https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
Bug ID: 95094
Summary: alignof(reference_to_type) doesn't return
alignof(referenced_type) as it ought to, by the
standard
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95096
Bug ID: 95096
Summary: Feature request: add -fsplit-dwarf
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95013
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2a0225e47868fbfceaecaa5e2de96c1c5a2251ea
commit r11-338-g2a0225e47868fbfceaecaa5e2de96c1c5a2251ea
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95095
Bug ID: 95095
Summary: Feature request: support -fno-unique-section-names
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12411
Rafael Avila de Espindola changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rafael at espindo dot la
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But this doesn't seem like a very useful behaviour for the extension.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
--- Comment #3 from Inbal Levi ---
Actually, you are right,
I'm currently working on a paper to change it, should have waited for
afterward.
The reason to change it is to align (...) with C behavior.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95078
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> TER should go away, not be extended. So you are suggesting that we replace
>
> leaq44(%rdi,%rdx,4), %rdx --- redundant could be fwprop
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
Bug ID: 95097
Summary: Missed optimization with bitfield value ranges
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94118
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0fec3f62b9bfc03e5088a09036791c2ac84fe0c8
commit r11-344-g0fec3f62b9bfc03e5088a09036791c2ac84fe0c8
Author: liuhongt
Date: Fri May 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #25 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #23)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> > (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #18)
> > > Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
> > > if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #26 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #18)
> > Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
> > if the loop has multi-exits or upbound is not a fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95013
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95093
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94118
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95096
--- Comment #1 from Fangrui Song ---
Created https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-May/545638.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95023
--- Comment #2 from Ye Luo ---
I got the following error when building the new lib. Tried gcc 8 and 10 with
master and newlib-3.3.0. No difference
/home/yeluo/opt/build-amdgcn-gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/yeluo/opt/build-amdgcn-gcc/./gcc/ -nostdinc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95077
Bug ID: 95077
Summary: Wrong backtrace infromation at O1
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95063
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:99b0c9ec47d563d1f780cb678c04d37c9835440f
commit r11-314-g99b0c9ec47d563d1f780cb678c04d37c9835440f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94980
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95045
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bb63ca63e744c08bc5a9ffa53df62ea35f098b0b
commit r11-308-gbb63ca63e744c08bc5a9ffa53df62ea35f098b0b
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95067
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
Summary|[10/11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95075
Bug ID: 95075
Summary: gcc/d/dmd/dscope.c: 2 * strange assignments ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
Bug ID: 95076
Summary: Failure to optimize out stack alignment on function
call of different type
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12345
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=a62236b9d579315a0482cdd6deb409f76381c233
commit r10-5848-ga62236b9d579315a0482cdd6deb409f76381c233
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93223
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=8a37df5e5cb2de8302f9412173103593ec53961e
commit r10-5852-g8a37df5e5cb2de8302f9412173103593ec53961e
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95068
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93223
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93244
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to CVS Commits from comment #13)
> The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;
> h=af213b4c4ca30e55de64f8b1e0bf442df08f3e6d
>
> commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95033
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6b41920bd5c68998a53de749b4fe5c0b8875db6c
commit r11-315-g6b41920bd5c68998a53de749b4fe5c0b8875db6c
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95051
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6b41920bd5c68998a53de749b4fe5c0b8875db6c
commit r11-315-g6b41920bd5c68998a53de749b4fe5c0b8875db6c
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95073
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This part is still useful, to show the one that *was* found, but couldn't be
called:
q.C:9:15: note: declared here
9 | extern void f();
| ^
If that is replaced then it's not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #18 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
if the loop has multi-exits or upbound is not a fixed number, we may not do
'complete unroll' for the loop, except -funroll-all-loops is specified.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95045
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57359
Bug 57359 depends on bug 95045, which changed state.
Bug 95045 Summary: [11 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95045
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93244
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=af213b4c4ca30e55de64f8b1e0bf442df08f3e6d
commit r10-5851-gaf213b4c4ca30e55de64f8b1e0bf442df08f3e6d
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95033
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95051
Bug 95051 depends on bug 95033, which changed state.
Bug 95033 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in set_parm_rtl, at cfgexpand.c:1310
since r11-165-geb72dc663e9070b2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95033
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95051
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84766
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't think we want to use another TLS entry just for this handler, so I'm
leaning towards the nice suggestion to say "reentrant" instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
Is libgfortran built with -O2 -funroll-loops or with -O3 (IIRC -O3?). Note we
see
Estimating sizes for loop 3
BB: 14, after_exit: 0
size: 1 _20 = count[n_95];
size: 1 _21 = _20 + 1;
size: 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94980
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d17a896da1e898928d337596d029f0ece0039d55
commit r11-311-gd17a896da1e898928d337596d029f0ece0039d55
Author: Richard Sandiford
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94980
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:14605b6bd8c37fffd8065c5c3fe6b1b9d7b2a294
commit r11-312-g14605b6bd8c37fffd8065c5c3fe6b1b9d7b2a294
Author: Richard Sandiford
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94980
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c0283b9ad75b128b79c507d78d678123fe9f471
commit r11-313-g4c0283b9ad75b128b79c507d78d678123fe9f471
Author: Richard Sandiford
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95073
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95067
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94969
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Bin Cheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f6e1a4cd83190746b6544917f7526fa480ca5f18
commit r11-345-gf6e1a4cd83190746b6544917f7526fa480ca5f18
Author: Bin Cheng
Date: Wed May 13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #27 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #26)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> > (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #18)
> > > Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
> > > if the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95019
--- Comment #1 from bin cheng ---
Please provide the exact configuration/compilation command lines in bug report
next time, which could save others' time to reproduce. Considering I didn't
touch mips for years.
