https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101012
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Reduced C code seems to be:
putRGBAAseparate8bittile_w(int *cp, unsigned char *g) {
char *a, *r;
unsigned *b;
int _x;
for (; _x; _x -= 8) {
*cp++ = *r++ | (unsigned)*g++ << 8 | *b++ << 16 | (u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101012
Bug ID: 101012
Summary: ice in vect_slp_analyze_node_operations
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100984
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100984
Bug ID: 100984
Summary: gimple-ssa-evrp.c: mismatched new and delete
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100925
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
That one seems bad, so current range is (ea418485c700494c..d2d74c9fc0cf46f6),
so 15 revisions left.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100925
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #1)
> Seems ok at ea418485c700494c. Trying 7ed1cd9665d8ca0f
Tried it and it seems bad. Range seems to be (ea418485c700494c,
7ed1cd9665d8ca0f).
Trying d2d74c9fc0cf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100925
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Seems ok at ea418485c700494c. Trying 7ed1cd9665d8ca0f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100925
Bug ID: 100925
Summary: tree check fail in make_range_step, at
fold-const.c:5061
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100913
Bug ID: 100913
Summary: cppcheck: 2 * pointless new assignments in the parser
?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100773
--- Comment #7 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> Yes, this fixed that.
I've just checked and yes, I agree.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100773
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Seems bad at b6bdd7a4cb41ee05, so the current range is
10b286ce335cca13..b6bdd7a4cb41ee05, or about 6 revisions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100773
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
Seems fine at 10b286ce335cca13. Trying b6bdd7a4cb41ee05.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100773
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
Seems fine at 4b1987f8ad382a6c. Trying 10b286ce335cca13.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100773
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
I will have a go at doing a git bisect. 51 commits to start with.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100773
Bug ID: 100773
Summary: ice in operator[], at vec.h:890
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100513
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100722
Bug ID: 100722
Summary: ice in extract_insn, at recog.c:2770
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100369
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #1)
> Can you share details on how you get this error? (GCC configure options,
> command-line used to compile the testcase)
configure is
CC="clang -Wall -Wextra"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98218
--- Comment #15 from David Binderman ---
Bug first appears sometime between git hash 21dfb22920ce32fc,
dated yesterday and git hash 097fde5e7514e909, dated today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98218
--- Comment #14 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #13)
> A wild guess: you are compiling for TARGET_XOP?
Not sure. bdver2.
Reduced C code:
typedef float DBL;
struct {
DBL c_x, c_y
} Random_Simis_Cur;
Random_Simis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98218
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100445
--- Comment #14 from David Binderman ---
AFAIK, yes. I didn't try out the gcc/testsuite, but I did try out
all the places (about 20) where fedora rawhide failed to build.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100418
--- Comment #15 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> This PR is about amdgcn ICEs, so please move x86 related ICEs to a different
> PR, they have nothing to do with this bug.
Done. Please see # 100445.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100445
Bug ID: 100445
Summary: ice during RTL pass: vregs
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100418
--- Comment #12 from David Binderman ---
It looks like my ice is due to commit f3661f2d63fbc5fd30c24d22137691e16b0a0a17
by Uroš Bizjak.
I'll send in another bug report. Sorry for this mixup.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100418
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman ---
Reduced C code:
int kgd_get_dense_grid_point_double_mesh_mesh_i;
int kgd_get_dense_grid_point_double_mesh_mesh_address[3];
kgd_get_dense_grid_point_double_mesh_mesh() {
for (; kgd_get_dense_grid_point_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100369
Bug ID: 100369
Summary: crash after error in
gcc.target/aarch64/simd/vgetq_lane_s64_indices_1.c
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100344
--- Comment #7 from David Binderman ---
Reduced C++ code seems to be:
template struct integral_constant {
static constexpr int value = __v;
};
template constexpr long find_index() { return 1; }
template
using find_index_checked = integral_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100344
--- Comment #6 from David Binderman ---
The bug first seems to occur sometime between git hash
b58dc0b803057c0e, dated 20210429, and 17f2908fcf058e14, dated
20210430.
