https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86217
Bug ID: 86217
Summary: option aux-info
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86220
Bug ID: 86220
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_structure, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:7789
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86221
Bug ID: 86221
Summary: _Generic not match function return that has _Atomic
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86218
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86219
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38658
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
/9.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/home/absozero/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20180619 (experimental) [trunk revision 261742] (GCC)
$ g++-trunk -c abc.c
abc.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65416
--- Comment #3 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jcmvbkbc
Date: Tue Jun 19 18:26:07 2018
New Revision: 261755
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261755=gcc=rev
Log:
xtensa: fix PR target/65416
The issue is caused by reordering of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86192
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jun 19 18:46:51 2018
New Revision: 261757
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261757=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/86192 - ICE with anonymous union passed to template.
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86218
Bug ID: 86218
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in compare_ics, at cp/call.c:9769
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86219
Bug ID: 86219
Summary: [8/9 Regression] ICE in coerce_template_parms, at
cp/pt.c:8515
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65416
jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48665
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's not valid.
[expr.typeid] p5 says typeid(cv T) is the same as typeid(T) but that isn't
relevant here. 'void () const' is not the cv-qualified version of 'void ()',
because there are no cv-qualified
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48665
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Blaikie from comment #15)
> "The compiler still reuses the same representation for const/volatile and
> for some attributes, sometimes misinterpreting one for the other." - sounds
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86223
Bug ID: 86223
Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on an access to an implicitly
zeroed out array
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86223
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48560
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jun 19 22:35:45 2018
New Revision: 261774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261774=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/85602 - -Warray-bounds fails to detect the out of bound array
access
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70129
Shaun Jackman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjackman at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86222
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-ibm-aix7.2 |powerpc-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70129
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to chuck cranor from comment #3)
> I think you'll find most build systems that do "-isystem /usr/include"
> instead of "-I /usr/include" are only using "-isystem" for the change
> in the warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86213
Bug ID: 86213
Summary: -fsplit-stack runtime may clobber SSE input param reg
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86214
Bug ID: 86214
Summary: [8 Regression] Strongly increased stack usage
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86138
--- Comment #3 from Christian Franke ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Why is the one in the DLL not compatible?
I don't know.
> The extern templates are disabled because std::basic_string has additional
> member functions in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86138
--- Comment #6 from Christian Franke ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> Could you please debug this to find where it's crashing and why?
It segfaults with a bogus pointer below std::string::_Rep::_M_dispose().
A comparison of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Thanks, r261751 should take care of it.
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jun 19 17:30:47 2018
New Revision: 261751
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261751=gcc=rev
Log:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Thanks, r261751 should take care of it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86203
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
You're right, a strict reading of the standard does imply that the pointer
argument to strlen could point to the integer. I keep forgetting about this
unfortunate loophole. Ironically, the equivalent code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86221
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The C17 specification for function return types says "function returning
the unqualified version of T", not "function returning the unqualified,
non-atomic version of T". I believe the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86220
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to G. Steinmetz from comment #0)
> Introduced between 20180520 and 20180527.
It wasn't introduced. It wa uncovered. :-)
>
> $ cat z1.f90
> program p
>type t
> real :: a = 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86222
Bug ID: 86222
Summary: ICE in final_scan_insn_1 calling strncmp() with a
bound of PTRDIFF_MAX + 1
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86190
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86138
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2018-06-15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86138
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Christian Franke from comment #0)
> This is because there is a bogus prototype specialization in basic_string.h:
>
> template<>
> basic_istream&
> getline(basic_istream& __in,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86215
Bug ID: 86215
Summary: Exceptions are broken on OSX when linking with
-static-libgcc
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81668
--- Comment #12 from sgunderson at bigfoot dot com ---
The spurious warning seems to be gone in GCC 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86138
--- Comment #5 from Christian Franke ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to Christian Franke from comment #3)
> > > The extern templates are disabled because std::basic_string has additional
> > > member functions in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86138
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
OK, so then this is the whack Windows linker model, where every DLL has its own
address space, and probably the same as PR 81522.
