https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Why use STACK_REALIGN_DEFAULT rather than PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY_DEFAULT?
We know that it works since Solaris has used it for ages, so this alternate way
could be deemed riskier. But no strong
led by GNU C version 14.0.0 20231128 (experimental), GMP version
6.3.0, MPFR version 4.2.1, MPC version 1.3.1, isl version isl-0.26-GMP
# GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096
-# options passed: -m32 -m8bit-idiv -masm=intel -mtune=generic -march=x86-64
-O2 -fno-dce -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112759
matoro changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matoro_gcc_bugzilla@matoro.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112759
Bug ID: 112759
Summary: [13 regression] mips -march=native detection broken
with gcc 13+
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112578
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112578
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:530348c418d9ec28aac5b151c15405bfb860e5c4
commit r14-5950-g530348c418d9ec28aac5b151c15405bfb860e5c4
Author: Xi Ruoyao
Date: Sat Nov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112753
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112751
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |testsuite
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112748
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112743
--- Comment #4 from Li Pan ---
There may be another ICE for zve32f, will double-check about the details.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112743
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pan Li :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:25a51e98fdd504826a40775a5e5b9ffb336b5aa1
commit r14-5945-g25a51e98fdd504826a40775a5e5b9ffb336b5aa1
Author: Pan Li
Date: Wed Nov 29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112751
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112758
Bug ID: 112758
Summary: Inconsistent Bitwise AND Operation Result between int
and long long int on Different Optimization Levels in
GCC Trunk
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101113
David Mazières changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #15 from Zeb Figura ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #14)
> > I'd say that
> >
> > config/i386/cygming.h:#define STACK_REALIGN_DEFAULT TARGET_SSE
> >
> > is a non-working "fix". The appropriate default would be
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112729
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hongyu Wang :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:99fa0bfd63d97825c4221dcd3123940f1d0e6291
commit r14-5943-g99fa0bfd63d97825c4221dcd3123940f1d0e6291
Author: Hongyu Wang
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112757
--- Comment #1 from Patrick O'Neill ---
See also:
rv32_zvl128b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112754
rv32_zvl256b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112755
rv32_zvl512b:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112755
--- Comment #1 from Patrick O'Neill ---
See also:
rv32_zvl128b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112754
rv32_zvl256b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112755
rv32_zvl512b:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112756
--- Comment #1 from Patrick O'Neill ---
See also:
rv32_zvl128b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112754
rv32_zvl256b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112755
rv32_zvl512b:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112754
--- Comment #1 from Patrick O'Neill ---
See also:
rv32_zvl128b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112754
rv32_zvl256b: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112755
rv32_zvl512b:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112757
Bug ID: 112757
Summary: RISC-V regression testsuite errors with
rv32gcv_zvl1024b
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112756
Bug ID: 112756
Summary: RISC-V regression testsuite errors with
rv32gcv_zvl512b
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112755
Bug ID: 112755
Summary: RISC-V regression testsuite errors with
rv32gcv_zvl256b
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112754
Bug ID: 112754
Summary: RISC-V regression testsuite errors with
rv32gcv_zvl128b
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55757
Yann Poupet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yann at poupet dot eu
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112752
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is a semi-reduced testcase:
```
#define byte unsigned char
#define MIN(a, b) ((a) > (b)?(b):(a))
byte hh(byte r, byte g, byte b) {
byte c = 255 - r;
byte m = 255 - g;
byte y = 255 - b;
byte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I'd say that
>
> config/i386/cygming.h:#define STACK_REALIGN_DEFAULT TARGET_SSE
>
> is a non-working "fix". The appropriate default would be
> -mincoming-stack-boundary=2. MIN_STACK_BOUNDARY should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112753
Bug ID: 112753
Summary: [14 Regression] unrecognizable insn building glibc for
s390x
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112752
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I made a small mistake into what it should be optimized to:
The MIN should be MAX (oops):
that is:
tmp = MAX(r, g);
k = MAX(b, tmp);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112607
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112752
Bug ID: 112752
Summary: `~a - MIN, ~c>` is not optimized to
`MAX,c> - a`
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112607
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c7c92d61d32f6fd7746e2844f68d1936e2b6f6f6
commit r13-8105-gc7c92d61d32f6fd7746e2844f68d1936e2b6f6f6
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52252
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #11)
> We're lacking a way to say one of the bit_not should be single-used,
> one multi-use would be OK and a fair trade-off - not sure if that
> would be enough
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #31 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Bisection points to r14-5831-gaae723d360ca26cd9fd0b039fb0a616bd0eae363 for that
remaining FAIL as well (and it isn't fixed by the new patch).
It introduced a new warning which wasn't present before:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53220
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:305a2686c99bf9b57490419f25c79f6fb3ae0feb
commit r14-5941-g305a2686c99bf9b57490419f25c79f6fb3ae0feb
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94264
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:305a2686c99bf9b57490419f25c79f6fb3ae0feb
commit r14-5941-g305a2686c99bf9b57490419f25c79f6fb3ae0feb
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112751
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is just a testsuite issue. The functions are currently marked as noinline.
You can either add -fno-ipa-vrp or mark them with noipa instead. I am not sure
if noipa here is right due to having some ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112751
Bug ID: 112751
Summary: [14 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/pcrel-sibcall-1.c
fails after r14-5628-g53ba8d669550d3
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102419
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||novulae at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112749
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112606
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=112744
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
0.0 20231128 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112744
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112749
Bug ID: 112749
Summary: GCC accepts invalid code in concepts (requires clause
incorrectly satisfied)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112748
--- Comment #2 from Tavian Barnes ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Does -fsanitize=address remove it?
