https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
*** Bug 107385 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #15 from Tamar Christina ---
and just -O3 -march=armv8-a+sve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113899
--- Comment #6 from sadineniharish8446 at gmail dot com ---
After adding given patch, vect-simd-clone-10.c & vect-simd-clone-12.c test case
were not running the below error observed in gcc.sum,
ERROR: tcl error sourcing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113567
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31679
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> HWI is always 64bit these days so I doubt this can be reproduced.
Plus The tree level uses wide_int so maybe this was fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50440
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sayle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112639
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113928
Bug ID: 113928
Summary: Aliasing of pointer in expression
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113877
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I’ve now found the related documentation[1].
I think the conclusion is that gnatchop is working-as-designed, and that this
PR should be marked WONTFIX (or INVALID), as seems best.
Sorry for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
I didn't add STMT_VINFO_SLP_VECT_ONLY, I'm quite sure we can now do both SLP of
masked loads and stores, so yes, STMT_VINFO_SLP_VECT_ONLY (when we formed
a DR group of stmts we cannot combine without SLP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113910
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
OK, thanks for checking. Btw, -ftime-report for GCC 11 has different
bottle-necks meanwhile fixed:
tree PTA : 1.66 ( 3%)
tree SSA incremental : 31.86 ( 61%)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
--- Comment #3 from rhalbersma ---
Nice that this is changed now. I noticed a similar optimization could be done
for bitset::operator== (more accurately: the helper _M_is_equal) where there is
an opportunity to use memcmp, with a similar dance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113877
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #14 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> I didn't add STMT_VINFO_SLP_VECT_ONLY, I'm quite sure we can now do both SLP
> of masked loads and stores, so yes, STMT_VINFO_SLP_VECT_ONLY (when we formed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113783
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113899
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to sadineniharish8446 from comment #6)
> Also as you said in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113899#c3
> (Maybe the run testcases are failing but you might not be noticing that.),
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113927
Bug ID: 113927
Summary: [avr-tiny] Sets up a stack-frame even for trivial code
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113856
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I should note that the one place where `{1.0, 0.0}` shows up is the use with
complex :). I found it on accident while understanding why I was getting a
failure with `libgomp.c-c++-common/reduction-*.c`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113074
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-active.html#submit_issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113652
--- Comment #17 from Erhard F. ---
Sidenote: Interestingly GCC 14 builds fine with -mcpu=970 -mtune=970 despite
the PowerPC G5 (aka. 970, POWER4+) is before ISA 2.06 and not being able to use
-mvsx either.
I used Gentoo snapshot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113567
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:baa40971d1600672f3a1abf688905a70cf655c92
commit r14-8995-gbaa40971d1600672f3a1abf688905a70cf655c92
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113802
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
So just to say all versions seem to be affected and the issue is just latent
because of the rev we bisected to.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113774
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113802
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113811
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4d819db7f229a23cb15ef68f310e0bb51d201c45
commit r14-9001-g4d819db7f229a23cb15ef68f310e0bb51d201c45
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113806
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf883e6428a545d091319c8b71fcfb35e7dd7084
commit r14-9003-gbf883e6428a545d091319c8b71fcfb35e7dd7084
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e7ae13a858f36031b8fd3aa07362752ff2b19b2e
commit r14-9002-ge7ae13a858f36031b8fd3aa07362752ff2b19b2e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87744
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c9ce332b557bb95987d038d98ea929cdfd1eae1d
commit r14-8998-gc9ce332b557bb95987d038d98ea929cdfd1eae1d
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99117
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b58f0e5216a3053486e7f1aa96c3f2443b14d630
commit r14-9000-gb58f0e5216a3053486e7f1aa96c3f2443b14d630
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99546
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2022-09-20 00:00:00 |2024-2-15
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111266
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #36 from Jan Hubicka ---
> > Having a testcase is great. I was just playing with crafting one.
> > I am still concerned about value ranges in ipa-prop's jump functions.
>
> Maybe my imagination is too limited, but if the ipa-prop's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113929
Bug ID: 113929
Summary: GCC accepts template
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113505
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113927
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99546
Andrew Giese changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gieseanw+gcc at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #31 from Jan Hubicka ---
Having a testcase is great. I was just playing with crafting one.
I am still concerned about value ranges in ipa-prop's jump functions.
Let me see if I can modify the testcase to also trigger problem with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110907
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113509
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vultkayn at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #35 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
>
> --- Comment #34 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, jakub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112575
Antoni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113806
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113927
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc
index 7cf9504398c..8deeecfd4aa 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc
@@ -1280,8 +1280,11 @@ vect_build_slp_tree_1 (vec_info
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Jakub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So
2024-02-15 Jakub Jelinek
PR middle-end/107385
* gcc.dg/pr107385.c: New test.
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr107385.c.jj 2024-01-13 00:05:00.077372302 +0100
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #31)
> Having a testcase is great. I was just playing with crafting one.
> I am still concerned about value ranges in ipa-prop's jump functions.
