.0 or trunk gives an ICE
>
> in gfc_format_decoder, at fortran/error.c:936
There is an assert at that line:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68216
--- Comment #5 from neil.n.carlson at gmail dot com ---
Paul, I'm delighted than someone is finally working on this long-standing
problem. I hope you're also taking a look at all the other related PRs that
Dominique pointed out; I suspect that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68216
--- Comment #4 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Dear Dominique,
I think that a meta-bug would be an excellent idea. I am 5
regressions away from a fix for this PR. I'll get the patch to you
over the weekend.
Many thanks for your s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68236
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44491
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68145
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68231
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37513
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68145
--- Comment #3 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Fri Nov 6 13:31:51 2015
New Revision: 229848
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229848&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR tree-optimization/68145
* tree-vect-stmts.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68228
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.3.0, 6.0
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68236
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31560
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68088
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68088
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Fri Nov 6 12:04:15 2015
New Revision: 229845
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229845&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM/AArch64] PR 68088: Fix RTL checking ICE due to subreg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65419
--- Comment #17 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Fri Nov 6 11:48:06 2015
New Revision: 229843
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229843&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert "Add IFN_GOACC_DATA_END_WITH_ARG"
2015-11-06 Tom de Vr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67709
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68221
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I don't have any testcase that would exhibit a problem with variable low-bound,
but that is not a proof there isn't a problem.
Trying:
typedef __UINTPTR_TYPE__ uintptr_t;
void bar (unsigned short *, unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68235
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57845
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57845
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I'm trying to upgrade from 3.4.4 to 5.2.0, and I used -freg-struct-return
> for years with 3.4.4 with no issues. Not that there is huge amount of code
> that actually uses functions returning structures, bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68236
Bug ID: 68236
Summary: [6 Regression] selective scheduling with
--param=sched-autopref-queue-depth=10 ICEs a lot @
aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
Bug 64164 depends on bug 67753, which changed state.
Bug 67753 Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: cxg1005, cxg2002, cxg2006, cxg2007,
cxg2008, cxg2018, cxg2019 and cxg2020
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67753
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67753
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55099
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> Improving the message will be quite trivial once an agreement is found about
> the improvement. Would the addition of "This name has not been declare
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68234
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55099
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57845
--- Comment #8 from Sergey Organov ---
I'm trying to upgrade from 3.4.4 to 5.2.0, and I used -freg-struct-return for
years with 3.4.4 with no issues. Not that there is huge amount of code that
actually uses functions returning structures, but the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68235
Bug ID: 68235
Summary: gimple optimisations always use global -fmath-errno
setting
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68227
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The ICE occurs at
gcc_assert (INTEGER_CST_P (size));
I don't follow the logic of
gfc_do_allocate (tree bytesize, tree size, tree * pdata, stmtblock_t * pblock,
tree elem_type)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66612
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68227
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
--- Comment #56 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Nov 6 10:34:13 2015
New Revision: 229840
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229840&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR67753] fix copy of PARALLEL entry_parm to CONCAT target_reg
In ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67753
--- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Nov 6 10:34:13 2015
New Revision: 229840
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229840&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR67753] fix copy of PARALLEL entry_parm to CONCAT target_reg
In assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68234
Bug ID: 68234
Summary: tree-vrp pass need to be improved when handling
ASSERT/PLUS/MINUS/_EXPR and Phi node
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68233
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 65947, which changed state.
Bug 65947 Summary: Vectorizer misses conditional assignment of constant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65947
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65947
Alan Hayward changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67518
--- Comment #4 from vondele at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vondele
Date: Fri Nov 6 09:51:12 2015
New Revision: 229839
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229839&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add testcases for middle-end/53852 and middle-end/67518
201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53852
--- Comment #21 from vondele at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vondele
Date: Fri Nov 6 09:51:12 2015
New Revision: 229839
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229839&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add testcases for middle-end/53852 and middle-end/67518
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68233
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68233
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you try GCC 5 or the trunk, I think this was just fixed recently.
And it is not 1 cycle, it is 4 cycles (the latency to L1).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68232
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68231
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-ibm-aix*|
Summary|[6 Regression] AIX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68233
Bug ID: 68233
Summary: Performance : GCC not uses possible LDP-Instruction on
ARM64
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65963
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68232
Bug ID: 68232
Summary: gcc.dg/ifcvt-4.c fails on some arm configurations
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68162
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #8)
> I don't know what DWARF semantics are meant to be, but the language
> semantics are definitely that in C array types are always unqualified,
> wherea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68221
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68229
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Status|UNCONFIR
97 matches
Mail list logo