https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
--- Comment #6 from Matthias Klose ---
also seen on arm-linux-gnueabihf.
at least on s390x, the proposed patch fixes the bootstrap.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98542
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 6 Jan 2021, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98542
>
> --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> With the follow-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1b5669752426d225b0088d57d1d2fffba9625032
commit r11-6514-g1b5669752426d225b0088d57d1d2fffba9625032
Author: Hongyu Wang
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79251
luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98537
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
BTW(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #0)
> Since r11-5839-g3a6e3ad38a17a03ee0139b49a0946e7b9ded1eb1 we ICE on the
BTW, for testcase
typedef int v4si __attribute__ ((vector_size (16)));
v4si
foo (v4si b,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577
Bug ID: 98577
Summary: Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the
"count" argument is int64.
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98576
--- Comment #3 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #2)
> The same issue can be found with any EXEC charset besides UTF-8.
>
> I really hope GCC could provide a macro to let me know what the current
> execution charset is so I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98576
--- Comment #2 from cqwrteur ---
The same issue can be found with any EXEC charset besides UTF-8.
I really hope GCC could provide a macro to let me know what the current
execution charset is so I can output the correct thing under the current
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98576
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98576
Bug ID: 98576
Summary: std::source_location should return EBCDIC encoding
strings under EBCDIC execution charset charsets
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98564
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97074
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97074
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:be6c485b24f2b47ac85380dd2bea025d353f1f91
commit r11-6513-gbe6c485b24f2b47ac85380dd2bea025d353f1f91
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98564
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cffe6dd2ce358c2cb550c9fb3c57cec65eee1c93
commit r11-6512-gcffe6dd2ce358c2cb550c9fb3c57cec65eee1c93
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17314
--- Comment #25 from Anthony Sharp ---
Hopefully (pending approval) the original bug is now fixed, even if it did take
a long time! I agree that compilers should match the standard where reasonable
to do so (like in this case), but I can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98461
--- Comment #14 from Denis Yaroshevskiy
---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #13)
> (In reply to Denis Yaroshevskiy from comment #11)
> > Previous 128bit contained a bug.
> > Here is an updated one: https://godbolt.org/z/6vdxro
> >
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17314
--- Comment #24 from Ivan Godard ---
OP here.
Yes, no one would *intentionally* try to derive from a virtual private. But one
could - and I did - derive a class with. It took no little wild geese chasing
from the diagnostic to find that a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98465
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Adding #pragma GCC diagnostic ignore "-Wstringop-overread" to
string::_M_replace(size_type, size_type, const _CharT*, const size_type)
doesn't suppress the warning, either on trunk, or (with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98499
--- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Possibly in discovering pure/constness. See uses of
> gimple_call_return_slot_opt_p in tree-ssa-structalias.c
Aha, that's useful!
Trying to understand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98465
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
Different -std= settings also affect the warning, again as a result of inlining
and the explicit instantiation declarations. The basic_string.tcc file has the
following block toward the end which explains
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98465
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Comparing the code emitted by GCC 10 and the current trunk shows that the
former doesn't inline std::string::replace() regardless of the inlining limit.
The translation unit obtained with the former shows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88356
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> could someone try this for me?
This worked fine for me, both with -j2 and without. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98573
--- Comment #4 from David Neill Asanza ---
Created attachment 49906
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49906=edit
Reproducer for 0-length case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98573
--- Comment #3 from David Neill Asanza ---
A related case when the array is 0-length. In this case, the dynamic type is
lost in both assignment and sourced allocation.
$ cat type_lost_0_length.f90
module foo
type, public:: box
class(*),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger ---
could someone try this for me?
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests
index 80d4b61..7cd755c 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97978
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Vladimir Makarov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15a47f437d2ba320aa9cb72986812f115498dbf9
commit r11-6509-g15a47f437d2ba320aa9cb72986812f115498dbf9
Author: Vladimir N. Makarov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92736
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Aah, now I see (lto-wrapper.c):
if (parallel)
{
fprintf (mstream, "%s:\n\t@%s ", output_name, new_argv[0]);
for (j = 1; new_argv[j] != NULL; ++j)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #10 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> I tried to bootstrap with
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.24
>
> but still cannot reproduce the reported
> failure ltrans0.ltrans_args
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #10 from Bernd Edlinger ---
I tried to bootstrap with
GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.24
but still cannot reproduce the reported
failure ltrans0.ltrans_args / ltrans0.ltrans_args.0
I really wonder what makes the difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95768
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98305
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95768
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abb1b6058c09a7c0430d9bf019466ada07ca7b40
commit r11-6508-gabb1b6058c09a7c0430d9bf019466ada07ca7b40
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98305
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd64f348a6b40621dc2bcc743f5fdfb31ed0894c
commit r11-6507-gfd64f348a6b40621dc2bcc743f5fdfb31ed0894c
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98572
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96504
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:334a295fafdf5e66c4c976874282aea959830eb6
commit r11-6506-g334a295fafdf5e66c4c976874282aea959830eb6
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98575
Bug ID: 98575
Summary: [11 regression] gcc.dg/analyzer/pr94851-1.c fails
after r11-6495
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88731
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vonchun at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98572
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98574
Bug ID: 98574
Summary: Make gcc-jenkins an OSS Project
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/jenkins
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98572
--- Comment #2 from Chun Feng ---
Hi Pinskia:
Thanks for looking into this.
This is my understanding:
As rules from
https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/INT02-C.+Understand+integer+conversion+rules
1. If both operands have the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98573
--- Comment #2 from David Neill Asanza ---
Created attachment 49905
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49905=edit
Minimal reproducer for segmentation fault.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98573
--- Comment #1 from David Neill Asanza ---
Removing the derived type container triggers a segfault.
$ cat segfault.f90
module foo
contains
subroutine store1(arr, val)
class(*), allocatable, intent(out) :: arr(:)
class(*), intent(in)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98541
--- Comment #3 from Martin Uecker ---
Having to set the length to 0 for NULL pointers is problematic also because
zero-sized array types are now allowed in ISO C.
On the other hand, an optional warning that warns for all parameters declared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98573
Bug ID: 98573
Summary: Dynamic type lost on assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98572
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>Even if integer promotion happens, it should be promoted as "unsigned int" as
>well.
Why do you think it should be promoted to unsigned int rather int? Since a
24bit unsigned int fits into a 32 bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98567
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Comment on attachment 49901
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49901
gcc11-pr98567.patch
>+(define_insn "*bmi_blsi__cmp"
>+ [(set (reg:CCZ FLAGS_REG)
>+ (compare:CCZ
>+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98555
--- Comment #3 from Rich Felker ---
> Due to "undefined behavior" of course means this isn't unexpected
That would only be the case if undefined behavior were reached during
execution, but it's not. This bug affects programs that do not and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98572
Bug ID: 98572
Summary: Unexpected signed extension for unsigned bit fields
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78746
--- Comment #23 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8b6f1e8f97fe0d435d334075821149dbd85c8266
commit r11-6505-g8b6f1e8f97fe0d435d334075821149dbd85c8266
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98568
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49903
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49903=edit
gcc11-pr98568.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98541
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
> and necessary to prevent this use case.
I mean: ...to prevent invalidating it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98541
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98558
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Might be a dup of PR98568.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #4)
> C++ tests aren't run in C++11 mode unless specified by GXX_TESTSUITE_STDS
> (to alleviate testing times).
Or one can use make check-c++-all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98570
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98571
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92587
--- Comment #17 from DIL ---
Thanks for fixing this!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose ---
the attached files are from a build configured --with-arch=z196
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
Created attachment 49902
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49902=edit
preprocessed source & gcda
/home/doko/gcc-11-11-20210106/build/./prev-gcc/cc1 -quiet -I . -I
../../src/li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98571
Bug ID: 98571
Summary: ICE in handle_argspec_attribute, at
c-family/c-attribs.c:3542
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e6a5daae7ec5318c3949432d92b7f674dab5241d
commit r11-6504-ge6a5daae7ec5318c3949432d92b7f674dab5241d
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98570
Bug ID: 98570
Summary: ICE: canonical types differ for identical types
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98561
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Grund ---
I did some work to reduce this further: https://godbolt.org/z/sezTPs
For some reason it seems to be related to std::array. So may I suggest to
include the above (or the original reproducer) in the test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
C++ tests aren't run in C++11 mode unless specified by GXX_TESTSUITE_STDS (to
alleviate testing times).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98568
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
$ ~/arch-gcc/r11-6475/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/dimhen/arch-gcc/r11-6475/bin/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
I suspect I meant for the test to only be compiled in C++ 14 and up, but it has
{ dg-do compile { target c++11 } } at the top so that seems wrong. But the
test log shows that it is only compiled in c++14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98569
Bug ID: 98569
Summary: concept error message does not report the file
location
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98568
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-06
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98567
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49901
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49901=edit
gcc11-pr98567.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98568
Bug ID: 98568
Summary: [11 regression] ICE in verify_gimple() during GIMPLE
pass: store-merging
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98567
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 98561, which changed state.
Bug 98561 Summary: -Wstringop-overflow triggered when memcpy to single char and
writing to differently sized array members
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98561
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95353
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexander.grund@tu-dresden.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98561
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-06
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98567
Bug ID: 98567
Summary: Failure to optimize using ZF flag from blsi
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Bug ID: 98566
Summary: g++.dg/warn/Wmismatched-dealloc.C fails with
-std=c++11
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98564
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98563
--- Comment #1 from N Schaeffer ---
I just found the -mprefer-vector-width=512 to force to use zmm.
The reported regression however remains.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98565
Bug ID: 98565
Summary: internal compiler error: in conv_function_val, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:3950
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
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=98563
Bug ID: 98563
Summary: regression: vectorization fails while it worked on gcc
9 and earlier
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98555
--- Comment #2 from Campbell ---
> Did you actually run into this for a relevant case?
Yes. The relevant use case is where a sentinel value is needed that has
function pointer type, as function pointers are not interchangeable with other
types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98506
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98506
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by John David Anglin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d0b075d662e277a9847f7e8c17d34e7866f0cec
commit r11-6503-g6d0b075d662e277a9847f7e8c17d34e7866f0cec
Author: John David Anglin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96919
--- Comment #14 from Bhavana Kilambi
---
Hi Martin,
This fix is for a customer who was facing this issue. Since I couldn't find a
trivial fix for it, tried to handle it in a special case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98551
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98562
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
this is r11-6500
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98542
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> What do you mean with "twice"? We seem to do interleaving here (on x86_64)
> but since 'v' and 'i' have different types they do not belong to
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: doko at debian dot org
Target Milestone: ---
trunk 20210106 ftbfs on s390x-linux-gnu, profiledbootstrap-lean target. an
20210102 snapshot successfully built.
In file included from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17314
--- Comment #23 from Anthony Sharp ---
The patch is now on the mailing list
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/562835.html).
Please take my last comment with a pinch of salt ... I was mainly trying to sum
up what has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98292
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96919
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška ---
> Hi Martin, My sincere apologies for the delay in replying and also for
> uploading a faulty patch. I have attached another patch for this issue. It
> is more of a tweak than a straight-forward approach to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98330
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] ICE in |[9/10/11 Regression] ICE in
1 - 100 of 173 matches
Mail list logo