Does Cygwin default to _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86218
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Is this really valid though?
clang++ says
86218.C:8:7: error: type 'double' cannot be narrowed to 'char' in initializer
list [-Wc++11-narrowing]
and if I use
f ({static_cast(2.0)});
then g++ compiles it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602
--- Comment #11 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It is fixed now. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81522
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86138
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||irfanadilovic at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65416
--- Comment #5 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jcmvbkbc
Date: Tue Jun 19 20:57:46 2018
New Revision: 261763
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261763=gcc=rev
Log:
xtensa: fix PR target/65416
The issue is caused by reordering of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86206
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65416
--- Comment #6 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jcmvbkbc
Date: Tue Jun 19 21:01:22 2018
New Revision: 261764
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261764=gcc=rev
Log:
xtensa: fix PR target/65416
The issue is caused by reordering of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65416
--- Comment #7 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jcmvbkbc
Date: Tue Jun 19 21:08:46 2018
New Revision: 261765
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261765=gcc=rev
Log:
xtensa: fix PR target/65416
The issue is caused by reordering of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48665
David Blaikie changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dblaikie at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70966
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85906
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78549
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86212
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86212
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r258755.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86198
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I don't a reason to change the test to ==. I don't see what would be helped by
that. Note that Richi already approved the change to <=.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82644
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Jun 19 13:16:44 2018
New Revision: 261743
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261743=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82644 define TR1 hypergeometric functions in strict modes
Following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86212
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86198
--- Comment #2 from Denis Khalikov ---
Looks like that feature was implemented by this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70940
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.4 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85731
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.monteverde at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86195
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82644
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86222
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86224
Bug ID: 86224
Summary: [m68k] textrels in libgcc
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86226
Bug ID: 86226
Summary: A bug seems to be not fully fixed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86227
Bug ID: 86227
Summary: invalid suffix on floating constant
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86227
--- Comment #2 from zhonghao at pku dot org.cn ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Did you add -pedantic-error or use -std=c++11 ? This is the decimal
> floating point extension that gcc supports that llvm does not.
I tried.g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86229
Bug ID: 86229
Summary: ASAN Reports "alloc-dealloc mismatch" intsead of
"attempted delete without new"
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86228
Bug ID: 86228
Summary: ordered comparison between pointer and zero
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86230
Bug ID: 86230
Summary: missing exception specification
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86227
--- Comment #3 from zhonghao at pku dot org.cn ---
(In reply to zhonghao from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > Did you add -pedantic-error or use -std=c++11 ? This is the decimal
> > floating point extension that gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86225
Bug ID: 86225
Summary: Missing error message
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86227
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Did you add -pedantic-error or use -std=c++11 ? This is the decimal floating
point extension that gcc supports that llvm does not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86206
Bug ID: 86206
Summary: ICE in forall
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86207
--- Comment #1 from zhonghao at pku dot org.cn ---
BTW, clang++ accepts the above code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86209
Bug ID: 86209
Summary: Peephole does not happen because the type of zero/sign
extended operands is not the same.
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86202
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The issue is that the frontend ends up with
chain
chain
chain
^^^
pointer_to_this >
addressable used nothrow public external built-in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86207
Bug ID: 86207
Summary: A recurring bug?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86208
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86206
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86179
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jun 19 06:53:04 2018
New Revision: 261731
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261731=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-06-19 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/86179
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86179
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86203
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86203
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
It works if you make n0 static btw. (only in late FRE because early
TREE_ADDRESSABLE of n0 is not yet cleared)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86204
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|8.0 |9.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86202
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Actually I forgot we have two copies of the builtin decl. The implicit one
gets its type "adjusted" by the duplicate via merge_decls
/ composite_type (newtype, oldtype)
eventually we can simply do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86196
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86195
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Version|8.1.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83819
Bug 83819 depends on bug 86203, which changed state.
Bug 86203 Summary: duplicate non-constant call to strlen() not folded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86203
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86208
Bug ID: 86208
Summary: improper handling of an extern declared inline
function
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86208
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Possibly related to Bug 82204
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86207
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80061
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*** Bug 86207 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86004
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
If I recall correctly, old binutils issue warning when plugin produce IL file
which is done for incremental linking. I do not think there is a way to prevent
this message from gcc side other than requiring
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86210
Bug ID: 86210
Summary: [6/7/8/9 Regression] Missing -Wnonnull warning for
function defined in the same TU
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86197
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 19 10:52:39 2018
New Revision: 261738
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261738=gcc=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix vector homogeneous aggregates (PR86197)
The existing code allows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86211
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018, charlet at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86211
>
> Arnaud Charlet changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86211
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86209
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Since you are trying to combine loads you may run afoul of STLF issues on
modern CPU architectures which generally cannot forward from separate stores to
a
larger load. Not sure if that applies to ARM but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86209
--- Comment #2 from sameerad at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ramana, it is another peephole that I am trying to explore for falkor. It
combines loads/stores of shorter types (QI/HI/SI) into single load/store of
larger type (SI/DI).
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
