https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> > This invalid VCE is created by SRA. The code has multiple undefined
> > behaviors in it, but we shouldn't ICE on th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
--- Comment #3 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> This invalid VCE is created by SRA. The code has multiple undefined
> behaviors in it, but we shouldn't ICE on that.
Hi Jakub,
This code example is reduced from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69607
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Tested -flto-partition=.
fails:
- balanced
- 1to1
passes:
- max
- none
- one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55143
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Thanks Bernhard -- It was a mistake to add this to the Cilk+ tracker. I was on
the road with a single screen, which probably isn't the best time to create a
tracker bug then walk through the various potenti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69369
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69369
>
> --- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich ---
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2)
> > I will take a look. It works in my tree with changes to avoid use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68557
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at cordes dot ca
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69277
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69349
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69277
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69290
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69253
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69251
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69251
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Feb 4 04:50:42 2016
New Revision: 233126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69251 - [6 Regression] ICE in unify_array_domain on a flexible arra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69253
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Feb 4 04:50:42 2016
New Revision: 233126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69251 - [6 Regression] ICE in unify_array_domain on a flexible arra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69349
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Feb 4 04:50:42 2016
New Revision: 233126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69251 - [6 Regression] ICE in unify_array_domain on a flexible arra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69277
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Feb 4 04:50:42 2016
New Revision: 233126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69251 - [6 Regression] ICE in unify_array_domain on a flexible arra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69290
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Feb 4 04:50:42 2016
New Revision: 233126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69251 - [6 Regression] ICE in unify_array_domain on a flexible arra
zero/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160203 (experimental) [trunk revision 233104] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk abc.c -O2
abc.c: In function 'fun2':
abc.c:13:1: error: conversion of register to a different size
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69195
--- Comment #10 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #9)
> I think we have another bug in addition to the bug where we reuse a register
> that is already in use. We have the rtl below which is used to initialize
> a[
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8529
Annaliese Saint changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||joesiahleif at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69664
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|column info
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
This should be fixed in libcpp, probably in lex.c, but maybe other places also.
A good testcase to start with would be:
/* ñ /* */
/* a /* */
cc1 -Wcomment
prog.cc:1:7: warning: "/*" within comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69665
Bug ID: 69665
Summary: Internal error on #pragma push_macro("__FILE__")
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68442
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69397
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69664
Bug ID: 69664
Summary: column info is lost
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: preprocessor
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #5)
> Note I see the long, long long, int128, float, double, long double
> overloads, but where is the plain int overload defined?
In the libc header, not in libstdc++.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #5)
> > I bet that adding an int overload that redirects to __builtin_abs similar to
> > the others will fix the issue.
>
> Hmm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69461
--- Comment #16 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Thu Feb 4 00:39:34 2016
New Revision: 233120
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233120&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-03 Michael Meissner
Vladimir Makarov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #5)
> I bet that adding an int overload that redirects to __builtin_abs similar to
> the others will fix the issue.
Hmm, I wonder if the following needs to hold true:
extern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69663
Bug ID: 69663
Summary: [ARM] Implement overflow arithmetic standard names
{u,}{add,sub,mul}v4
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancemen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> > Recategorising as component=c++, and removing the regression marker (because
> > the change in libstdc++ that reveals t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69662
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69662
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69662
Bug ID: 69662
Summary: -Wplacement-new on allocated one element array members
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69661
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69661
Bug ID: 69661
Summary: missing -Wsequence-point warning
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54812
Che Amaya changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||katzfiller5 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Summary|a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69644
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69627
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69627
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Feb 3 22:40:22 2016
New Revision: 233114
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233114&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/69627
* diagnostic-show-locus.c (layout::get_state_at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69644
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Feb 3 22:38:56 2016
New Revision: 233113
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233113&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69644
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_expand_at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This exhibits the same problem:
namespace foo
{
inline double
abs(double __x)
{ return __builtin_fabs(__x); }
}
using foo::abs;
#include
int
wrap_abs (int x)
{
return std::abs (x) + std::abs(x);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
is not unrelated, it declares overloads of std::abs. If you include a
genuinely unrelated file then you get your expected output.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62002
--- Comment #6 from Viacheslav Chernyshev ---
Still happens on 5.3.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69611
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Tobler ---
Author: andreast
Date: Wed Feb 3 22:15:21 2016
New Revision: 233111
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233111&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-03 Andreas Tobler
PR bootstrap/69611
* config/rs60
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69660
Bug ID: 69660
Summary: Microblaze break_handler and symbol
`_interrupt_handler' is already defined
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: min
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69611
Andreas Tobler changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53440
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69655
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In addition, these also fail (hiding PR69607, which is triggered in the same
test-cases when undoing r232384):
...
