https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102600
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102593
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102591
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102540
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102540
>
> --- Comment #6 from Andrew Macleod ---
>
> >
> > > It removes a
> > > relation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84469
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||1997.rajatjain at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102590
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102590
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51549|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102601
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102601
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
In file included from ../../../../../../gcc/libgcc/gthr.h:148,
from ../../../../../../gcc/libgcc/libgcov-interface.c:27:
./gthr-default.h:35:10: fatal error: pthread.h: No such file or directory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102601
Bug ID: 102601
Summary: [maybe not a bug] libgcc requires pthread.h even i use
--disable-thread --without-headers --disable-shared
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100427
--- Comment #6 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #5)
> actually a lot of dlls are not copied correctly.
>
> libstdc++-6.dll libatomic.dll libquadmath.dll libssp.dll are all copied with
> 32 bit dlls.
>
> And libgcc_seh.dll i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
--- Comment #12 from Thiago Macieira ---
Commit 7e0c0500808d58bca5b8e23cbd474022c32234e4 + your patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
--- Comment #11 from Thiago Macieira ---
$ for ((i=0;i<32;++i)); do ~/dev/gcc/bin/gcc "-DCONSTANT=(1<<$i)" -S -o - -O2
/tmp/test.cpp | grep bts; done
lock btsl $0, (%rdi)
lock btsl $1, (%rdi)
lock btsl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95185
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95185
Arjun Shankar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arjun.is at lostca dot se
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102600
Bug ID: 102600
Summary: [modules] ICE Segmentation fault during GIMPLE pass
evrp
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51543|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #28 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #21)
> Reduced testcase:
>
> int
> qy (void)
> {
> int tw = 4;
> int fb[tw];
> return fb[2];
> }
For this reduced testing case, if compiled with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102599
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102588
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://buildd.debian.org/s |
|tatus/fetch.php?pkg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102593
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102596
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #26 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #25)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #22)
> > Hmm, my proposed patch seems to work. I've adjusted it to not regress
> > previously correctly handled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93148
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
Additionally, it seems as if the contiguous check used for
gfortran.dg/contiguous_10.f90 currently unconditionally copies in the data –
which causes a problem when the pointer address escapes.
(Okay, whether
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102599
Bug ID: 102599
Summary: Wrong simplification of inquiry parameters for complex
arrays
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102528
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
hmm let me see if I can reproduce this (I didn't see it in my earlier tests):
.L41:
ud2
test():
ret
which would make things look somewhat strange indeed (the functions are all
TU-local - so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93148
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Also when looking at gfc_conv_subref_array_arg – the function is called
seemingly up to 3 times – once per:
* gfc_conv_loop_setup (&loop, &expr->where);
which calls gfc_conv_loop_setup → gfc_conv_loop_set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102528
--- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe ---
note I looked at master (trunk) and 11.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102528
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Mathias Stearn from comment #0)
> https://godbolt.org/z/aoab9W4xG
>
> This should all compile away, and test() should just be a single ret
> instruction. That is not what happens now, even w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102528
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-04
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102598
--- Comment #1 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña ---
Attempts to reduce another wrong-code bug lead to this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33925
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102571
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libgomp |tree-optimization
--- Comment #1 from J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102598
Bug ID: 102598
Summary: [modules] ICE in pp_string, at pretty-print.c
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102597
Bug ID: 102597
Summary: ICE in gfc_get_extern_function_decl, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:2243
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102596
Bug ID: 102596
Summary: [11/12 Regression] ICE in gfc_omp_clause_default_ctor,
at fortran/trans-openmp.c:713
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102385
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102595
Bug ID: 102595
Summary: ICE in var_element, at fortran/decl.c:298
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102594
Bug ID: 102594
Summary: ICE in decay_conversion, at cp/typeck.c:2311
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102548
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102593
Bug ID: 102593
Summary: [10/11/12 Regression] ICE in
cp_oacc_check_attachments, at cp/semantics.c:6561
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102485
--- Comment #2 from Paul Clarke ---
GCC putting the base ".machine" directive at the beginning of the file makes
any command-line use of "-many" (-Wa,-many) be ignored. Is that OK? "-many"
is supposed to make those black boxes just work. This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102485
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #25 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #22)
> Hmm, my proposed patch seems to work. I've adjusted it to not regress
> previously correctly handled cases and will test it fully.
I guess the r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102540
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Macleod ---
>
> > It removes a
> > relationship between c_10 and _2. The reason ranger no longer can fold _2
> > == 0
> > is because the sequence is now:
> >
> > a.0_1 = a;
> > _2 = (unsigned int) a.0_1;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102574
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102587
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102574
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5b9ac0301c850a02d045b5630aa08b4ceab20c1
commit r9-9756-ga5b9ac0301c850a02d045b5630aa08b4ceab20c1
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102574
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:41e21afc427ffe4a320616d4a454144b1e93a670
commit r10-10167-g41e21afc427ffe4a320616d4a454144b1e93a670
Author: Iain Buclaw
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102574
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd6098467ff83351948435efc826e1c4b4b27f99
commit r11-9068-gdd6098467ff83351948435efc826e1c4b4b27f99
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102544
--- Comment #9 from miko at predsci dot com ---
Both the C and Fortran versions returned "-1".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97573
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97573
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2dda00b734888d3b53ac91160083b5c6cd5ca5c8
commit r12-4148-g2dda00b734888d3b53ac91160083b5c6cd5ca5c8
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
--- Comment #9 from Thiago Macieira ---
Looks like it doesn't work for the sign bit.
$ cat /tmp/test.cpp
#include
bool tbit(std::atomic &i)
{
return i.fetch_or(CONSTANT, std::memory_order_relaxed) & CONSTANT;
}
$ ~/dev/gcc/bin/gcc -DCONST
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85730
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Not sure whether targets should have a special-case pattern here or whether
> that's for combine to un-canonicalize it?
Is the shift defined anywhere as th
4tbitRSt6atomicIiE, .-_Z4tbitRSt6atomicIiE
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 12.0.0 20211004 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
+1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102515
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102574
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c86a16b07b76604a8e3d556f135babab80e2b747
commit r12-4146-gc86a16b07b76604a8e3d556f135babab80e2b747
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Sun O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102566
--- Comment #7 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5)
> Created attachment 51536 [details]
> A patch
>
> Please try this.
Give me an hour (will try v2).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102554
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
> I can confirm I am seeing g:r12-4038-g6de9f0c13b27c343 resolve the issue.
>
> Is it possible to get this applied into the upcoming 10.4, 11.3 releases?
Sorry, but it won't be possible. It's a pretty sign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102588
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Reduced test-case:
namespace std {
typedef int size_t;
template class vector {
public:
typedef size_t size_type;
};
} // namespace std
typedef int quint32;
typedef double qreal;
class QPointF {
qreal yp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102570
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102570
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:55a3be2f5255d69e740d61b2c5aaba1ccbc643b8
commit r12-4143-g55a3be2f5255d69e740d61b2c5aaba1ccbc643b8
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49244
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102554
John S changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|12.0|
--- Comment #3 from John S ---
(In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102592
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102592
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|heap-use-after-free when|[11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102592
Bug ID: 102592
Summary: heap-use-after-free when constructing
std::filesystem::path from iterator pair
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102482
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100444
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 51547
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51547&action=edit
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102591
Bug ID: 102591
Summary: Failure to optimize search for value in vector-sized
area to use SIMD
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102587
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102544
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Stubbs ---
Did you get the C version to return anything other than "-1"? (The expected
result is "2".)
I'm still trying to determine if the device is compatible, but the mapping
problem looks like a different issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102586
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Seems in the C++ FE it is CLASSTYPE_AS_BASE, so shall clear_padding_type for
FIELD_DECLs where DECL_SIZE_UNIT (fld) is smaller than TYPE_SIZE_UNIT
(TREE_TYPE (fld)) call some new langhook which for C++ would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
I do have to check the result before this fix attempt but at least with it
the overall testsuite state isn't so great. You can do
make check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix/-ftrivial-auto-var-init=zer"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93183
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > We get:
> > .L3:
> > ld1bz0.b, p0/z, [x1, x3]
> > movprfx z2, z0
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102586
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102590
--- Comment #2 from Rajat Jain <1997.rajatjain at gmail dot com> ---
Yeah .template works as well. This is in the latest release too. I wasn't sure
whether I should write the oldest version that this is in (since other 8.x
releases would need a p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85730
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> The GIMPLE IL is now using BIT_INSERT_EXPRs consistently for all cases and
> combine does
>
> Trying 8 -> 11:
> 8: {r90:SI=r89:SI<<0x1;clobber flags:CC;}
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102560
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102560
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fa3ccf8bfe9940b439d6cc2c38ee8da134b0ff2d
commit r12-4139-gfa3ccf8bfe9940b439d6cc2c38ee8da134b0ff2d
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102319
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
@Jason: May I please ping this issue. It's still not addressed after
g:4320a4b717dcccddf230d0b944bfc5a7ae282508.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102590
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
My bet is gcc mistaken it for being a dependent type which meaning you can use
the template keyword to workaround the issue. Also gcc 8.x series is over 3
years old so this might be fixed already in a newer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102590
Bug ID: 102590
Summary: Templated operations on variables in structured
binding don't work when templated functions/lambdas
require type deduction
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102589
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Overloading < for shared_ptr like that is a bit questionable anyway.
You can use std::lexicographical_compare with a custom comparison function if
you want the custom less-than behaviour:
if (std::le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102589
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85730
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102588
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-04
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102589
Bug ID: 102589
Summary: spaceship: std::map does not use specialised operator<
for value
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, my proposed patch seems to work. I've adjusted it to not regress
previously correctly handled cases and will test it fully.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 102073, which changed state.
Bug 102073 Summary: gcc/ada/socket.c: 2 * missing return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102073
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102073
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102588
--- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 51545
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51545&action=edit
Preprocessed source.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102588
Bug ID: 102588
Summary: ICE: in smallest_mode_for_size, at stor-layout.c:356
when building openorienteering-mapper
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
URL: https://buildd.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
Reduced testcase:
int
qy (void)
{
int tw = 4;
int fb[tw];
return fb[2];
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102587
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102587
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The ICE is fixed, but VLA registers are uninitialized.
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
