https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bug ID: 64049
Summary: Wrong code at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #1 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
Created attachment 34090
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34090action=edit
ValueHelper1.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
Created attachment 34091
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34091action=edit
ValueHelper2.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63311
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
Created attachment 34092
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34092action=edit
ValueHelper.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63313
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63325
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63340
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63403
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63203
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Nov 24 13:35:08 2014
New Revision: 218017
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218017root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-11-24 Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63432
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63537
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63577
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63636
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Is this fixed now (why is it in WAITING?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63657
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63658
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63661
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
v.value.LocalizedText = (LocalizedTextStruct*) Localized Text;
if you access v.value.LocalizedText as a LocalizedTextStruct the above causes
undefined code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63636
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
Is this fixed now (why is it in WAITING?)
Because you changed the status to WAITING?
I will retest this once all P1 ICF issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63657
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64046
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63740
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64048
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64046
--- Comment #2 from Peter Wu peter at lekensteyn dot nl ---
Since it is only reproducible with ld.gold, I have duplicated the report at
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17639
What about the application of optimization? Doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63311
--- Comment #8 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
Confirmed that it is ifcombine. Not sure if I'd call it wrong-code though.
Note that there are no default-defs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63203
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64048
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64044
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64004
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 24 14:02:36 2014
New Revision: 218018
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218018root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-24 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 24 14:07:18 2014
New Revision: 218019
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218019root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-24 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63636
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
Bug ID: 64050
Summary: [5 Regression] r218009 causes LTO/PGO bootstrap
failure: ICE: in inline_small_functions, at
ipa-inline.c:1709
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
Bug ID: 64051
Summary: broken exception model detection in libobjc's
configure
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
v.value.LocalizedText = (LocalizedTextStruct*) Localized Text;
if you access v.value.LocalizedText as a LocalizedTextStruct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
As far as I know a Canadian cross requires the cross toolchain to that target
at least the same languages as the Canadian cross. This check is the same check
in libstdc++ also.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59708
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34091|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34090|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34092|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59708
--- Comment #23 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #22)
So fixed?
Not on ppc64:
trippels@gcc2-power8 ~ % cat out_check15 | grep overflow
FAIL: gcc.dg/builtin-arith-overflow-1.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34094|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64052
Bug ID: 64052
Summary: compilation error local frame unavailable appears
for some optimization levels
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35261
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64025
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Breakpoint 1, inline_small_functions () at ../../gcc/gcc/ipa-inline.c:1709
1709 gcc_assert (current_badness = badness);
(gdb) l
1704 /* When updating the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64053
Bug ID: 64053
Summary: asm labels to accept extra parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64054
Bug ID: 64054
Summary: 27_io/basic_ostream/inserters_arithmetic/char/hexfloat
.cc FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64054
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64053
--- Comment #1 from Eugene eugene at hutorny dot in.ua ---
Created attachment 34098
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34098action=edit
code sample for illustartion
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58561
--- Comment #6 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dje
Date: Mon Nov 24 14:59:52 2014
New Revision: 218020
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218020root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/58561
* dbxout.c: Include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917
Roger Orr rogero at howzatt dot demon.co.uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rogero at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #13 from Pranith Kumar bobby.prani at gmail dot com ---
The main concern here is moving the read past the fence instruction
irrespective of volatile semantics. The fence instruction guarantees that
accesses before the fence will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64055
Bug ID: 64055
Summary: [5 regression] gnat.dg/derived_aggregate.adb FAILs on
32-bit i386
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64055
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64056
Bug ID: 64056
Summary: gcc.target/i386/chkp-strlen-4.c etc. FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64056
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
How is that observable (other than looking at the assembly)?
val1 is an automatic variable whose address doesn't escape to other threads,
and isn't volatile either. Why do you care?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63482
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to tbsaunde from comment #3)
r217991 seems to work
Not for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
--- Comment #6 from Trevor Saunders tsaunders at mozilla dot com ---
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 03:32:37PM +, trippels at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #3 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se ---
libstdc++ compiles fine though, but the previous stage did indeed include a C++
compiler. But even with that requirement, it still seems a bit dangerous. What
if the previous compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64021
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com ---
The Go language says that Pointers to distinct zero-size variables may or may
not be equal (http://golang.org/ref/spec#Comparison_operators). So in the
language sense it would be OK to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63972
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63972
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Nov 24 15:40:19 2014
New Revision: 218023
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218023root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-24 Andrew Pinski apin...@cavium.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #4 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se ---
I assumed that this would be what happened:
Given --build=B --host=H and --target=T:
1. A gcc would be configured with --build=B --host=H --target=T and put in the
installation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64021
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #7)
I note that a zero-sized array is converted to an empty struct in go-ffi.c.
I wonder how libffi handles that today.
It doesn't.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Perhaps for the linear arguments we could remember the {initial_val,
linear_step} pair from the analysis phase (somewhere in the stmt_info) and if
simple_iv would fail during the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64057
Bug ID: 64057
Summary: Overlapping memcpy generated for array assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Generally calling SCEV analysis again during the transform phase asks for
trouble
(though it may work in most cases). This means that the simple_iv calls (which
are mostly useless
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64055
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Note that the technical issue here is that the memory is considered as not
aliased and thus all barriers would need to explicitely reference it as
used and clobbered.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63524
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think this should be fixed at r216398
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #6 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se ---
Just to make sure I understand you perfectly. This is not supported:
../configure --build=A --host=B --target=B
Instead you have to do:
../configure --build=A --host=A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64052
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Nov 24 16:15:46 2014
New Revision: 218024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218024root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/63671
* ipa-inline-transform.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
Generally calling SCEV analysis again during the transform phase asks for
trouble
(though it may work in most cases). This means that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64054
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Weird. Somehow the double variable 'd' is getting set to 6 after it is
(correctly) written to the stream, so converting 0x1.1p+8 back to
a double doesn't compare equal to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Pierre Ossman from comment #6)
Just to make sure I understand you perfectly. This is not supported:
../configure --build=A --host=B --target=B
By itself yes this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
Generally calling SCEV analysis again during the transform phase asks for
trouble
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Usually it is only that which is hard to recompute, the base is pretty much
stable. But of course you never know. You could also simply add
a vecsimd_call_arg_info to the stmt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63703
--- Comment #12 from Rohit rohitarulraj at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 34100
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34100action=edit
Proposed patch
Francois,
Can you please test the attached patch?
2014-11-24 Rohit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #14 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #13)
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Nov 24 16:15:46 2014
New Revision: 218024
URL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
It was caused by r215898.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The performance regression seems solved on my setup (Trevor, can you double
check?).
-Ofast -fdevirtualize:
Time spent in iteration: 4.11598
-Ofast -fno-devirtualize
Time spent in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60102
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The ICE will probably go away with
Index: ipa-prop.c
===
--- ipa-prop.c (revision 217980)
+++ ipa-prop.c (working
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61527
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
101 - 200 of 403 matches
Mail list logo