https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90811
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Kito Cheng from comment #17)
> Created attachment 47920 [details]
> update-local-align-pass.patch
>
> Hi Jakub:
>
> I got your point, and I agree with your point, estimate_stack_frame_size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
--- Comment #29 from Thomas Henlich ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #28)
> ! Fold into [0,90] range
...
> if (arg == 180) then
I don't understand how (arg == 180) could be true after folding into [0,90]
range.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90811
--- Comment #17 from Kito Cheng ---
Created attachment 47920
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47920=edit
update-local-align-pass.patch
Hi Jakub:
I got your point, and I agree with your point, estimate_stack_frame_size not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92410
Roman Zhuykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhroma at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93956
Bug ID: 93956
Summary: Wrong array creation with p => array_dt(1:n)%component
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90467
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cf70bb0fbd7fb0f4bca99c53a36d0a389dcc2fc5
commit r10-6882-gcf70bb0fbd7fb0f4bca99c53a36d0a389dcc2fc5
Author: Sandra Loosemore
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86833
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2019-02-11 00:00:00 |2020-2-26
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89550
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
GCC 10 doesn't warn on the submitted test case so it looks like the change in
r269485 suppressed it. The patch was submitted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg00321.html
There's no test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84079
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84079
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Created attachment 47919
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47919=edit
Tested patch for GCC 11.
The attached patch adds the missing warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84079
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93789
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93789
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1231f71f96a4e461f94394b4fb8cfa25587fbd96
commit r10-6881-g1231f71f96a4e461f94394b4fb8cfa25587fbd96
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93955
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93955
Bug ID: 93955
Summary: detect conversion from pointer type to arithmetic type
in constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #43 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #42)
> I suspect the V_C_E inhibits tree-ssa-uninit.c code to avoid false
> positives. If we know the range of the V_C_E operand is narrow enough that
> it fits
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93950
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93947
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93950
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71b633aaea3aac2d983da7b1b99da8c9a8c80d1a
commit r10-6880-g71b633aaea3aac2d983da7b1b99da8c9a8c80d1a
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93544
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71b633aaea3aac2d983da7b1b99da8c9a8c80d1a
commit r10-6880-g71b633aaea3aac2d983da7b1b99da8c9a8c80d1a
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93947
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ba70d1b5ae8df6406a880b2d23e4710b393e8c9
commit r10-6879-g0ba70d1b5ae8df6406a880b2d23e4710b393e8c9
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93954
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> >Bisection points to g:bd2b9f1e2d67ec8e88c977154ecfee
>
> My bet is if you put a break point at "i--;" you would get the incorrect
> answer before that patch.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93954
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>Bisection points to g:bd2b9f1e2d67ec8e88c977154ecfee
My bet is if you put a break point at "i--;" you would get the incorrect answer
before that patch.
Since the function just has one instruction at -O3,
20200226 (experimental) [master revision
4d213bf6011:5d3c19b2ec6:ce25177f505ea75b3c0833c3f3f0072b97ee1b44] (GCC)
#It incorrectly prints i = 2580636200
$ gcc-trunk -g-O3 abc.c
$ gdb -x cmds -batch a.out
Breakpoint 1 at 0x4003a0: file abc.c, line 4.
Breakpoint 1, main () at abc.c:4
4 ;// b here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93848
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
An array is implicitly converted to a pointer; it's not an lvalue. But I think
we're splitting hairs. I agree we want a warning for passing past-the-end
pointers to functions that might inadvertently
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
--- Comment #28 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 04:02:23PM +, sgk at troutmask dot
apl.washington.edu wrote:
>
> > This is a best effort to still be able to use the standard library functions
> > but also get an increased
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91276
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Carl Love :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:526fadb010978c63dd06c0a85da3c4e1b5b1c63d
commit r9-8298-g526fadb010978c63dd06c0a85da3c4e1b5b1c63d
Author: Carl Love
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91276
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Carl Love :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f551b0889f56d2a89529e8cfce87f763f1a0bee9
commit r8-10092-gf551b0889f56d2a89529e8cfce87f763f1a0bee9
Author: Carl Love
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91276
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Carl Love :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15fc2e04a592f8bfcc3eafead71d0313566d8372
commit r10-6877-g15fc2e04a592f8bfcc3eafead71d0313566d8372
Author: Carl Love
Date: Wed Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93812
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93936
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93140
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92003
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90951
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93789
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93812
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase:
/* PR tree-optimization/93953 */
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 --param=ggc-min-expand=0 --param=ggc-min-heapsize=0" } */
int *b, c, e;
float d, g, f;
void
foo (int l)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93751
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
See https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html for the procedure. The patch is small
so you can probably skip the legal prerequisites, but you must post it on the
mailing list gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org in order to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
The results from creduce, lightly hand modified to add
some implied types, is
int *b;
int c;
float d, e;
void h() {
int f, g;
for (; f; ++f) {
float a = -(0 > g);
e += a * b[4 * (g + c * f)];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93948
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
The bug first seems to occur sometime between 20200224 and 20200225.
That is yesterday and the day before.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
Bug ID: 93953
Summary: ice during during GIMPLE pass: vect
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90951
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c51ac41714469104ee6120db3eedfb0964290502
commit r9-8292-gc51ac41714469104ee6120db3eedfb0964290502
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93140
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a8996b0a7b238180f4a10b19b1e90b33e5b2df0
commit r9-8291-g1a8996b0a7b238180f4a10b19b1e90b33e5b2df0
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c890c9650f3c4b1be1f39eabb74b438c033a8c08
commit r9-8294-gc890c9650f3c4b1be1f39eabb74b438c033a8c08
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92003
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f2f70af7c52720a0905a455425de0d6ca4fb1dc4
commit r9-8293-gf2f70af7c52720a0905a455425de0d6ca4fb1dc4
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92852
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b6678d67c4b7471c25130b6c60a9087e02f31179
commit r9-8290-gb6678d67c4b7471c25130b6c60a9087e02f31179
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93901
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It is the
* pt.c (maybe_instantiate_noexcept): Only update clones if we
instantiated.
part of that commit that breaks this, but I'm afraid I have no idea why.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93751
--- Comment #12 from Alexey Neyman ---
Patch ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93949
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87652
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87651
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87651
Bug 87651 depends on bug 86747, which changed state.
Bug 86747 Summary: [8 Regression] rejects-valid with redundant friend
declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86747
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86747
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87652
Bug 87652 depends on bug 86747, which changed state.
Bug 86747 Summary: [8 Regression] rejects-valid with redundant friend
declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86747
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93913
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:051b9873e78fe1acb1a3fecd0c6e5685b6c12fb3
commit r10-6874-g051b9873e78fe1acb1a3fecd0c6e5685b6c12fb3
Author: Peter Bergner
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88394
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87748
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87480
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87327
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86429
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 86429, which changed state.
Bug 86429 Summary: [8 Regression] lambda capture breaks constexpr-ness
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86429
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87554
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87685
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93952
--- Comment #1 from Frédéric Recoules
---
(In reply to Frédéric Recoules from comment #0)
> Now I wonder if the code where we replace the constraint by "rm" is valid
> because the returned value depends of the constraint the compiler have
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93862
--- Comment #8 from Will Wray ---
OK. I'll try to get full confirmation and clarification on legality,
with links to wording if possible, then open a new bug if valid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93862
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Oof, curious. Could you please create a new PR for that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93205
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f80c40f93f9e8781b14f1a8301467f117fd24051
commit r8-10091-gf80c40f93f9e8781b14f1a8301467f117fd24051
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92886
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a13dd21c3f4fe405980b469c544a00c4356d7006
commit r8-10090-ga13dd21c3f4fe405980b469c544a00c4356d7006
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93205
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92922
sudi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93862
--- Comment #6 from Will Wray ---
Thanks for the quick work.
However, I'm not sure that (2) and (3) _are_ invalid.
(Sorry, I didn't have time to follow the email thread).
I should have provided this link to an exchange with Richard Smith.
I'd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92922
--- Comment #2 from Joel Hutton ---
This was fixed by Richard Sandiford's patch.
commit fb15e2bab5267213b8706fa6a29eeef94f62a524
Author: Richard Sandiford
Date: Mon Jan 20 19:29:25 2020 +
aarch64: Fix SVE ACLE handling of SImode
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92886
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.0|8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93205
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a29236a23c03fe08998b81a0ef1f67e7ea185ba3
commit r9-8289-ga29236a23c03fe08998b81a0ef1f67e7ea185ba3
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92886
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a7ef79651abd20b95d1f76479887d1ea008a62f
commit r9-8288-g7a7ef79651abd20b95d1f76479887d1ea008a62f
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93950
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93012
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93877
--- Comment #13 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Indeed, this seems to be related to LRA.
I just tried to build gcc-9 with LRA enabled by default and the build fails
when trying to build gnat with:
checking for shl_load in -ldld...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
--- Comment #27 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:58:21PM +, thenlich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
>
> --- Comment #26 from Thomas Henlich ---
> Created attachment 47914
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93952
Bug ID: 93952
Summary: Giving an array in an operand
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI, accepts-invalid, documentation
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93320
Przemyslaw Wirkus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||przemyslaw.wirkus at arm dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93848
--- Comment #9 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #8)
> In
>
> int i[4];
> int (*p)[4] =
> bar_aux (p[1]);
>
> p[0] points to i and p[1] to (char*) + sizeof (i) (which is the same as
> [4]).
It seems
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93951
Bug ID: 93951
Summary: ICE with '-flto -femit-struct-debug-baseonly'
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93325
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93325
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:08a70a65670ee801d4190ec122d42aa4a9a997a9
commit r9-8286-g08a70a65670ee801d4190ec122d42aa4a9a997a9
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93325
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:655434f5ae93a4222a48c39c37a3a6fe0bdfc071
commit r8-10089-g655434f5ae93a4222a48c39c37a3a6fe0bdfc071
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93562
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93562
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93676
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] crash |[8/9 Regression] crash in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93936
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93676
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:38e1002657828150b2cda9f80c1f752184286e80
commit r10-6872-g38e1002657828150b2cda9f80c1f752184286e80
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
ary-trunk-20200226101433-gb9934ad88d6-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.1 20200226 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93936
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ce13842b50cbd2676f2e322995182af20df31fe
commit r10-6871-g8ce13842b50cbd2676f2e322995182af20df31fe
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93862
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93949
Bug ID: 93949
Summary: Register const local var will not compile
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93562
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:30cb4c78ea6563177c43f897e480d9993c38c0ed
commit r9-8285-g30cb4c78ea6563177c43f897e480d9993c38c0ed
Author: Jonathan Wakely
1 - 100 of 197 matches
Mail list logo
