https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97543
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97543
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
One of my patches for adding IEEE 128-bit long double may help with this
situation. The ibm-ldouble.c module was not being compiled with
-mno-gnu-attributes would affect things if a different long double
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97543
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner ---
Created attachment 49436
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49436=edit
patch file
So libgcc compiles are explicitly using -mlong-double-128, which doesn't seem
right when GCC is configured
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
Hana Dusíková changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hanicka at hanicka dot net
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95979
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97557
Bug ID: 97557
Summary: [11 regression] several ada test case failures
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
--with-system-zlib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20201023 (experimental) [master revision
7991e963239:9cbfe237f74:757ba6653c2699761c2243e0194749a6695112d8] (GCC)
[521] %
[521] % gcctk -m32 -Os -c small.c
[522] %
[522] % gcctk -m32 -O2 -c small.c
during
version 11.0.0 20201023 (experimental) [master revision
7991e963239:9cbfe237f74:757ba6653c2699761c2243e0194749a6695112d8] (GCC)
[537] %
[537] % gcctk -O1 small.c; ./a.out
[538] %
[538] % gcctk -Os small.c
[539] % ./a.out
Floating point exception
[540] %
[540] % cat small.c
struct {
int a:1;
} b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87403
Bug 87403 depends on bug 91741, which changed state.
Bug 91741 Summary: Implement new warning -Wsizeof-array-div
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91741
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91741
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97543
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
This part of the attribute (all but the low 2 bits) is not documented
in the as manual, btw.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97552
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97463
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97552
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:757ba6653c2699761c2243e0194749a6695112d8
commit r11-4327-g757ba6653c2699761c2243e0194749a6695112d8
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97463
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7991e963239160624b22a12caaacce95d3667e49
commit r11-4326-g7991e963239160624b22a12caaacce95d3667e49
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97543
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97543
Gustavo Walbon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gustavowalbon at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
There are a couple of more constants for this could be tried.
Base 7:
static unsigned
rem_7_v2 (mytype n)
{
unsigned long a, b, c, d;
a = n & MASK_48;
b = (n >> 48) & MASK_48;
c = n >> 96;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97550
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97553
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
ted verifier of observations, that
is now failing to compile after including newest meteorological data.
gcc version 11.0.0 20201023 (experimental) linux x86_64
$ gcc -Wall -Wextra -O2 -c nwp_test.c
during RTL pass: cprop
nwp_test.c: In function 'obs_verif_body_entry':
nwp_test.c:14043:13: inter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97553
Bug ID: 97553
Summary: [missed optimization] constexprness not noticed when
UBsan enabled
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97552
Bug ID: 97552
Summary: missing waning passing null to a VLA argument declared
[static]
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20201023 (experimental) (GCC)
git version: 43868df37b0e1fa19c32175b41dd7dc1e7c515fd
***
Command Lines:
$ gcc -Wall -Wextra -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97550
Bug ID: 97550
Summary: libgcc ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu compiler hosted on
msys2
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97532
--- Comment #9 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #6)
>
>
> Shouldn't memory_operand (XEXP (op, 0), GET_MODE (XEXP (op, 0))) imply
> legitimate_address_p?
memory_operand does not imply legitimate_address_p. When
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97549
Bug ID: 97549
Summary: include/pstl rebase breaking
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97548
Bug ID: 97548
Summary: bogus -Wvla-parameter on a bound expression involving
a parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||erenon2 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97544
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97544
--- Comment #4 from Benedek Thaler ---
FTR, Using (N != 0 && i < N) does not silence the warning.
https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/WqaT3G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97547
Bug ID: 97547
Summary: How to fix problem causing warning?
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97546
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oh and since C++17 you can do:
if constexpr (N != 0)
for (size_t i = 0; i < N; ++i) {
ret += i * x[i];
}
but it still shouldn't be necessary :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97546
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Likely find_bswap_or_nop just needs to bail out if !cst_and_fits_in_hwi
(TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (gimple_expr_type (stmt)))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to William Throwe from comment #2)
> This warns if passed an array of length 0 because the for-loop condition is
> always false. Any change I can make to fix it seems to make the code worse.
> I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97546
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97544
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97544
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's right, but it's not helpful. There are other instantiations of the
template where the condition isn't always true, and users shouldn't have to
write the condition as (N != 0 && i < N) just to silence
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97546
Bug ID: 97546
Summary: [SVE] ICE with -fenable-tree-bswap
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97538
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 49434
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49434=edit
proposed patch in testing
Ranger was returning undefined, which caused get_size_range() to use an
uninitialized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97545
Bug ID: 97545
Summary: ICE since commit 90e88fd376b and using
selective-scheduling2
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97544
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97544
Bug ID: 97544
Summary: -Wtype-limits triggered for comparison to template
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97540
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
2588 /* For special_memory_operand, there could be a memory operand
inside,
2589 and it would cause a mismatch for constraint_satisfied_p. */
2590 if (UNARY_P (op) && op ==
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49432
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49432=edit
a-stzunb.s.xz
The assembly (though, I don't have binutils 2.35.1+ around, so can't verify
easily myself now).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97543
Bug ID: 97543
Summary: powerpc64le: libgcc has unexpected long double in
.gnu_attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
--- Comment #5 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> # 82 "s-atocou.adb" 1
> isn't a .file assignment though.