As for this specific issue, note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95052
--- Comment #7 from Krzysztof Nowicki ---
Thanks for the very quick response. I've applied the patch on top of GCC 9.1
and it indeed fixes the problem we've seen on MIPS64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
--- Comment #16 from Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95032
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(It currently enables p10 insns, but it leaves p9 insns disabled (and any
older insns your compiler doesn't default to as well)).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94988
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:119a7db1e05c9741803b3ff93266b00fd535732a
commit r11-320-g119a7db1e05c9741803b3ff93266b00fd535732a
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57359
Bug 57359 depends on bug 94988, which changed state.
Bug 94988 Summary: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr64110.c
scan-assembler vmovd[\\t ]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94988
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94988
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95058
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
The problem is since df_lr_bb_local_compute has
/* If the def is to only part of the reg, it does
not kill the other defs that reach here. */
if (!(DF_REF_FLAGS (def) & (DF_REF_PARTIAL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
This ia32 psABI return value discussion also applies here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ia32-abi/return$20value%7Csort:date/ia32-abi/9H4BBrIdkmk/sjWw06ZPnS4J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 12 May 2020, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
>
> --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
> The problem is since df_lr_bb_local_compute has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95086
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95069
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nico at josuttis dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94924
--- Comment #2 from rhalbersma ---
OK, Alisdair Meredith points out on Twitter that in [class.compare.default]/6
there is a special sentence on array class data members
In that list, any subobject of array type is recursively expanded to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95082
Bug ID: 95082
Summary: LE implementations of vec_cnttz_lsbb and
vec_cntlz_lsbb are wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95085
Bug ID: 95085
Summary: diagnostic on designated-initializer from
braced-init-list could be better
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95086
Bug ID: 95086
Summary: brace initialization in captures doesn't work with
function calls
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> GCC doesn't tail-call because the return types are not compatible. With a
> call
> it cannot optimize the stack adjustment because of the ABI.
>
> Note I'm not sure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95083
Bug ID: 95083
Summary: x86 fp_movcc expansion depends on real_cst sharing
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95083
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|10.0|11.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95084
Bug ID: 95084
Summary: code sinking prevents if-conversion
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95069
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #21 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #19)
> Is libgfortran built with -O2 -funroll-loops or with -O3 (IIRC -O3?).
Just plain -O2 (for size reasons), with matmul as an exception
where we add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95005
Michael Kuhn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #48482|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95079
Bug ID: 95079
Summary: unorderd_map::insert_or_assign and try_emplace should
only hash and mod once unless there is a rehash.
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94689
--- Comment #4 from pmatos at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Unfortunately a fix for this didn't make it into 10.1. We can still not analyze
racket source code due to this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95035
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:90aea3e8d4f6119a9b666275b274bc4c251a7c91
commit r11-317-g90aea3e8d4f6119a9b666275b274bc4c251a7c91
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date:
d=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r11-314-20200512100527-g99b0c9ec47d-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 11.0.0 20200512 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95077
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.3.1
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95032
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ah. I couldn't reproduce this, but I used -mcpu=future.
Please don't use -mfuture, it does not work, it cannot work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95082
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
STV generates:
8d b6 00 00 00 00 lea0x0(%esi),%esi
a1 00 00 00 00 mov0x0,%eax R_386_32target_p
83 ec 08sub$0x8,%esp
f3 0f 7e 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94906
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dc103060c18656affaecfdd57faa4e0237dadcd3
commit r10-8136-gdc103060c18656affaecfdd57faa4e0237dadcd3
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94933
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8836c35d5d6fefa514cb78cb6800670869fb1df2
commit r10-8135-g8836c35d5d6fefa514cb78cb6800670869fb1df2
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #22 from Thomas Koenig ---
Here are the details of how I tested this.
I generated the in_pack_r4.i and in_unpack_r4.i by adding -save-temps to the
Makefile options in ~/trunk-bin/powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu/libgfortran ,
then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 12 May 2020, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
>
> --- Comment #21 from Thomas Koenig ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95035
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95078
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
TER should go away, not be extended. So you are suggesting that we replace
leaq44(%rdi,%rdx,4), %rdx --- redundant could be fwprop
movl(%rdx), %eax
movl$3, (%rsi)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95081
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #18)
> > Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
> > if the loop has multi-exits or upbound is not a fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94672
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8aeffc4c9f47dd09ccc6a82d9fae35931414eb4d
commit r10-8137-g8aeffc4c9f47dd09ccc6a82d9fae35931414eb4d
Author: Tobias Burnus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94672
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84685
Cyril Hrubis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chrubis at suse dot cz
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95081
Bug ID: 95081
Summary: Copyright infringement by ROS2
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94924
--- Comment #1 from rhalbersma ---
I just became aware of [depr.array.comp] in N4861
"Equality and relational comparisons (7.6.10, 7.6.9) between two operands of
array type are deprecated."
This is very surprising to say the least and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95074
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
Ever confirmed|0
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
