https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69766
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri Mar 4 07:33:16 2016
New Revision: 233959
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233959&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
S/390: Set GOARCH to the current target when testing multiarch.
The a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69766
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69947
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69947
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 4 07:27:15 2016
New Revision: 233958
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233958&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/69947
* dwarf2out.c (prune_unused_types_walk_loc_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70064
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, shall we silently disable -mred-zone for -fpic/-fPIE in 32-bit code?
Or error out in that combination?
Or disable it only if we need PIC pointer?
What about other cases where one can have calls in leaf fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70065
--- Comment #6 from Serge Roussak ---
(In reply to Serge Roussak from comment #3)
> (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> > The test "if (warn_precedence)"
> > seems redundant with the use of OPT_Wprecedence.
>
> I see all except this ment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69997
Liu Qiang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70073
Douglas Bagnall changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70076
Bug ID: 70076
Summary: no exception for excess initializer elements in a
multidimensional VLA
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69195
--- Comment #15 from Alan Modra ---
Blah, that last patch segfaults all over the place.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16994
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|2007-07-09 07:42:2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70075
Bug ID: 70075
Summary: incorrect initialization of multidimensional VLAs
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70073
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
You can find out where __attribute__ exactly is being defined by adding -g3 and
then looking at the preprocessed source for the define and trace it back that
way.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70073
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
This sounds more like an issue with samba's source if __attribute__ is being
defined away.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70073
--- Comment #2 from Douglas Bagnall ---
Created attachment 37864
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37864&action=edit
The preprocessed C file
Here is the preprocessed source. It looks like _hx509_abort() has lost its
attributes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70052
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69868
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Mar 4 03:13:30 2016
New Revision: 233957
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233957&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-03 Bill Schmidt
PR target/69868 + swap optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59666
--- Comment #5 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #4)
> For a non-IEEE type where the accuracy is specified as within 3ulp
> (depending on the operation in question), there is no definition of what
> hono
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69195
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37862|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70074
Bug ID: 70074
Summary: [C++14] Wrong array write access in constexpr
evaluation
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69195
--- Comment #13 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 37862
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37862&action=edit
delete bad reg_equiv
A patch like this one that deletes reg_equiv notes that become invalid
according to validate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67164
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 4 01:45:43 2016
New Revision: 233954
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233954&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67164
* pt.c (copy_template_args): New.
(t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69941
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |bernds at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70058
--- Comment #3 from Paul ---
I am using Windows 10. Find below the output when run from the command prompt
and a backtrace from gdb64.
Thanks,
C:\TDM-GCC-64\bin>a.exe
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory refe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59666
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59666
>
> --- Comment #2 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
> (In reply to Joseph S. Myers fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59666
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net wrote:
> > ISO C does not allow for arithmetic operations simply not working -
> > producing invalid results - for some types and rounding m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70019
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51570
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.3 |4.8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70064
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #0)
> Created attachment 37854 [details]
> autoreduced testcase
>
> The testcase is likely very fragile due to the set of compiler flags and
> quite big testcase itself.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51406
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 3 22:45:22 2016
New Revision: 233949
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233949&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/51406
* typeck.c (build_static_cast_1): Avoid fol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67364
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 3 22:45:16 2016
New Revision: 233948
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233948&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67364
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_component_reference)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51406
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 3 22:43:09 2016
New Revision: 233946
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233946&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/51406
* typeck.c (build_static_cast_1): Avoid fol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67364
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 3 22:43:03 2016
New Revision: 233945
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233945&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67364
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_component_reference)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70064
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 37861
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37861&action=edit
Failing i?86-linux-gnu assembly
Assembly that fails with gcc -m32 and
$ ld --version
GNU ld version 2.25-15.fc23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70064
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69196
--- Comment #20 from Dominik Vogt ---
Created attachment 37860
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37860&action=edit
vrp1 dump for s390x (-m64)
vrp1 dump for s390x attached (-m64, give me a shout if you need the -m31 dump).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70067
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Creduce came up with the following:
template struct App;
template struct Dyn {
typedef typename Dyn::Acc Acc;
App a;
};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70073
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|-Werror=return-ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70069
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70067
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70067
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70073
Bug ID: 70073
Summary: -Werror=return-type ignores call to function with
attribute noreturn
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70067
--- Comment #1 from Orion Poplawski ---
Created attachment 37859
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37859&action=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70017
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 3 20:52:40 2016
New Revision: 233944
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233944&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/70017
* gcc.dg/pr70017.c (foo): Store 0 to first e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70072
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Whereas with "type" instead of "class" :
$ cat z2.f90
program p
type t
integer :: n
end type
type(t), parameter :: z(2,3) = t(1)
print *, size(z, dim=1)
print *, lbound(z, dim=1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70072