FAIL: libgomp.oacc-fortran/atomic_capture-1.f90 -DACC_DEVICE_TYPE_nvidia=1
-DACC_ME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69607
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
With:
- the tentative fix for PR69599
- the tentative fix for PR59627
- the undo of r232384 patch that caused PR69655
this still reproduces. Apparently this is an independent issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69056
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69056
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Feb 3 20:14:43 2016
New Revision: 233108
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233108&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/69056 (argument pack deduction failure during overload resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Otherwise, we happily consider in
struct S { char a[1]; int b; char c[1]; };
void
foo (struct S *p, int i, int j)
{
p->c[i]
...
p->c[j]
}
the above two as equivalent, while we should only consider thos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Bet we shouldn't use get_ref_base_and_extent comparisons if there is a variable
ARRAY_REF index and the corresponding array is flexible array member or poor
man's flexible array member.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69658
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69658
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, rejects-valid
Target Miles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69659
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
List of affected files :
actual_array_offset_1.f90
allocate_class_3.f90
allocate_with_source_16.f90
allocate_with_source_8.f08
class_array_11.f03
class_array_20.f03
class_array_21.f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69659
Bug ID: 69659
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE on using option -frepack-arrays, in
gfc_conv_descriptor_data_get
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69658
Bug ID: 69658
Summary: [6 Regression] Bogus "C99 designator outside aggregate
initializer" error
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69636
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
To begin with a short example, namely function_kinds_3.f90.
Placing statement "private" explicit in source, reducing a bit,
then compiling without "-fmodule-private" :
$ cat z1.f90
module m
private
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69423
--- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #6)
> What I have learnt so far:
>
> When the gimple optimisation algorithm 'remove_unused_locals ()' in
> gcc/tree-ssa-live.c is done, it has removed the temporary for the
> _g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #10 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The stores are getting optimized out because equal_mem_array_ref_p considers
equal pairs of MEM_REFS like
fmcom.x[_168] and fmcom.x[_208]
That is, a ARRAY_REF whose first operand is a COMPONEN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69619
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
Proposed patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg00206.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69657
Bug ID: 69657
Summary: [6 Regression] abs() not inlined after including
math.h
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69461
--- Comment #15 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #12)
> Vlad, thanks for taking this over. Let me just point out, just in case you
> missed, that I believe it is important for any register allocator to test
> H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69461
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #23 from Alexander Fomin ---
Created attachment 37574
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37574&action=edit
Original patch
It would be great, thank you.
Here is the original patch I've evaluated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69461
--- Comment #13 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Feb 3 17:58:34 2016
New Revision: 233107
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233107&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-03 Vladimir Makarov
Alexandre Oliva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #22 from David Edelsohn ---
We can try it again or I can try an additional bootstrap test with your patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #21 from Alexander Fomin ---
I'm sorry for a late response.
When applying this patch over r233079, I can't see any bootstrap issues on AIX
machine except some missing symbols from libintl.
Adding --disable-nls to options provided by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69656
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
# Overhead Command Shared Object Symbol
4.48% cc1plus cc1plus[.] bitmap_set_bit
2.34% cc1plus cc1plus[.] bitmap_clear_bit
1.48% cc1plus cc1plus[.] record_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69652
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jakub at redhat dot com|
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jeline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69652
--- Comment #2 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
This is my fault - forgot to fix vuse for scalar statements which are crossed
by masked stores during code motion. Fix is testing and will be sent for review
tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69656
Bug ID: 69656
Summary: -fsanitize=undefined compile time hog
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69423
--- Comment #6 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What I have learnt so far:
When the gimple optimisation algorithm 'remove_unused_locals ()' in
gcc/tree-ssa-live.c is done, it has removed the temporary for the
_gfortran_transfer_character_write's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69655
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69655
Bug ID: 69655
Summary: libgomp lto failures: segfault in
cgraph_node::mark_force_output
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69655
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69652
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69654
Bug ID: 69654
Summary: ICE in gfc_trans_structure_assign
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69634
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69648
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69625
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt ---
It's a bug in the S/390 backend that sometimes trashes r6 in vararg functions.
We're working on a fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69648
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Yeah, my current theory is that r87 is spilled at the start, then the spill reg
is inherited in all the existing uses of it, and lra thinks it can avoid
storing it to memory.
Then we add a new reference to i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69653
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Since tree optimizer cannot handle cse opportunities as described here, backend
needs to force register scaling expr (instead of loop invariant part address
expression) out of memory reference, hopi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69648
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #3)
> It's not crashing for me, but I think I agree there's a problem. Will
> investigate a bit.
Looks like PIC register is not initialized properly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69653
Bug ID: 69653
Summary: More CSE opportunities in address expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69118
Kirill Yukhin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69118
--- Comment #3 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Wed Feb 3 13:48:27 2016
New Revision: 233104
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233104&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69118.
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md (define_insn "avx512
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69118
--- Comment #2 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Wed Feb 3 13:44:50 2016
New Revision: 233103
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233103&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69118
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md (define_insn "avx512f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69594
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59627
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 69594 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69120
Kirill Yukhin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
1 - 100 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