Yes, it's still removed with -fsanitize=address.
While ASAN is necessary to check that the memory is really allocated,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112748
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does -fsanitize=address remove it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94264
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112748
Bug ID: 112748
Summary: memmove(ptr, ptr, n) call optimized out even at -O0
with -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112738
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112738
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:68ffaf839883253e0f288862ff20b8005c92df4e
commit r14-5938-g68ffaf839883253e0f288862ff20b8005c92df4e
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 56707
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56707=edit
gcc14-pr112733-2.patch
Second patch to be tested. Turned out it is more complicated than that.
If n > m, i.e. when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112560
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103183
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64117
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||piannetta at kalrayinc dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112747
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103185
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103185
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ind[arr] is rejected when |[11/12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111909
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marc Poulhi?s :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:396db92d3aa7412dd7133563fecbc6237fa81c02
commit r14-5936-g396db92d3aa7412dd7133563fecbc6237fa81c02
Author: Simon Wright
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112746
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112747
Bug ID: 112747
Summary: #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wstringop-overflow"
has no effect in pre-compiled headers.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112280
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
I suspect I've just hit this when trying to build pixman on s390x too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112746
Bug ID: 112746
Summary: Missed optimization for redundancy computation
elimination (fre1(tree) for global variable)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually, maybe better variant of the first fix in the above comment would be:
--- gcc/wide-int.cc.jj 2023-11-28 16:56:50.0 +0100
+++ gcc/wide-int.cc 2023-11-28 16:58:02.268776755 +0100
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112494
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112560
Bug 112560 depends on bug 112494, which changed state.
Bug 112494 Summary: ICE in ix86_cc_mode, at config/i386/i386.cc:16477
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112494
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112732
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101057
Bug 101057 depends on bug 112741, which changed state.
Bug 112741 Summary: ICE: in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at gimplify.cc:3261
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112741
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112741
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112741
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f45d5e30bd98ea1d8dc29841a06b2cfa5662deb5
commit r14-5935-gf45d5e30bd98ea1d8dc29841a06b2cfa5662deb5
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112732
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f26d68d5d128c86faaceeb81b1e8f22254ad53df
commit r14-5934-gf26d68d5d128c86faaceeb81b1e8f22254ad53df
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112494
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:99db2ce2419245e40808a9fad45113315496a907
commit r14-5933-g99db2ce2419245e40808a9fad45113315496a907
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As for the actual crash, I have again multiple possible fixes:
--- gcc/wide-int.cc.jj 2023-10-16 14:24:46.360204472 +0200
+++ gcc/wide-int.cc 2023-11-28 16:33:35.737394223 +0100
@@ -1297,6 +1297,8 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109253
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110606
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The insn that it fails on is the result from a split using *tls_ld .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
--- Comment #15 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry for the regression, and thanks for the prompt fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
Bug 37336 depends on bug 110415, which changed state.
Bug 110415 Summary: (Re)allocation on assignment to allocatable polymorphic
variable from allocatable polymorphic function result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110415
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110415
Andrew Jenner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110606
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It needs -O2 -fPIC -fno-exceptions to fail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #30 from Jonathan Wakely ---
So far the only FAIL is still see is:
FAIL: 23_containers/vector/types/1.cc -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
I'm not sure if this is caused by your patch or one of Honza's. The test only
fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110415
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Jenner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b247e917ff13328298c1eecf8563b12edd7ade04
commit r14-5931-gb247e917ff13328298c1eecf8563b12edd7ade04
Author: Andrew Jenner
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109253
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jose E. Marchesi :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f31a019d1161ec78846473da743aedf49cca8c27
commit r14-5930-gf31a019d1161ec78846473da743aedf49cca8c27
Author: Jose E. Marchesi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112716
--- Comment #9 from Martin Uecker ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> (In reply to uecker from comment #7)
>
> > >
> > > Note that even without LTO when you enable inlining you'd expose two
> > > different structures with two
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112563
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ro at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112733
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
One thing is obviously we shouldn't crash on it and will debug that.
But, what multiple_of_p does (or its callers) is weird:
14552 /* Check for special cases to see if top is defined as
multiple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112563
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:33b6ce99b54917a910b59dbd643fd223fbba834c
commit r14-5928-g33b6ce99b54917a910b59dbd643fd223fbba834c
Author: Rainer Orth
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112563
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:088d3cbc5f906444a7dee98bc9a6f4b724ddfc21
commit r14-5927-g088d3cbc5f906444a7dee98bc9a6f4b724ddfc21
Author: Rainer Orth
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112729
--- Comment #7 from Hongyu Wang ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #5)
>
> Is there a reason to have -fomit-frame-pointer once before and once
> after -mapx-features=push2pop2?
Ah, thanks for pointing that out. Will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #29 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #28)
> (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #27)
> > Can you please try if
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/638318.html
> > fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112728
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111409
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #28 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #27)
> Unfortunately I cannot reproduce this, the above (on pristine master
> commit 006e90e1344 on an x86_64-linux) results in:
>
> Running target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112415
--- Comment #52 from Manolis Tsamis ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #51)
> manolis, did you have a chance to look at the remaining pass issue? You'll
> need to revert Dave's commit locally which made the issue latent for
> building
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112729
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112729
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #3 from Hongyu Wang ---
[...]
> Hi Rainer, can you help verify if the change make these test pass on
> solaris/FreeBSD?
They do on Solaris/x86. Thanks.
FreeBSD was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
