https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113608
--- Comment #2 from JuzheZhong ---
vuint16m2_t vadd(vuint16m2_t a, vuint8m1_t b) {
int vl = __riscv_vsetvlmax_e8m1();
vuint16m2_t c = __riscv_vzext_vf2_u16m2(b, vl);
return __riscv_vadd_vv_u16m2(a, c, vl);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113204
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
Only need SGFTree.cpp, GTP.cpp to reproduce the issue.
Reducing it further.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #12 from Lehua Ding ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Works for me with r14-8399-ge6fbc3cc786a74.
>
> My -march=native expands to: `-march=skylake-avx512 -mmmx -mpopcnt -msse
> -msse2 -msse3 -mssse3 -msse4.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #11 from Lehua Ding ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> Finally able to reproduce it using -fno-use-linker-plugin .
I compile GCC with this commit e0701f8f7b6dcddb299eb5345e510cf9ea419150, but
the as and ld are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Maybe related to
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/586290.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
I just tried with a cross to aarch64-linux-gnu and that does not reproduce the
error either.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Works for me with r14-8399-ge6fbc3cc786a74.
My -march=native expands to: `-march=skylake-avx512 -mmmx -mpopcnt -msse -msse2
-msse3 -mssse3 -msse4.1 -msse4.2 -mavx -mavx2 -mno-sse4a -mno-fma4 -mno-xop
-mfma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #6 from Lehua Ding ---
(In reply to Lehua Ding from comment #5)
> Created attachment 57287 [details]
> All source file
Decompress the attachment and cd to it, then you can reproduce by these
command:
g++ -std=c++03 -m64 -c -o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #5 from Lehua Ding ---
Created attachment 57287
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57287=edit
All source file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I think GCC should be able to vectorize this loop but it goes wrong.
SVE the 7 part gets lost:
```
vect__3.12_54 = .MASK_LOAD (_48, 16B, loop_mask_52);
_32 = cond_17(D) + POLY_INT_CST [16, 16];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #21 from JuzheZhong ---
Hi, Richard. I looked into ivcanon.
I found that:
/* If the loop has more than one exit, try checking all of them
for # of iterations determinable through scev. */
if (!exit)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 57286
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57286=edit
Testcase that shows this is wrong code
I reduced the testcase into something which shows it is wrong code too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #3 from Lehua Ding ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> (In reply to Lehua Ding from comment #1)
> > Reproduce steps:
> > 1. download these object files(bugzilla has size limit):
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112439
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f4998609908e4926fc095ce97cb84b187294fd1d
commit r14-8727-gf4998609908e4926fc095ce97cb84b187294fd1d
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113638
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0b786ff38ab398087820d91241e030a28c451df9
commit r14-8726-g0b786ff38ab398087820d91241e030a28c451df9
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Lehua Ding from comment #1)
> Reproduce steps:
> 1. download these object files(bugzilla has size limit):
> https://github.com/lhtin/temp/raw/main/objects.zip
> 2. cd the object files dir and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #1 from Lehua Ding ---
Reproduce steps:
1. download these object files(bugzilla has size limit):
https://github.com/lhtin/temp/raw/main/objects.zip
2. cd the object files dir and run the command: /path/to/your/g++ -std=c++03
-m64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
Bug ID: 113712
Summary: lto crash: when building 641.leela_s peek with
Example-gcc-linux-x86.cfg (SPEC2017 1.1.9)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112919
--- Comment #8 from chenglulu ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #7)
> Any update? :)
Well, I haven't run it yet. Since this does not have a big impact on the spec
score, I am currently testing it on a single-channel machine, so the test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51492
--- Comment #13 from Li Pan ---
I'll try to understand it and make it happen recently.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113682
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Mathias Stearn from comment #5)
> Do you know if that applies to any cores that support x86_64? I checked
> Agner Fog's tables, and only very very old cores (P4 era) had high
> reciprocal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113694
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113694
--- Comment #2 from Matheus Afonso Martins Moreira ---
That's true but in that case the __stack_chk_* symbols will remain in the
compiler output and in the final binary. They will show up in readelf output,
GDB function disassemblies.
I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113711
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.0|---
Summary|Warning:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113335
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-01
nction
foo:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
addl$2000, %fs:0, %eax
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.size foo, .-foo
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 14.0.1 20240201 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
[hjl@gnu-cfl-3 apx
t;x.c"
.text
.p2align 4
.globl foo
.type foo, @function
foo:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
addl$2000, 8000(%esi,%edi,4), %eax
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.size foo, .-foo
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 14.0.1 2024020
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107126
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111790
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103701
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103701
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113360
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113690
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111895
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108166
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiajing_zheng at 163 dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113709
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109559
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113709
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112439
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113467
--- Comment #29 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 57285
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57285=edit
testcase w abort
Tweaked https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113467#c26 so it can be
used as a testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112836
--- Comment #5 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #4)
> I tried this patch but it does not address the issue with posix_spawn that I
> am seeing.
