https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121699
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120691
--- Comment #16 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #15)
> Release branches are open for *regression* fixes only by default.
Also reverted on releases branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120691
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-08-30
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121718
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao Liu ---
Let's revert it first
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121718
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #3)
> Created attachment 62233 [details]
> use __builtin_fegetround.
>
> Does this help?
No.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121718
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao Liu ---
So using __builtin_fegetround?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121718
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao Liu ---
Created attachment 62233
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62233&action=edit
use __builtin_fegetround.
Does this help?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121699
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #4)
> This fixs the ICE.
>
1) Fix predicate of operands[3] in cond_ since only
const_vec_dup_operand is excepted for masked operations, and pass real
count
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121699
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao Liu ---
This fixs the ICE.
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md b/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md
index 175798cff69..5dbe444847f 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md
@@ -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121699
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120691
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121661
--- Comment #10 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #6)
> > Looks correct in the gimple
>
> The bug only happens at -O0. At higher levels it is ok.
https://godbolt.org/z/M979
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121662
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121661
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao Liu ---
Looks correct in the gimple
int main (int argc, char * * D.3685)
{
[local count: 1073741824]:
# DEBUG BEGIN_STMT
# DEBUG val => __complex__ (1.0e+0, 0.0)
# DEBUG INLINE_ENTRY fun1
__builtin_dwarf_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121606
--- Comment #7 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5)
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2025, haochen.jiang at intel dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121606
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from Haochen Jian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121606
--- Comment #9 from Hongtao Liu ---
>
> Are you using GCC16, and yes GCC16 is refactored with that logic.
In GCC15, because avx10.1 was initially set to 256-bit by default, we wanted to
prevent the mixed usage of avx512 and avx10.1, so we issu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121606
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao Liu ---
And zen5 is not AVX10.1 capable host.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121606
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||haochen.jiang at intel dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121274
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121274
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #4)
> Probably caused by r14-1902-g96c3539f2a3813
>
> - /* Special case TImode to V1TImode conversions, via V2DI. */
> - if (mode == V1TImode
> + /* Special case TImo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121274
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119876
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||16.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120957
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #3)
> I've bisected this on Zen2. It is possible that this is actually two
> different slowdowns and only the Zen2 slowdown is caused by r16-1647. I'll
> bisect on Zen3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120957
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao Liu ---
I've tested my commit(r16-1647) and the previous commit(r16-1646) with
-march=native -Ofast on zen3 server, and didn't find any regression for
503.bwaves_r.(we don't have zen2 machine.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120907
Bug ID: 120907
Summary: vectorizer creates redundunt vec_perm_expr for
reversed access of array
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120906
Bug ID: 120906
Summary: vectorizer create redudant permutation for reversed
access of array
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120895
--- Comment #9 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #8)
> It passes for me with -march=znver2. Hongtao, were you maybe testing with a
> compiler with default `--with-arch=`?
I'm using option -march=x86-64-v4(assume __m512 ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120895
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120815
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao Liu ---
Maybe we should have something like mtune=intel_p and mtune=intel_e, P-core and
E-core are quite different from each other, mtune=intel maybe not sufficient.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120799
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 115842, which changed state.
Bug 115842 Summary: [15/16 Regression] 6.5% slowdown of 548.exchange2_r on
Intel Ice Lake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115842
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115842
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120697
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #5)
> 9380 gcc_assert (!crtl->shrink_wrapped_separate);
>
> It hits this assert which is added by the patch, maybe this assert is not
> needed.
I mean it's added by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120697
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120694
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> Could you retry on trunk? This might be a dupe of bug 120661.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 120661 ***
Yes, it's fixed by r16-1550-g9244ea4b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120694
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao Liu ---
stuck in the loop of ranger_cache::propagate_cache for niters.5_40
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120694
Bug ID: 120694
Summary: endless compile in ranger at expand
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118551
--- Comment #10 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #9)
> I am happy it helps. I wonder if you can share details of your SPEC config.
> I.e. how you call perf (do you specify count etc) and how you handle merging
> of pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118551
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118551
--- Comment #7 from Hongtao Liu ---
Looks like it's fixed by r16-1521-g2ef043c5a05d99
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115842
--- Comment #11 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #9)
> (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #8)
> > (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #7)
> > > (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #6)
> > > > I noticed s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112824
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71453
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92492
Bug 92492 depends on bug 92658, which changed state.
Bug 92658 Summary: x86 lacks vector extend / truncate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95764
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87767
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gabravier at gmail dot com
--- Comment #23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94962
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.1.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92645
Bug 92645 depends on bug 92658, which changed state.
Bug 92658 Summary: x86 lacks vector extend / truncate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92611
Bug 92611 depends on bug 92658, which changed state.
Bug 92658 Summary: x86 lacks vector extend / truncate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58889
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 36844, which changed state.
Bug 36844 Summary: Vectorizer doesn't support INT<->FP conversions with
different size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36844
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96654
Bug 96654 depends on bug 36844, which changed state.
Bug 36844 Summary: Vectorizer doesn't support INT<->FP conversions with
different size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36844
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36844
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82897
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82897
--- Comment #12 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> Looks like this was fixed in GCC 15:
> ```
> foo:
> .LFB7284:
> .cfi_startproc
> vmovd %edi, %xmm2
> vmovdqa32 %zmm1, %zmm4
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82897
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120457
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #1)
> double __attribute__((noinline,noclone))
> compute_integral (double w_1[18])
> {
> double A = 0;
> double t33[2][6] = {{0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0},
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120457
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao Liu ---
double __attribute__((noinline,noclone))
compute_integral (double w_1[18])
{
double A = 0;
double t33[2][6] = {{0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0},
{0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0}};
double t43[2] = {0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120428
--- Comment #16 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #13)
> > The inner loop is not completely unrolled since std::copy is lowered to
> > __builtin_memmove instead of __built
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120428
--- Comment #14 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #13)
> >
> > constexpr std::size_t ProcessChunkSize = BlockSize * OrderSize;
> >
> > std::array buffer{};
> >
> > std::byte* const bytes = reinterpret_cast
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120428
--- Comment #13 from Hongtao Liu ---
>
> constexpr std::size_t ProcessChunkSize = BlockSize * OrderSize;
>
> std::array buffer{};
>
> std::byte* const bytes = reinterpret_cast(data);
>
> for (std::size_t i = 0; i < TotalSize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112824
--- Comment #11 from Hongtao Liu ---
>
> Add --param sra-max-scalarization-size-Ospeed=2048 will eliminate those
> spills
>
> So for sra we can consider using MOVE_MAX * move_ratio as the size limit for
> Ospeed which represents real backend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119181
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 119181, which changed state.
Bug 119181 Summary: Missed vectorization due to imperfect SLP discovery for 2
grouped load with same base pointer (taken as 1 interleaved load)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120378
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao Liu ---
> The ifcvt'ed code before vect is:
>
> _4 = *_3;
> x.0_12 = (unsigned int) _4;
> _38 = -x.0_12;
> _15 = (int) _38;
> _16 = _15 >> 31;
> _29 = x.0_12 > 255;
> _17 = _29 ? _16 : _4;
> _18 = (u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118994
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120215
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120215
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120184
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120184
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120184
Bug ID: 120184
Summary: --gc-section can't discard unused section due to
fpatchable-function-entry ?
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118508
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118581
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119879
Bug ID: 119879
Summary: [r16-39 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.target/i386/avx512fp16-trunc-extendvnhf.c
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108134
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108134
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #3)
> (In reply to sandra from comment #2)
> > This was introduced by commit 0fec3f62b9bfc03e5088a09036791c2ac84fe0c8. I
> > wondered if there might have been a patch hun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108134
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119617
--- Comment #12 from Hongtao Liu ---
Let's just fix it in GCC16, either solution is ugly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118551
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #5)
> as discussed in PR111551 the SPEC train run does not include hottest loop of
> MorphologyApply, so MeanShiftImage may have same issue and auto-fdo may be
> kind of c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119617
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #4)
> (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #2)
> > > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > > > I think we need
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119617
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #2)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > I think we need to disable the effect of -mno-evex512, looks like there's
> > still traces of it left?
>
> Let's ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119617
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102294
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119596
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101017
--- Comment #13 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #12)
> (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #11)
> > (In reply to David Binderman from comment #10)
> > > Did this ever happen ?
> > >
> > > Similar test case gcc/t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119464
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119368
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao Liu ---
>
> But for this case, I think targetm.can_change_mode_class (op_mode,
> result_mode, ALL_REGS) is not needed since it's memory.
I mean case in #c1, for case in #c0, it's more complicated.
1. It's also rela
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114591
--- Comment #18 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #16)
> >
> > 4952 /* See if a MEM has already been loaded with a widening operation;
> > 4953 if it has, we can use a subreg of that. Many CISC machines
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119368
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119425
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lin1.hu at intel dot com
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117452
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115842
--- Comment #8 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #7)
> (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #6)
> > I noticed some double-counting of cost in group-candidate (regarding loop
> > invariant expressions), this modific
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118753
Bug 118753 depends on bug 117069, which changed state.
Bug 117069 Summary: [15 Regression] gcc.target/i386/apx-ndd-tls-1b.c since
r15-268-g9dbff9c05520a7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117069
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117069
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117452
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117069
--- Comment #15 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #7)
> This stopped failing for me around:
>
> commit 2bc3ea210565dc7cdbba9adb31acceefed406254
> Author: Sam James
> Date: Fri Nov 22 15:20:45 2024 +
>
> saving
1 - 100 of 618 matches
Mail list logo