I have a poor record with git bisect, so I will leave that
to someone else
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100344
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100336
Bug ID: 100336
Summary: file trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386-isa.def doesn't get
installed ok ?
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #11 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 50642
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50642&action=edit
x86_64 object module
gruser.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 50641
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50641&action=edit
x86_64 object module
grtter.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #9 from David Binderman ---
>From a different fedora package build, I have a much simpler test case:
$ /home/dcb/gcc/results/bin/gcc grtter.o gruser.o
Two object modules attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #7)
> How is libtolua++-5.3.so built?
$ gcc -o lib/libtolua++-5.3.so -Wl,-soname,libtolua++-5.3.so -shared
src/lib/tolua_event.os src/lib/tolua_is.os src/lib/tolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #6 from David Binderman ---
The command line seems to be:
gcc -o src/bin/tolua.o -c -g -O3 -funroll-all-loops -freport-bug -flto=auto
-ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security
-fstack-protector-strong -fasy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 50635
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50635&action=edit
preprocessed C source code file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
Starting git bisect ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 50634
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50634&action=edit
x86_64 object module
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
Bug ID: 100150
Summary: ice in bp_unpack_string
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100147
Bug ID: 100147
Summary: libstdc++-v3/include/bits/gslice.h:170: missing check
for assignment to self ?
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100143
Bug ID: 100143
Summary: gcc/gengtype.c:4097:34: warning: Function
'finish_root_table' argument order different
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99933
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pekka.jaaskelainen@parmance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99933
Bug ID: 99933
Summary: gcc/brig/brigfrontend/brig-function.cc: 4 * possible
performance problem ?
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99917
Bug ID: 99917
Summary: gcc/d/dmd/mtype.c:5223: missing call to va_end ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99866
Bug ID: 99866
Summary: gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-protos.h: 2 * passing
structs ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99674
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
A straightforward generalisation of this bug report would
be for gcc to warn on code like this:
struct S
{
int a, b, c;
S();
};
S::S() : a( 0), c( 2)
{
};
cppcheck finds the problem but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99674
Bug ID: 99674
Summary: gcc/config/i386/i386-features.c: 2143: 2 * member
variable not inited in ctor ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99617
Bug ID: 99617
Summary: gcc/cp/coroutines.cc:2807: member variables not
initialised in constructor ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99616
Bug ID: 99616
Summary: gcc/cp/decl.c:12220: pointless test ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99615
Bug ID: 99615
Summary: gcc/cp/decl.c:10038:possible null pointer dereference
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99614
Bug ID: 99614
Summary: diagnostic-manager.cc:85: possible missing copy
constructor ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99489
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99553
Bug ID: 99553
Summary: libgo/misc/cgo/testcarchive/testdata/main_unix.c:39:
suspicious compare ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99467
Bug ID: 99467
Summary: ice in lra_set_insn_recog_data, at lra.c:1006
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99422
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99131
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
I usually write code that compiles warning free on both gcc and clang.
I only noticed this difference between gcc and clang as a result
of compiling the latest release of the tor browser. I thought it
woul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99131
Bug ID: 99131
Summary: gcc doesn't detect missing comma in array
initialisation
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97894
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
I applied the obvious changes and gcc built fine.
git diff attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97894
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 50128
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50128&action=edit
git diff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98963
Bug ID: 98963
Summary: gcc/jit/libgccjit++.h: 20 * function could be const
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
--- Comment #12 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #11)
> It might be that some code optimizes converts
...
> It might be that the either the middle end of GCC does this optimization or
> that valgrind does this in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98951
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Thanks for the fast fix.
Since this bug has gone so well, you may like to have a look at # 97894.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman ---
I added the debug lines
fprintf( stderr, "%d\n", flag_coarray);
fprintf( stderr, "%d\n", lhs_caf_attr.codimension);
fprintf( stderr, "%d\n", rhs_caf_attr.codimension);
fprintf( stderr, "%d\n", lhs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98951
Bug ID: 98951
Summary: gcc/cp/call.c: 4 * member functions can be marked
const
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98912
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
For varasm.c line 8285 is
for (p = s; p < limit && *p != '\0'; p++)
So either the limit is wrong or there are some un-init bytes in
the string. My money is on option 2 ;->
Maybe a suitable firs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98912
Bug ID: 98912
Summary: valgrind error in default_elf_asm_output_ascii
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> Can you please point to the source file.
./BLAS/SRC/dcabs1.f
I have attached a copy anyway.
> And can you please use the following valgrind option:
> --expens
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
--- Comment #7 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 50103
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50103&action=edit
fortran source code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
Another test case. I compiled source code file dcabs1.f, from the lapack
package.
I got
$ /home/dcb/gcc/results.20210131.valgrind/bin/gfortran dcabs1.f
==76833== Conditional jump or move depends on uninit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
The compile line of relevance is
/home/dcb/gcc/working.valgrind/./gcc/gfortran
-B/home/dcb/gcc/working.valgrind/./gcc/
-B/home/dcb/gcc/results.20210131.valgrind/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/home/dcb/gcc/res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98904
Bug ID: 98904
Summary: valgrind error in gfc_trans_assignment_1 during
bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98879
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98879
Bug ID: 98879
Summary: gcc/ada/terminals.c:732: redundantAssignment ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98758
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
Minor quibble over the patch. I notice that integer division by abs_b occurs.
Belt and braces, but is zero a legal value for abs_b ?
If so, it might be worth putting in some code to avoid divide by zero.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98758
Bug ID: 98758
Summary: ice in lambda_matrix_right_hermite
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94751
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98659
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98687
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
Another test case:
void a();
namespace b {
using ::a;
}
namespace c {
template void a();
template void f(d, e) {
using b::a;
using c::a;
}
template void i(g j, h, e k) { f(j, k); }
} // namespace c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98671
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #4)
> I'm not sure if solving this would bring us anything.
For clarity, at very most a 4% reduction in the size of the stack frame
for function ix86_parse_stringop_st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98679
Bug ID: 98679
Summary: Four functions could be marked "const".
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyze
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98671
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
For the same source code file, cppcheck finds these other very minor problems:
1.
trunk.git/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c:1520:11: warning:inconclusive: Width
10 given in format string (no. 3) is smaller
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98671
Bug ID: 98671
Summary: gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c:787:redundantAssignment
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98629
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98629
Bug ID: 98629
Summary: ice during GIMPLE pass: widening_mul
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
I see this problem in C++ on x86_64. Source code attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98564
Bug ID: 98564
Summary: valgrind error with -fanalyzer
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
--- Comment #10 from David Binderman ---
Reduced test case:
typedef struct {
short a;
struct {
unsigned short b;
unsigned short c
} d[]
} e;
enum { f, g, h, i };
e j;
char k, l;
e *m;
void n(void) {
int o;
char *q, *r = 0, *s,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
--- Comment #9 from David Binderman ---
Also from the testsuite, files
./gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c
./gcc.dg/torture/pr98235.c
./gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-34.c
with -O3 show the same problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
Range so far seems to be 7f359556a772e26e..1423318fa7786493
Trying fa4a8b6463e0dbc2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Seems good, so range reduces to 7f359556a772e26e..97b56dece7413839
Trying 1423318fa7786493
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
Seems ok, so range reduces to 4cf70c20cb10acd6..97b56dece7413839
Trying 7f359556a772e26e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
Seems good, so range reduces to f6e8e2797ebae21e..97b56dece7413839
Trying 4cf70c20cb10acd6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98393
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Trying hash f6e8e2797ebae21e.
901 - 1000 of 1103 matches
Mail list logo