Maybe my imagination
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Anyway, should I work on the union variant or do you want to take this over?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #34 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
>
> --- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111802
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks for filing this bug report.
The issue seems to be with the top line here:
┌┬┬┬┬┐┌─┬─┬─┐
│[1] │[1] │[1] │[1]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a6e9e70ea88061981c5565c043985d8cde9ecc8
commit r11-11239-g7a6e9e70ea88061981c5565c043985d8cde9ecc8
Author: Jakub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113811
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113927
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5cff288c2dae4ea709df067cf398f23e214b2e80
commit r14-9009-g5cff288c2dae4ea709df067cf398f23e214b2e80
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113205
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Richard S., any comments on this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113887
--- Comment #12 from Jens Gustedt ---
(In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #11)
> As I said in comment#2, I prefer a constant suffix for __int128 to the
> wb/uwb hack - I think it's cleaner, as well as allowing int128_t to work
> properly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4040d472825f203660371331c9e86cd75e30f8d2
commit r13-8328-g4040d472825f203660371331c9e86cd75e30f8d2
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:407b04b59f712ba41d1bcfbf86eba68c52e7917f
commit r13-8329-g407b04b59f712ba41d1bcfbf86eba68c52e7917f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a6005ed4f1200ce59501cfadd2d8f558ad90
commit r11-11240-ga6005ed4f1200ce59501cfadd2d8f558ad90
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
I think the following fixes it, can you verify the runtime (IL looks sane, but
it uses masked scatter stores).
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index 9e26b09504d..5a5865c42fc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113508
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5329b94188206e9f8c96d9a63931c415fa5d39d7
commit r14-9006-g5329b94188206e9f8c96d9a63931c415fa5d39d7
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113508
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
It can also for an effective memset to a non-constant, but it has to be
uniform,
thus 'char'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Hmm, yes, the code for bitset::set() is actually similar to what we get for
foo() in comment 5. The new version with memset does produce different
(vectorized?) code though.
For operator== the current
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
--- Comment #8 from rhalbersma ---
For bitset::operator==, I wonder why (at last in C++20 and later mode) it is
not defaulted?
For bitset::set and bitset::operator==, I also wonder why the manual loop vs
memset/memcmp consteval logic is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113927
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f0ca42fb5556f2c6b76b017fbbd90820a728ce0
commit r13-8327-g0f0ca42fb5556f2c6b76b017fbbd90820a728ce0
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113619
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b312cf21afd62b43fbc5034703e2796b0c3c416d
commit r14-9011-gb312cf21afd62b43fbc5034703e2796b0c3c416d
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99546
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Giese ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> The OP's example is supposed to be ill-formed though, it shouldn't compile
> successfully. So I don't think it's fixed.
That's my mistake, sorry. Yes the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2b4efc5db2aedb59196987300e14951d08cd7106
commit r14-9012-g2b4efc5db2aedb59196987300e14951d08cd7106
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5459a9074afabf700f055fc8164f88dadb1c39b0
commit r14-9013-g5459a9074afabf700f055fc8164f88dadb1c39b0
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #37 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Also remember we like to have a fix that's easily backportable, and
> that's probably going to be resetting the info. We can do something
> more fancy for GCC 15
Rejecting to merge function with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d2ebd5948bd21f54fdbc5ea99e391be59d0af64c
commit r12-10159-gd2ebd5948bd21f54fdbc5ea99e391be59d0af64c
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113930
Bug ID: 113930
Summary: [modules] ICE in register_duplicate when using
partitioned modules
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113918
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113807
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to rhalbersma from comment #8)
> For bitset::operator==, I wonder why (at last in C++20 and later mode) it is
> not defaulted?
Because nobody bothered to change working code.
> For bitset::set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113606
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #38 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #36)
> > > Having a testcase is great. I was just playing with crafting one.
> > > I am still concerned about value ranges in ipa-prop's jump functions.
> >
> > Maybe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba09da9787e8db8903b2b0f7c647c0d7af68bb74
commit r12-10158-gba09da9787e8db8903b2b0f7c647c0d7af68bb74
Author: Jakub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113496
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109191
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94988
--- Comment #10 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Reasoning that the concurrent stores invoke undefined behavior would enable us
to assume that the stores don't alias, which invalidates the reasoning in
comment 1. Alas, I don't think gimple preserves
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug ID: 113934
Summary: Switch avr to LRA
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113935
Bug ID: 113935
Summary: Switch bfin to LRA
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113942
Bug ID: 113942
Summary: Switch msp430 to LRA
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113941
Bug ID: 113941
Summary: Switch mn10300 to LRA
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113944
Bug ID: 113944
Summary: Switch rl78 to LRA
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113946
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
ft32 has a maintainer (James Bowman) but I can't find a BZ account for him to
CC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113930
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||103524
Summary|[modules]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107191
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 107191, which changed state.
Bug 107191 Summary: [modules] ICE when importing module partition (internal
compiler error: in tree_node, at cp/module.cc:9061)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107191
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113778
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113949
Maciej W. Rozycki changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |macro at orcam dot me.uk
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo