https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70867
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Bug ID: 70869
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault on array
of pointer to function members
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
--- Comment #1 from Helfer Thomas ---
Created attachment 38374
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38374&action=edit
The generated .ii file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(gdb) bt
#0 gimplify_expr (expr_p=expr_p@entry=0x7bfff148,
pre_p=pre_p@entry=0x7fffd7d0, post_p=0x0,
gimple_test_f=gimple_test_f@entry=0xada690
, fallback=fallback@entry=1) at
../../gcc/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65686
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13962
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
For GCC 7 we can now do ptr != decl (for certain kinds of decls). I have
patches extending this to the ptr != ptr case but they need work because PTA
needs to handle points-to NULL (aka nothing) and STRING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13962
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Apr 29 08:36:49 2016
New Revision: 235622
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235622&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-04-29 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/13962
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65686
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Apr 29 08:36:49 2016
New Revision: 235622
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235622&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-04-29 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/13962
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70870
Bug ID: 70870
Summary: Segmentation violation in gfc_assign_data_value
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61636
Tatsuyuki Ishi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ishitatsuyuki at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70861
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70857
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68860
--- Comment #13 from Dominik Vogt ---
By the way, I think the value of y should be tested *after* the asm statement
in line 17 not before it in line 16. At higher optimization levels the
assignement may not have happened yet when gdb reaches lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60040
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Apr 29 08:59:09 2016
New Revision: 235625
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235625&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
avr-related reload fix from Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
PR target/60
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70871
Bug ID: 70871
Summary: questionable optimisation in fold-const.c
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70871
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70855
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.2
Summary|[6 Regression] I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70856
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openacc
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70856
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Looks like OACC generates aliases the "wrong way around"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70872
Bug ID: 70872
Summary: c++ regression malloc not found c++ 5.3.0 compiles
fine
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70872
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70722
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zeccav at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70870
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70855
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70863
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70873
Bug ID: 70873
Summary: [GCC7 Regressio] 20% performance regression at
482.sphinx3 after r235442 with -O2 -m32 on Haswell.
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70873
--- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Created attachment 38375
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38375&action=edit
test-case to reproduce
Must be compiled with -O2 -mavx2 -m32 options.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70864
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70871
--- Comment #2 from Jan Smets ---
Created attachment 38376
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38376&action=edit
possible solution
I have not extensively tested this, but it seems to work for my testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Yuri Rumyantsev from comment #12)
> Created attachment 38367 [details]
> modified patch
The loop->aux flagging looks redundant to me. Why is ->safelen only valid
before vectorization? I supp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729
--- Comment #14 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> (In reply to Yuri Rumyantsev from comment #12)
> > Created attachment 38367 [details]
> > modified patch
>
> The loop->aux flagging looks redundant to me. Wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #10 from Jan de Mooij ---
Richards, thank you for fixing that.
Unfortunately Firefox still crashes and my original test case (see comment 0
and the attachment) still fails. Do you have any idea why?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jan de Mooij from comment #10)
> Richards, thank you for fixing that.
>
> Unfortunately Firefox still crashes and my original test case (see comment 0
> and the attachment) still fails. Do you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729
>
> --- Comment #14 from Ilya Enkovich ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #12 from Jan de Mooij ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> The patch has not yet been backported to GCC 5.
I'm using:
g++-6 (Ubuntu 6.0.1-1ubuntu11) 6.0.0 20160414 (experimental) [trunk revision
234994]
Shouldn't tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70871
Jan Smets changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #38376|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70342
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Apr 29 12:32:45 2016
New Revision: 235637
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235637&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/70342
* fold-const.c (tree_single_nonzero_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70342
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed for GCC 7, will backport to GCC 6 after a while.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70852
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70852
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Apr 29 12:39:25 2016
New Revision: 235638
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235638&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/70852
* c-common.c (warn_for_memset): Check domain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
disabling SRA doesn't help anymore.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70803
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Thanks for reporting this, I will check it. Maybe a simple "vect_int_mult" to
> skip on some targets.
Right, restricting the scan to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70859
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
no differences in GIMPLE dumps with -f[no-]strict-aliasing, so this is now a
RTL optimization issue. -fno-schedule-insns2 fixes it ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |rtl-optimization
Summar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
In ToConstantOrRegister:
-(insn 66 64 88 7 (set (mem:SI (reg/f:DI 0 ax [orig:90 _12 ] [90]) [2
MEM[(struct Register *)_12]+0 S4 A32])
+(insn:TI 89 64 66 7 (set (reg:DI 1 dx [orig:125 D.3219+8 ] [125])
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #17 from Jan de Mooij ---
Thank you for looking into this again.
