https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79061
--- Comment #32 from chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chefmax
Date: Fri Feb 3 07:17:38 2017
New Revision: 245144
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245144&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/79061
* asan.c (asan_add_global): Fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68823
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Pop ---
The data dependence relations are dumped in the output of
-fdump-tree-graphite-all.
graphite-dependences.c contains the code for the data dependence computations.
Looking at the gimple code it seems like a tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
--- Comment #7 from Michael Meissner ---
On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 01:41:44AM +, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
>
> --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 40661
> -->
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79352
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra ---
Regression tested powerpc64le-linux successfully.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
That looks good to me. Mike, to you too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79275
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79275
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Feb 3 02:18:59 2017
New Revision: 245142
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245142&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/79275 - -Wformat-overflow false positive exceeding INT_MAX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 40661
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40661&action=edit
gcc7-pr79354.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looking at tmp-mddump.md, the only other insn that emits the stxssp instruction
is movsf_hardfloat and that uses wb constraint for the input_operand and only
uses wu constraint for stxsspx, while movsi_from_s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79327
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Variant patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg00156.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Perhaps add also foo (&b); below foo (&h); to avoid any kind of IPA thinking
the memcpy is useless.
It is apparently the movsi_from_sf instruction that has this, added by Michael
in r244279. TARGET_NO_SF_SU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79352
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79343
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
Followup here:
https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/1078
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66144
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 40660
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40660&action=edit
Replacement proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79279
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79354
Bug ID: 79354
Summary: [7 Regression] -mcpu=power8 -O2 generates power9
instruction on powerpc64le-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79353
Bug ID: 79353
Summary: ICE in curr_insn_transform, at lra-constraints.c:3773
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
URL: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=gcc-7&a
rch=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69992
--- Comment #2 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Digging deeper, if i is not 64-bit, we don't choose it as one of the IVs, and
the loop iteration test gets converted based on ap instead. Then the math in
iv_number_of_iterations decides that it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63256
acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #30 from David Edelsohn ---
.../src/src/configure --disable-werror --with-gmp=/opt/cfarm
--with-libiconv-prefix=/opt/cfarm --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--with-included-gettext
By the way, it's a lot faster if the src and build directories
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79352
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79352
Bug ID: 79352
Summary: [6 Regression] -fprintf-return-value doesn't handle
flexible-like array members properly
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79351
Bug ID: 79351
Summary: Invalid tree PRE optimization around compound literal
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79350
Bug ID: 79350
Summary: "explicit" deduction guides don't work
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79348
--- Comment #6 from Dominik Vogt ---
Before that the "undesignated symbols" were around already, but the test PASSed
anyway.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79349
Bug ID: 79349
Summary: unused std::string is not optimized away in presense
of a call
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66144
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #40657|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79348
--- Comment #5 from Dominik Vogt ---
The test failure has started with r238647:
Move allocator in std::string and RB tree move constructors
PR libstdc++/71964
* include/bits/basic_string.h [_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI]
(b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66144
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 40657
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40657&action=edit
Potential patch to do the optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56828
kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79334
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
When you have the tree optimization bug fixed, this becomes an rtl optimization
bug since rtl pre does the same as tree pre..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #29 from Aldy Hernandez ---
> Are there any other particular tricks for bootstrapping GCC circa 219827 on
> this AIX? Are there any other configury or otherwise flags?
FYI, I also tried --disable-nls as per comment 21, but I get a d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79343
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79348
--- Comment #4 from Dominik Vogt ---
(Also happend without --enable-shared.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32003
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32003
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Feb 2 20:57:37 2017
New Revision: 245136
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245136&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/32003 - Undocumented -fdump-tree options
gcc/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65542
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79344
--- Comment #3 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Finally reduced this to something like 260 lines. Problem is the allocate
source construct, i.e. copying of allocatable derived type components.
module iso_varying_string
implicit none
integer, parame
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79344
--- Comment #4 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 40656
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40656&action=edit
Much reduced problem case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65542
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77445
--- Comment #24 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Feb 2 20:22:13 2017
New Revision: 245135
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245135&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/77445
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr77445-2.c: Updat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79300
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg00207.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79348
--- Comment #3 from Dominik Vogt ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Why have these symbols appeared now? Is TLS enabled by default on this
> target now? Did something change regarding TLS?
Not that I know of.
> Are you using th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79193
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This seems reasonable to me, but this area of the configury is not my forte.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79348
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/appendix_porting.html#build_hacking.configure.version
but you don't want to do that to add new symbols to an old symbol version, that
would hide a bug.
W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #21 from Thomas Koen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79348
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt ---
How do you regenerate the baseline files for s390*?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79348
Bug ID: 79348
Summary: abi_check fails on s390x (2 undesignated symbols)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78348
--- Comment #10 from Dominik Vogt ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Author: rguenth
> Date: Wed Nov 16 08:42:20 2016
> New Revision: 242470
>
> URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242470&root=gcc&view=rev
> Log:
> 2016-11-16 R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78348
Dominik Vogt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78604
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78604
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|meissner at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
Bug ID: 79347
Summary: [7 regression] vect_do_peeling is messing up profile
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49974
--- Comment #8 from Szikra ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #7)
> We currently warn on all the examples involving X, with -O2. We don't for Y,
> we might if there was a caller and the dangling reference was used there...
Hi, I assume yo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #3 from Dominik Vogt ---
For example, use-after-scope-goto-1.c built with -O0 -m31 crashed during exit:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x in ?? ()
(gdb) up
#1 0x77a65c0a in __interceptor___tls_get_addr_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79275
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Target Mileston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
--- Comment #26 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to __vic from comment #11)
> condition_variable.o
> cow-stdexcept.o
> cow-string-inst.o
> eh_throw.o
> functexcept.o
> functional.o
> futex.o
> future.o
> ios_failure.o
> regex.o
> stdexcept.o
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78142
--- Comment #6 from tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tnfchris
Date: Thu Feb 2 16:35:15 2017
New Revision: 245132
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245132&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78142
* gcc.target/aarch64/v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #2 from Dominik Vogt ---
No, that does not help.
Meanwhile the Tests on s390x have completed (r244119), and there are > 100 Asan
related FAILs with -m31 as well as -m64. Not anywhere near your or Andreas'
test results. Many FAILs s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79230
--- Comment #24 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #23)
> I filed another PR:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79334
sorry, this was a typo, the correct one is:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78142
tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79344
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79335
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68823
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Ok, fails with:
g++ -floop-nest-optimize -Ofast -w tramp3d-v4.cpp -fdump-tree-graphite-details
-$ fdbg-cnt=graphite_scop:4
Problem are following side-by-side loops:
[scheduler] original ast:
{
for (int c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79345
--- Comment #1 from Pedro Alves ---
Note, if we add a use of gdb_disassembler::m_stream somewhere, like:
gdb_disassembler_test ()
: gdb_disassembler (verbose == 123 ? &stream_v : &stream_q) // bug here
{
if (m_stream != &stream_v)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79230
--- Comment #23 from Jürgen Reuter ---
I filed another PR:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79334
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79344
--- Comment #1 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 40654
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40654&action=edit
This test case now actually produces a segfault.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79346
Bug ID: 79346
Summary: -Wundef should not warn for standard macros
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: pre
it
test source
Using g++ 7.0.1 20170202 (trunk), compiling this code:
==
#include
struct ui_file {};
ui_file stream_v, stream_q;
struct gdb_disassembler
{
gdb_disassembler (struct ui_file *file) : m_stream (file) {}
struct ui_file *m_stream;
};
/* Test disassembly of one inst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79344
Bug ID: 79344
Summary: [7 Regression] segmentation faults and run-time
errors
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78439
wilco at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
--- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> I see SIGILL on
>0x3fffb7e722e8 : xscvuxdsp vs32,vs33
> => 0x3fffb7e722ec : stxssp v0,0(r31)
>0x3fffb7e722f0 : add r31,r31,r27
> T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79287
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79287
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I see SIGILL on
0x3fffb7e722e8 : xscvuxdsp vs32,vs33
=> 0x3fffb7e722ec : stxssp v0,0(r31)
0x3fffb7e722f0 : add r31,r31,r27
This is in libhdf5 compiled with -mcpu=power8, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79342
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ccoutant at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79342
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Broken by
#0 hash_table::expand (
this=0x768a1360)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/gcc-6-branch/gcc/hash-table.h:734
#1 0x00c5803e in hash_table::find_slot_with_hash (this=0x768a1360,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79342
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79342
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79342
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68823
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79343
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68823
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79343
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The original source is
https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/blob/develop/kernel/power/sasum_microk_power8.c
Is that invalid for ppc64le (previously, or only now)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79343
Bug ID: 79343
Summary: [7 Regression] error: PIC register clobbered by '%2'
in 'asm'
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
seen on the gcc-6-branch, at least 20161005 and 20170202, not on 5 and on the
trunk. May be related to PR70578.
$ g++-6 -std=gnu++11 -c -gsplit-dwarf -g3 -Og -fno-exceptions uvectr64.ii
uvectr64.ii:3031:1: internal compiler error: in output_index_string, at
dwarf2out.c:25635
}
^
Please submit a f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #39 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Finally, the total between after the last and before the first patch.
> Overall,
> some tests gain some performance and others lose some. The total number of
> instructions has grown somewhat (especially
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79287
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Can you:
s390*-*-linux*)
-if test x$ac_cv_sizeof_void_p = x4; then
-UNSUPPORTED=1
-fi
in libsanitizer/configure.tgt and retry? As I said on the mailing list, I
don't have a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
Bug ID: 79341
Summary: Many Asan tests fail on s390
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78468
--- Comment #33 from Dominik Vogt ---
I still disagree with reverting the patch. There was plenty of time to
identify and fix affected backends instead of doing nothing for half five
months and then claiming that the patch is potentially too dis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
Tom Hughes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tom at compton dot nu
--- Comment #14 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78468
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78468
--- Comment #31 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Feb 2 12:39:09 2017
New Revision: 245124
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245124&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78468
* emit-rtl.c (init_emit): Add ???
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo