https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81415
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
ioctl.c: In function ‘main’:
ioctl.c:21:24: warning: array subscript is above array bounds [-Warray-bounds]
if ((int) sgbuf.c_cc[VSUSP] != 0377) {
~~^~~
#1 from Martin Liška ---
Cannot reproduce it with g++ pr102071.C -c -faligned-new=2
g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 12.0.0 20210826 (experimental)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102071
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102069
--- Comment #1 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
Thanks, Segher!
The test case could be updated. The patch supports calculating the number of
iterations for the special condition(step to min/max), so we may just update to
the case to check if the "number of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
OPTION_MASK_P8_FUSION is purely optimization and shouldn't prevent inlining,
no?
As of HTM it would make the testcase a user error - when using -mcpu=power10 it
would require building with -mcpu=power8 -m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102061
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I suppose he means to follow the DECL_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN links to the origin.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #12 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> As of HTM it would make the testcase a user error - when using -mcpu=power10
> it would require building with -mcpu=power8 -mno-htm?
Or -mcpu=power8 should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102069
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Version|9.4.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102072
Bug ID: 102072
Summary: New test case gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_3.c in r12-3136
fails on armeb
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #13 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> OPTION_MASK_P8_FUSION is purely optimization and shouldn't prevent inlining,
> no?
>
> As of HTM it would make the testcase a user error - when using -mcpu=power
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #14 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> Note that x86 uses for example
>
> else if (caller_opts->x_ix86_fpmath != callee_opts->x_ix86_fpmath
>/* If the calle doesn't use FP expressions di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Michael Matz from comment #8)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #7)
> > Hm, note the ccxjqZU1 file contains:
> >
> > libwave_common.a@0x4307c
> > libwave_common.a@0x180314c
> >
> > What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #15 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #12)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> > As of HTM it would make the testcase a user error - when using -mcpu=power10
> > it would require building with
This mailing list is for automated emails from our bugzilla database,
not for reporting bugs directly.
To report a bug please follow the instructions at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/
Your email doesn't look like a bug report anyway, maybe you meant to
send it to the gcc-help mailing list?
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102073
Bug ID: 102073
Summary: gcc/ada/socket.c: 2 * missing return
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
>
> Thanks for the example, it looks useful! Now the field fp_expressions is
> generic, one target specific summary class seems required then. And not sure
> if the users still have interests/senses to furt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102071
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102071
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102071
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.3.1, 11.2.1, 12.0
Known to wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90147
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Please post the patch to the gcc-patches list for review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102074
Bug ID: 102074
Summary: include/bits/atomic_timed_wait.h:215: possible missing
return ?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #17 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 51357
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51357&action=edit
Fix some issues in rs6000_can_inline_p
As Martin pointed out, currently function rs6000_can_inline_p just returns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102075
Bug ID: 102075
Summary: fill_always_executed_in_1 incomplete computation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #18 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> >
> > Thanks for the example, it looks useful! Now the field fp_expressions is
> > generic, one target specific summary class seems required then. And not sure
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102072
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102069
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
perf isn't particularly helpful, pointing at differences where no differences
in assembly occurs. But we do now vectorize soplex::SPxSteepPR::entered4, in
particular soplex::Vector::operator* which is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102044
--- Comment #2 from qingzhe huang ---
The root cause of this issue maybe similar to those PR102033, PR102034,
PR102042 etc., however, this is still a distinctive case because of its nature.
It is not a "typename" indicating its a dependent-type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102072
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |---
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102076
Bug ID: 102076
Summary: powerpc: mflr called twice when using
__builtin_return_address(0)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101243
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100285
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cd67d138ec6006d650d1ba96c8a1322b285723cd
commit r12-3158-gcd67d138ec6006d650d1ba96c8a1322b285723cd
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100285
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It should look a bit better after r12-3158.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101243
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #3)
> pr.cc:71:22: error: use of deleted function 'FOO::FOO(const FOO&)'
> pr.cc:59:3: note: declared here
Maybe I'm missing the point of the code, but this is exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45178
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|TREE|
Last reconfirmed|2021-07-26 00:00:00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39821
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102073
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |charlet at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102074
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102077
Bug ID: 102077
Summary: null-pointer dereference in std::thread::detach()
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
Bug ID: 102078
Summary: ffinity.c:59:19: error: Signed integer overflow ?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99299
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102077
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
std::thread::detach doesn't dereference any pointers except 'this' and if that
is null or invalid, the problem is not in libstdc++. This looks like a GDB bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102077
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There's no evidence of a null pointer in that backtrace anyway.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101935
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102077
Florin Iucha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102072
--- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon ---
Indeed, so I don't think this is a dup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-26
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #10 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #9)
> For this example, let's suppose that we set mcpu=power8 and mno-vsx in the
> command line. Thus, _ARCH_PWR8 should be defined as mcpu=power8. B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #10 from Matt Godbolt ---
Thanks! Will attach!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #11 from Matt Godbolt ---
Created attachment 51360
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51360&action=edit
preprocessed, gzipped App.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #12 from Matt Godbolt ---
Created attachment 51361
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51361&action=edit
preprocessed. gzipped, Sentry.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #13 from Matt Godbolt ---
Both attached. When they're built they're built with:
```
/home/mgodbolt/dev/wave/cmake-build-release/env/bin/x86_64-conda_cos6-linux-gnu-g++
-DSPDLOG_FMT_EXTERNAL -Igenerated -I../src -I../src/wave/common/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
Thanks, Tulio, exactly right.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #12 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho ---
There is a chance, that my previous comment is wrong with regards the
generation of VSX instructions for Power8.
I don't know what the second command means:
$ gcc-11 -mcpu=power10 -dM -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102079
Bug ID: 102079
Summary: Misleading -Wlto-type-mismatch warning on wrong float
type to C function
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102079
--- Comment #1 from Rimvydas (RJ) ---
On side note the gfortran -fc-prototypes-external do suggest (as documentation
for gfortran v8 and newer) to use size_t type for hidden character array
lengths that are passed by value instead of usual by re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Matt Godbolt from comment #13)
> Both attached. When they're built they're built with:
>
> ```
> /home/mgodbolt/dev/wave/cmake-build-release/env/bin/x86_64-conda_cos6-linux-
> gnu-g++ -DSPDLOG_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102079
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102075
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Status|U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102072
--- Comment #4 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
Code around tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:1049 (in determine_exit_conditions) is:
else if (cmp == GT_EXPR)
{
gcc_assert (tree_int_cst_sign_bit (step));
}
which seems checking: 'step' should be negative
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45178
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
> and that marks a condition that has nothing to do with loop control. I
> suppose
> we can elide this when the loop has no exit (we are already marking backedges
> of irreducible loops).
>
> But I never act
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102072
--- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #4)
> I did not find arm big-endian yet, I'm trying to reproduce this issue on
> other targets...
For testing purposes you should be able to build a standard arm-eab
ith-multilib-list=m64
--prefix=/tmp/gcc-c/../gcc-native-quick-installed --disable-nls --without-isl
--disable-libsanitizer --disable-libvtv --disable-libgomp
--disable-libstdcxx-pch --disable-libunwind-exceptions CFLAGS='-O1 '
CXXFLAGS='-O1 '
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102080
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 51362
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51362&action=edit
dec_reconstruct.cc.cc.orig.xz
dec_reconstruct.cc.cc.orig.xz is the original extracted preprocessed file,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102081
Bug ID: 102081
Summary: [12 regression] ICE building compiler starting with
r12-3159
Product: gcc
Version: 9.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102081
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64le-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101723
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #15 from Matt Godbolt ---
> Can you please try reproducing it locally with the 2 pre-processed file.
I'm not sure how to: if I don't have all the object files available in my link
line I get missing symbol errors before any lto1 inv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102057
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:226eb7ff5d73669184a4a56cd348fa6c46b3ec52
commit r12-3162-g226eb7ff5d73669184a4a56cd348fa6c46b3ec52
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Thu A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102057
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102082
Bug ID: 102082
Summary: minor: 2 * pointless assignment to function parameters
?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102083
Bug ID: 102083
Summary: libiberty/simple-object-xcoff.c:844: pointless test
and assignment ?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102080
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102084
Bug ID: 102084
Summary: Segfault when lambda is missing return type
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102081
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102085
Bug ID: 102085
Summary: libsanitizer/asan/asan_errors.cpp:387: declaration and
definition do not match ?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102086
Bug ID: 102086
Summary: [F2008][TS29113] Accepts invalid scalar TYPE(*) as
actual argument to assumed-rank
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102029
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a2d9b558299df91e9c34a583eb0f0b14d1cacce9
commit r12-3163-ga2d9b558299df91e9c34a583eb0f0b14d1cacce9
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Thu A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
Ok, so please provide pre-processed files for all stuff that goes to
libwave_common.a library. And the same for main.o please.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102081
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102076
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98411
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:65ff948e6f8a257ad593256715004eaa41c27011
commit r11-8932-g65ff948e6f8a257ad593256715004eaa41c27011
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
--- Comment #17 from Matt Godbolt ---
This is proprietary code (that the App and Sentry files didn't really contain
anything I was concerned about), and it links with a number of other libraries
which are much more proprietary (e.g. lwave env/li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98411
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d9887f6d99fe435dd63e1c0eefa820b24c7f4100
commit r10-10071-gd9887f6d99fe435dd63e1c0eefa820b24c7f4100
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98411
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88220
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102084
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
With -fsanitize=undefined I get:
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20210826/include/c++/12.0.0/bits/invoke.h:116:38:
runtime error: reference binding to null pointer of type 'const double'
/op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102084
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
So we have in original:
< = (const double &) &TARGET_EXPR (const
double&)::&> (<<< Unknown tree: empty_class_expr >>>,
std::forward(const double&)::&> ((struct
type &) __fn))>;, 0>>;
Note the ,0 there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102084
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101997
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I have run the testcase under the debugger and the longest arguments to
sprintf I have found is
"m2345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789_123.n234567890123456789012345678901234
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102085
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
It might be useful to submit this upstream too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102084
--- Comment #4 from Sergio Losilla ---
I see, thanks! The second version (constant_ref) which returns the reference to
the captured does not trigger the sanitizer, so returning a reference to that
is valid?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102084
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sergio Losilla from comment #4)
> I see, thanks! The second version (constant_ref) which returns the reference
> to the captured does not trigger the sanitizer, so returning a reference to
> tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102084
--- Comment #6 from Sergio Losilla ---
Thank you for taking the time in explaining it, appreciated :-)
--enable-multilib --with-system-zlib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210826 (experimental) [master revision
352d5e85a70:96f76144c4d:5a6c626710ad2ac4baa2dba02fac0750177e3305] (GCC)
[541] %
[541] % gcctk -O2 small.c
[542] %
[542] % gcctk -O3 small.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81609
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Seems fixed for GCC 11.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32042
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.1.0
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
1 - 100 of 183 matches
Mail list logo