I don't understand comment 16 though:
> _BUT_ here we access D.3125 both as Register (the store)
> and as its declared type TypedOrValueRegister (the load).
So D.3125
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70874
Bug ID: 70874
Summary: Segmentation violation in tree-chkp.c
chkp_walk_pointer_assignments
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
Bug ID: 70875
Summary: ICE in get_ubsan_type_info_for_type with
-fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69804
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zeccav at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70874
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70173
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
This is fixed on trunk now. Does it need backports?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70369
--- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon ---
Created attachment 38378
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38378&action=edit
list of tests missing for aarch64
On AArch64, there are many intrinsics defined in arm_neon.h for which there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70876
Bug ID: 70876
Summary: ICE in chkp_find_bounds: Unexpected tree code
with_size_expr
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70877
Bug ID: 70877
Summary: ICE in in convert_move
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68860
--- Comment #14 from Bill Seurer ---
Dominik Vogt, I've noticed that sort of failure in several of the guality test
cases where a test is done at line X but optimization moves the assignment
being tested to after line X. Should the tests be adju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70851
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70803
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:13:03 2016
New Revision: 235644
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235644&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
PR tree-optimization/708
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67737
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zeccav at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70878
Bug ID: 70878
Summary: ICE in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7680
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70803
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69531
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70879
Bug ID: 70879
Summary: Missed jump threading opportunity with multiple !=
conditions
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70880
Bug ID: 70880
Summary: Main page GCC 7.0 links point to GCC 6
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: web
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37780
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69810
--- Comment #9 from David Edelsohn ---
Author: dje
Date: Fri Apr 29 17:20:36 2016
New Revision: 235646
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235646&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69810
* config/rs6000/rs6000.md (EXTQI): Don't al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70155
--- Comment #7 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Apr 29 17:27:59 2016
New Revision: 235647
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235647&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Update scan-assembler-not in PR target/70155 tests
Since PIC leads
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49244
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70626
--- Comment #3 from cesar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cesar
Date: Fri Apr 29 17:37:55 2016
New Revision: 235650
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235650&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/c-family/
PR middle-end/70626
* c-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70881
Bug ID: 70881
Summary: -Wunused-parameter incorrect for macro case
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70626
--- Comment #4 from cesar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cesar
Date: Fri Apr 29 17:42:04 2016
New Revision: 235651
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235651&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/c-family/
PR middle-end/70626
* c-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49244
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The attached patch seems to work (just eyeballed assembly of the following
testcase, haven't turned it into a runtime testcase that would verify it works
right yet). It should detect both the compile time k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70626
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On April 29, 2016 5:24:00 PM GMT+02:00, "amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
>
>Alexander Monakov changed:
>
> What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70881
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70881
Ian Mallett changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70880
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70873
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70311
--- Comment #2 from Keith Marshall ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> Could some mingw32 guru assign this PR to her/himself?
Well, I should have thought that the requirement to include to
expose a prototype for strncasecmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70873
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Can you give me more information what exactly is causing the stall - which
instructions are affected, and what needs to be done to avoid it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67496
--- Comment #3 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Just back from my travels.
Sorry, I get the same warning on 6.1.0:
/home/vitti/1tb/vitti/gcc-6.1.0-undefined/gcc/f951 -quiet gfbug121.f
../../gcc-6.1.0/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c:2234:27: runtime error: loa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70882
Bug ID: 70882
Summary: vectorized sincos trashes the stack
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70882
Lorenzo Pistone changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||blaffablaffa at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70883
Bug ID: 70883
Summary: inconsistent error message for calls to
__builtin_add_overflow with too few arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70884
Bug ID: 70884
Summary: [6 regression] 2nd SRA pass confused by load from
constant pool
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70873
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67497
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
And in 6.1.0
../../gcc-6.1.0/gcc/fortran/data.c:191:32: runtime error: null pointer passed
as argument 2, which is declared to never be null
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67498
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Still in gfortran 6.1.0
../../gcc-6.1.0/gcc/fortran/interface.c:2738:33: runtime error: load of value
1818451807, which is not a valid value for type 'expr_t'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38825
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70884
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70873
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
-mfpmath=sse is needed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70847
Martin Richtarsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at martinien dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70873
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410
--- Comment #22 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Same ICE in 6.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278
--- Comment #11 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Same ICE in 6.1.0
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo