https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo ---
Go will not work on SH just by adding it to the list of targets. For instance
split stacks support is not implemented on SH.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83300
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83310
--- Comment #2 from Victor Porton ---
Created attachment 42807
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42807&action=edit
project file
note that sources should be put into src/ subfolder
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83310
--- Comment #1 from Victor Porton ---
Created attachment 42806
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42806&action=edit
forgotten Makefile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83301
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83309
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83301
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.5
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83301
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #2)
> However, in my "--enable-checking=yes,df,fold,rtl" build I'll then run into
> a different ICE with the original 6.5 MiB file... :-/ So there is more work
> t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83301
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tschwinge at gcc dot
gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83304
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 42808
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42808&action=edit
Assembly for aborting testcase
Attaching the assembly for -O2 -funroll-loops -mthumb -march=armv8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43871
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Dec 7 09:36:28 2017
New Revision: 255464
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255464&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Initialise rs6000_cpu correctly (PR43871)
Finally, set rs60
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83311
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83306
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83296
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83309
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
callgrind says all time is spent in lookup_field_1. I suppose
CLASSTYPE_SORTED_FIELDS isn't set during parsing the structure and we likely
look for duplicates here.
Nathan rewrote name-lookup for GCC 8 whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83297
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83302
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|x86_64--n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81906
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83304
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
At some point during combine we have
insn_cost 4 for72: r127:SI=0xff81
insn_cost 4 for 9: r130:SI=ctz(r125:SI)
insn_cost 4 for69: cc:CC=cmp(r125:SI,0)
insn_cost 4 for70: r131
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83309
--- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell ---
yeah, I'm not surprised by these numbers. IIUC the linear search happens when
we get a qualified lookup during parsing. Unqualified lookup will find the
IDENTIFIER_VALUE binding. But ICBW.
Anyway, when I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83164
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 42810
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42810&action=edit
gcc8-pr83164.patch
So like this? It makes no sense to call types_compatible_p or 2x
useless_type_conversion_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83164
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83164
>
> --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 42810
> --> https://gcc
/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/ptlrpcd.c?h=next-20171207#n492,
partially reduced test case follows:
struct ptlrpcd_ctl {
char pc_name[20];
};
struct ptlrpcd {
struct ptlrpcd_ctl pd_threads[6];
};
struct ptlrpcd *ptlrpcd_init_pd;
static void ptlrpcd_ctl_init(struct ptlrpcd_ctl *pc, int index) {
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83164
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Created attachment 42810 [details]
> gcc8-pr83164.patch
Sorry, I shouldn't have taken this long.
> So like this? It makes no sense to call types_compatible_p or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70268
--- Comment #10 from Boris Kolpackov ---
Second revision of the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00379.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81165
--- Comment #16 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Patch posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00376.html
(before seeing Jeff's comments)
Anyway, I think this is simple enough to go into 8. It isn't hard to add
caching, should we find i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83312
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Ironically, it seems to be the same pass, VRP1, that warns that some piece of
code accesses pd_threads[j] for some negative j and later notices that the
corresponding path is dead. I don't know if we can shift
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80101
--- Comment #6 from kelvin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kelvin
Date: Thu Dec 7 13:20:27 2017
New Revision: 255465
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255465&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2017-12-07 Kelvin Nilsen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83296
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83296
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Dec 7 13:21:51 2017
New Revision: 255466
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255466&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-07 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/83296
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67769
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Dec 7 13:21:51 2017
New Revision: 255466
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255466&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-07 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/83296
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83312
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83302
--- Comment #2 from Michael Matz ---
I guess the problem described in https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/10/188 is, that
the stack probe itself accesses a page which _doesn't_ belong to this threads
stack, but to something else. golang seems to use t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83302
--- Comment #3 from Michael Matz ---
In any case, this is not something that GCC could do anything about. A probe
necessarily has to be a write, and writing to something not belonging to own
stack (or guard page) will always have this problem of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83302
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83313
Bug ID: 83313
Summary: A whole lot of symbols cannot be demangled
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: dema
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83297
Dendi Suhubdy changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |MOVED
--- Comment #3 from Dendi Suhubdy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81827
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Bisected to pauls r254427, the fix for PR81447 and PR82783.
Test adjustments suggest that we'll create even more malloc/free calls.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83312
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82046
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83302
--- Comment #5 from Florian Weimer ---
FWIW, -fstack-clash-protection avoids these issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80026
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80907
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80947
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81197
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81304
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81481
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81566
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81572
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82641
--- Comment #11 from Tamar Christina ---
Author: tnfchris
Date: Thu Dec 7 14:54:22 2017
New Revision: 255468
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255468&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-07 Tamar Christina
PR target/82641
* con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81575
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81613
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81613
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81675
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82641
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81782
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82016
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81922
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79281
--- Comment #15 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #11)
> Thanks. I committed the patch to the GCC 6 branch.
>
> GCC 7 will require a different fix, as the code has moved from C to Go. I'm
> not sure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64867
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83314
Bug ID: 83314
Summary: gccgo: Compiled binaries panic with "mmap errno 9" on
m68k
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83179
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Guskov ---
32-bit SPEC CPU2006::436 also affected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57761
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59447
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|--with-dwarf2 is not|--with-dwarf2 should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81356
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83315
Bug ID: 83315
Summary: PowerPC xmmintrin.h emulation for _mm_{min,max}_ps not
semantically equivalent
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83315
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81566
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Dec 7 16:32:03 2017
New Revision: 255469
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255469&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/81544 - attribute noreturn and warn_unused_result on the same functio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81544
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Dec 7 16:32:03 2017
New Revision: 255469
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255469&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/81544 - attribute noreturn and warn_unused_result on the same functio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81544
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81566
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
gccgo does work on a number of targets that do not have split stack support.
The downsides are that each goroutine has a much larger stack, and if you have
too much recursion you can run out of stack spac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83314
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
errno 9 is EBADF, which doesn't make much sense since libgo only ever calls
mmap with MAP_ANONYMOUS. And I'm not even sure where those messages are coming
from. I don't see any place where the GCC 7 libg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81922
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 42811
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42811&action=edit
gcc8-pr81922.patch
WIP patch that attempts to handle it like the C FE, will work on testcases
tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80135
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Untested WIP patch attached to PR81922.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83164
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 7 17:06:08 2017
New Revision: 255470
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255470&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/83164
* tree-cfg.c (verify_gimple_assign_bi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83314
--- Comment #2 from James Clarke ---
My guess is libbacktrace/mmapio.c (perhaps mmap.c), which calls mmap with
MAP_PRIVATE, and calls `error_callback (data, "mmap", errno)` on failure.
That's a function pointer, which I would assume is error_call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83314
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Ah, of course. Thanks. In that case mmap is being called with a descriptor
that is the executable itself, as opened by fileline_initialize in
libbacktrace/fileline.c. I wonder why mmap fails on that? C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83164
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83314
--- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Ok, I should have actually tested this on real hardware right away.
Here's on my Amiga 4000:
root@elgar:~> ./hello
5662
fatal error: memstats.heap_live not aligned to 8 bytes
goroutine 16 [run
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83314
--- Comment #5 from James Clarke ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #4)
> Ok, I should have actually tested this on real hardware right away.
>
> Here's on my Amiga 4000:
>
> root@elgar:~> ./hello
> 5662
> fatal error: mem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80818
--- Comment #12 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Thu Dec 7 17:50:54 2017
New Revision: 255471
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255471&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-07 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/83252
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83252
--- Comment #14 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Thu Dec 7 17:50:54 2017
New Revision: 255471
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255471&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-07 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/83252
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308
--- Comment #5 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #4)
> gccgo does work on a number of targets that do not have split stack support.
> The downsides are that each goroutine has a much larger stack, and i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81303
--- Comment #11 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Thu Dec 7 18:03:53 2017
New Revision: 255472
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255472&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/81303
* Makefile.in (gimpl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83253
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Apologies for not responding sooner -- I've been out of pocket for the last
week. I'll have a look when I get unburied (probably next week).
Bill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82006
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Any progress on this?
Yeah, I have no exact analysis yet, but the issue is caused by Richards commit
r251220. I wonder how this can cause the tcl errors.
I will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83252
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80818
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83120
--- Comment #5 from David Edelsohn ---
Author: dje
Date: Thu Dec 7 20:05:59 2017
New Revision: 255483
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255483&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/83120
* testsuite/ext/special_functions/hyperg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83120
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83316
Bug ID: 83316
Summary: ICE: minval/maxval and characters
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81568
Dave Pagan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dave.pagan at oracle dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81568
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81568
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317
Bug ID: 83317
Summary: ICE in lra_eliminate_reg_if_possible compiling Python
with -mfpmath=sse on x86 Linux, possible 7 regression
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81568
--- Comment #5 from Dave Pagan ---
Thanks for the update, Martin.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83318
Bug ID: 83318
Summary: Illegal program causes internal compiler error with
tags gfc_trans_allocate, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:5646
and Aborted (program f951)
Product: gcc
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