> As I said earlier, if we don't want to revert the r11-3693 change and be
> able to specify -gdwarf-5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jakub at redhat dot com|mark at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> So isn't that yet another thing that needs to be changed/fixed in gas?
> Plus on the gcc side add a test for that once it is fixed in binutils?
I think this is a GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97542
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
--- Comment #3 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97542
--- Comment #2 from Vitaly Slobodskoy ---
Created attachment 49431
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49431=edit
Autogenerated files changes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97542
--- Comment #1 from Vitaly Slobodskoy ---
Created attachment 49430
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49430=edit
ITT API
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97542
Bug ID: 97542
Summary: Enable OpenMP efficient performance profiling via ITT
tracing
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97539
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97540
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
target?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541
Bug ID: 97541
Summary: Ada failed to bootstrap: Error: file table slot 1 is
already occupied by a different file
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97528
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97534
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-10-23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97504
--- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #5)
> Created attachment 49427 [details]
> patch that should fix the remaining s390 problem
>
> So, the issue is already fixed on aarch64-*,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97504
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97535
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Yeah, the overflow in the signed type is causing the number of instructions
guard to fail.
I'll submit a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97504
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9e3b9ddb996f18d541a3e03611d46c3a6c0c0b5f
commit r11-4314-g9e3b9ddb996f18d541a3e03611d46c3a6c0c0b5f
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97538
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97538
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 49428
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49428=edit
test-case
I see it also on x86_64-linux-gnu with ASAN:
$ /home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/objdir/gcc/xg++ -B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97537
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oh sorry, I misread your example. The second #include "header3.h" is indeed
reached. The header is skipped due to the optimization described at
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/Once-Only-Headers.html so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97537
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But the compiler never sees that #include, because it's guarded by the #ifndef
The -H option is not a general purpose dependency scanner, it just shows the
result of preprocessing. The documentation is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97539
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Stubbs ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #21)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #19)
> > GCN also uses MODE_INT for the mask mode and thus may be similarly affected.
> > Andrew - are the bits in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #21 from Andrew Stubbs ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #19)
> GCN also uses MODE_INT for the mask mode and thus may be similarly affected.
> Andrew - are the bits in the mask dense? Thus for a V4SImode compare
> would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97532
--- Comment #8 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> memory_operand calls general_operand which for MEM does:
> /* Use the mem's mode, since it will be reloaded thus. LRA can
> generate move insn with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97164
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:50bc94898fac1bd9cc1dabf227208fb5d369c4c4
commit r11-4282-g50bc94898fac1bd9cc1dabf227208fb5d369c4c4
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97535
--- Comment #3 from Icenowy Zheng ---
A minimal reproduction: (Compile with gcc -c -O1)
```
#include
#define SIZE 2181038080
extern char raw_buffer[SIZE];
void setRaw(const void *raw)
{
memcpy(raw_buffer, raw, SIZE);
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97540
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97540
Bug ID: 97540
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in lra_set_insn_recog_data, at
lra.c:1004 since r11-4202-g4de7b010038933dd
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97524
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97524
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6fade5a6044b7102758f4ca66c8715ebc12a6306
commit r11-4279-g6fade5a6044b7102758f4ca66c8715ebc12a6306
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97535
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97532
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
memory_operand calls general_operand which for MEM does:
/* Use the mem's mode, since it will be reloaded thus. LRA can
generate move insn with invalid addresses which is made valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97539
Bug ID: 97539
Summary: error: definition in block 5 does not dominate use in
block 24
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97538
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97538
Bug ID: 97538
Summary: ICE in during GIMPLE pass: wrestrict
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97534
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
So at least the tree.c use of get_mask_mode only passes it MODE_VECTOR so
we don't have to second-guess the component size when passed a MODE_INT used
as representation for an integer vector type.
So I'm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97524
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Tom Stellard from comment #6)
> If I have make installed on my system, but am using something else (e.g.
> ninja) to build my project, will I still get parallel execution?
No, we construct an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ams at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Maybe the x86 backend should use partial integer modes here (though we'd have
quite some, eventually not even possible), so the mask mode precision would
tell us how to build the types. Or the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7cda498920dbf244e9e06fdb2fc710a118a8c033
commit r11-4278-g7cda498920dbf244e9e06fdb2fc710a118a8c033
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97504
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 49427
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49427=edit
patch that should fix the remaining s390 problem
So, the issue is already fixed on aarch64-*, powerpc*-*, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15)
> CI with -march=cascadelake reports
>
..
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx2-vpcmpeqq-2.c execution test
expands
(gdb) p debug_tree (exp)
unit-size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97504
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97533
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97534
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
97 matches
Mail list logo