>
> Trying to build gcc from git on Linux sparc64 with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113638
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98935
Roman Lozko changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lozko.roma at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113710
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||103524
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113710
Bug ID: 113710
Summary: [14 Regression] g++.dg/modules/hello-1 ICE: canonical
types differ for identical types since
r14-8710-g65b4cba9d6a9ff
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112506
--- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
> (In reply to Gaius Mulley from comment #7)
> > I doubt the m2date and testclock are related to filesystem case (but I could
> > be wrong) as I've built gcc on a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111627
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe ---
FWIW. testing on i686-darwin9 and x86_64-darwin14 with
case-preserving-non-case-sens shows these fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82580
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113701
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:44764984cf24e27cf7756cffd197283b9c62db8b
commit r14-8713-g44764984cf24e27cf7756cffd197283b9c62db8b
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113686
--- Comment #2 from H. Peter Anvin ---
The intermediate alignment for lui is known, so if an object is known to fit
*entirely* within its natural alignment then it can be safely CSE'd, but this
is typically not the case with structures or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #10)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> > oh look at this a memset issue on sparc glibc:
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113402
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e9b2f15d989addc1c2ad4604f5fa5ee1bda6023b
commit r14-8712-ge9b2f15d989addc1c2ad4604f5fa5ee1bda6023b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113403
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:03519175e21f4c2940aeb446cd2b81fdf995cad5
commit r14-8711-g03519175e21f4c2940aeb446cd2b81fdf995cad5
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
--- Comment #10 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> oh look at this a memset issue on sparc glibc:
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31068 .
Hmm, but this would be sparc32. Are you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106749
Bug 106749 depends on bug 113309, which changed state.
Bug 113309 Summary: [C++23] Implement P2165R4, Compatibility between tuple and
tuple-like objects
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113309
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113309
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:65b4cba9d6a9ffe9b4d4bdff90727a7064cc0e3b
commit r14-8710-g65b4cba9d6a9ffe9b4d4bdff90727a7064cc0e3b
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113310
Bug 113310 depends on bug 113309, which changed state.
Bug 113309 Summary: [C++23] Implement P2165R4, Compatibility between tuple and
tuple-like objects
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113309
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113309
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109203
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:65b4cba9d6a9ffe9b4d4bdff90727a7064cc0e3b
commit r14-8710-g65b4cba9d6a9ffe9b4d4bdff90727a7064cc0e3b
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
--- Comment #8 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Let me look that seems like an unitialized variable. If it is obvious one, I
> will apply a patch.
Thanks. I was actually researching the above
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #4)
(sorry, I misread Rainer's comment - he was talking about glibc too.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #5)
> (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #1)
> > The build works for me just fine on sparc-sun-solaris2.11.
> >
> > I've also fired one off on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
--- Comment #5 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #1)
> The build works for me just fine on sparc-sun-solaris2.11.
>
> I've also fired one off on sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu which worked just as
> well.
> It
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108636
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, that's explained above:
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #3)
> On trunk there is a second problem, which is that the new equality
> operators for comparing directory iterators with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53499
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83371
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113709
Bug ID: 113709
Summary: User -fno-thread-jumps gave Floating point exception
at -O2, -O3, -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113705
--- Comment #8 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> --- gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc.jj 2024-02-01 09:14:16.623549514 +0100
> +++ gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc 2024-02-01 17:48:59.151771177 +0100
> @@ -2572,7 +2572,8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113689
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch is at
https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/list/?series=30482
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112836
--- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
I tried this patch but it does not address the issue with posix_spawn that I am
seeing.
Trying to build gcc from git on Linux sparc64 with glibc 2.37 with the
following configuration:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 112737, which changed state.
Bug 112737 Summary: [14 Regression] g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_b.C
-std=c++2b (test for excess errors)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112737
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112737
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112737
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3ba5be16a2be3eaedf2870ca1e25cfe826945948
commit r14-8705-g3ba5be16a2be3eaedf2870ca1e25cfe826945948
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113705
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=112580
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=113708
Bug ID: 113708
Summary: [modules] ICE in import_export_decl with non-trivially
initialized inline variable in header module
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113707
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
Another related test for -O3 (only):
[555] % gcctk -O3 small.c
during GIMPLE pass: cunroll
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:14:5: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
14 | int main() {
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113553
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113705
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111268
Richard Ball changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111268
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Ball :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4571b4d413a4ba5f1e2d429a2623180ad1c73c0f
commit r14-8703-g4571b4d413a4ba5f1e2d429a2623180ad1c73c0f
Author: Richard Ball
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111268
--- Comment #17 from Richard Ball ---
(In reply to Richard Ball from comment #16)
> Confirmed that approved patch:
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/644711.html
>
> Fixes neon-sve-bridge.c error and the error in #c8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111268
--- Comment #16 from Richard Ball ---
Confirmed that approved patch:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/644711.html
Fixes neon-sve-bridge.c error and the error in #c8.
The error in #c3 appears to already be fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113684
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> That is fuzzy, because working as or ld can mean a lot of things. Latest
> binutils as/ld can be working, or 5 or 7 years old binutils as well. So
> what exactly we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113706
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
On Solaris, when compiling this
#include
__attribute__ ((weak))
int
f (int a)
{
return memchr ("aE", a, 2) != NULL;
}
as C++ source, std::memchr is used and GCC doesn't treat std::memchr as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113705
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc.jj2024-02-01 09:14:16.623549514 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc 2024-02-01 17:48:59.151771177 +0100
@@ -2572,7 +2572,8 @@ is_widening_mult_rhs_p (tree type, tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112919
--- Comment #7 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Any update? :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113684
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That is fuzzy, because working as or ld can mean a lot of things. Latest
binutils as/ld can be working, or 5 or 7 years old binutils as well. So what
exactly we mean by that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113684
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Should there be configure options, like
--with-working-gnu-as
--with-working-gnu-ld
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113705
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112944
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
See also the GCC v14 Release Notes:
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-14/changes.html#avr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #4 from Niclas Rosenvik ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #3)
> (In reply to Niclas Rosenvik from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > > >I tried to add the gcc12 and up parts of
> > >
> > > It is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112987
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113705
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression] ICE in |[14 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113707
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE on valid code at -O1 on |[14 Regression] ICE on
1 - 100 of 185 matches
Mail list logo