Bug ID: 70072
Summary: ICE in gfc_find_array_ref(): No ref found
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70071
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Whereas :
$ cat z3.f90
program p
integer, allocatable :: z(:)[:,:]
allocate (z(1::2)[2,*])
end
$ gfortran-6 -fcoarray=single z3.f90
z3.f90:3:13:
allocate (z(1::2)[2,*])
1
Error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70071
Bug ID: 70071
Summary: ICE on wrong usage of a subscript triplet
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70070
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Similar :
$ cat z5.f90
program p
integer :: i
character(2) :: c
data (c(i:i), i=-1,2) /2*'c'/
end
$ gfortran-6 -c z5.f90
Error: DATA statement at (1) has more variables than values
*** Error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70070
Bug ID: 70070
Summary: ICE on initializing character data beyond min/max
bound
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70069
Bug ID: 70069
Summary: Uninitialized value default to zero, plus warning
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70068
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Similar :
$ cat z7.f90
program p
integer :: i
character(3), parameter :: x(3) = ['abc', 'ijk', 'xyz']
character(3), parameter :: y(2) = [(x(i)(i:1), i=2,3)]
end
$ gfortran-6 z7.f90
*** Error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70068
Bug ID: 70068
Summary: ICE: out of memory on involving empty substring
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70058
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Paul, could you please post the terminal output that gives the error message
please.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70058
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70067
Bug ID: 70067
Summary: internal compiler error: in strip_typedefs, at
cp/tree.c:1466
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70055
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
Inlining mempcpy uses a callee-saved register:
hjl@gnu-6 tmp]$ cat m.c
extern char *src, *dst;
char *
foo (unsigned long i)
{
return __builtin_mempcpy (dst, src, i);
}
char *
bar (unsigned long i)
{
return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70066
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||58601
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69257
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67257
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65061
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 3 18:43:01 2016
New Revision: 233942
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233942&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65061
* parser.c (cp_parser_template_name): Call st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65061
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, does anybody plan to change CONSTANT_ALIGNMENT for rs6000? If not, I think
we should close this bug, because changing the generic code back is
undesirable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70055
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> > Note the choice of this in a header file is obviously wrong, if you at some
> > point fix this up, then apps will still ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70066
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70055
--- Comment #6 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Note the choice of this in a header file is obviously wrong, if you at some
> point fix this up, then apps will still call memcpy rather than mempcpy,
> even when the lat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70055
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> If some arch in glibc implements memcpy.S and does not implement mempcpy.S,
> then obviously the right fix is to add mempcpy.S for that arch, usually it
> is just a matte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #87 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Great, many thanks for the tests, I was worried if we had hit another distinct
issue. (Of course this would be better on gcc-patches!)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70066
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is the definition which matters:
/* Minimum size in bits of the largest boundary to which any
and all fundamental data types supported by the hardware
might need to be aligned. No data type wants
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70066
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
> The BIGGEST_FIELD_ALIGNMENT macro is defined in config/i386/i386.h with the
> following comment:
...
> #ifdef IN_TARGET_LIBS
This definition version is only ever used in libobjc and libgcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56069
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |7.0
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70066
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.9.3, 5.3.0, 6.0
--- Comment #1 from Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70066
Bug ID: 70066
Summary: alignas imposes the wrong limit on data members
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69904
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69904
--- Comment #7 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Thu Mar 3 17:25:43 2016
New Revision: 233941
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233941&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR rtl-optimization/69904: Disallow copying/duplicat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70062
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37858
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37858&action=edit
gcc6-pr70062.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70060
--- Comment #4 from Stas Sergeev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> If you want it to be initialized at runtime, do that yourself.
> The compiler can't do that, you could e.g. access bigarr from another
> compilation unit before th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #86 from Bill Seurer ---
I also tried it on a power8 BE machine and it worked fine there, too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70062
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'll look at it then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70062
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> This ICEs since the -mmemcpy-strategy option has been added in r201645, so
> technically not a regression.
IMO, it looks like the fix for PR 69888 has to be refine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70061
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70060
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70061
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70055
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note the choice of this in a header file is obviously wrong, if you at some
point fix this up, then apps will still call memcpy rather than mempcpy, even
when the latter is more efficient (because it doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70055
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If some arch in glibc implements memcpy.S and does not implement mempcpy.S,
then obviously the right fix is to add mempcpy.S for that arch, usually it is
just a matter of #include memcpy.S with some define US
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70062
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70055
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wdijkstr at arm dot com
--- Comment #2 from Wilc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #85 from Bill Seurer ---
I just grabbed a fresh copy of the gcc source, applied the patch, built it,
fixed up the options for 416.gamess, and when I ran it it worked! I should
have done that yesterday.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70032
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Note the very first "cleanup" would be to rip out all value numbering use
> from
> the current implementation and make the pass properly separate. Now
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68187
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patches posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00260.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00261.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68074
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69059
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70021
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64696
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70021
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 3 14:32:15 2016
New Revision: 233940
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233940&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/70021
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vect_mark_relevant):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68206
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69798
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68802
--- Comment #3 from Philip Deegan ---
Anything I can do to help?
1 - 100 of 150 matches
Mail list logo
