https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83675
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
[...]
> Sorry, I'd missed that this feature was restricted to TARGET_VIS2.
> The attached patch seems to fix it.
It does indeed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83678
Bug ID: 83678
Summary: [GCOV] a pointer assignment before a break statment
lead to incorrect coverage in gcov
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83624
--- Comment #3 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
As you noted, --pedantic-errors makes that code an error, so it is not an
equivalent replacement.
Also, GNU-specific attributes can and often are supported by other compilers.
When they are not, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82915
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
For tracking purposes it probably would be better to have separate issues for
every CPU type which could benefit this. So this one could be for x86, and you
could open other requests for other CPUs which s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83655
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83655
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Jan 3 23:41:32 2018
New Revision: 256218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/83655 - ICE on an invalid call to memcpy declared wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83466
--- Comment #4 from Steve Ellcey ---
Created attachment 43027
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43027&action=edit
Patch file being tested
I am testing this patch for regressions, I have verified that it does fix the
small test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82915
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
See A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83677
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc*-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83677
Bug ID: 83677
Summary: PPC: The xxpermr instruction is not generated
correctly
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83429
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sylvestre at debian dot org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83586
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83672
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This looks familiar, I think it's a dup of an existing bug report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83624
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to andysem from comment #0)
> The problem with this warning is that it suggests using inline namespaces
> instead, but that is not an option on C++03 code base. The attribute is used
> precisely t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #17 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 43025
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43025&action=edit
another complement to the initial partial patch, this one improving
auto-inc-dec
We already had code to turn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83626
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83676
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83603
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83627
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83603
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Jan 3 22:52:53 2018
New Revision: 256217
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/83603 - ICE in builtin_memref at
gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83671
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83675
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83676
Bug ID: 83676
Summary: Problems with sscanf parsing hex-floats
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83675
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
Build: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
Between 20180102 and 20180103, man SPARC tests started to FAIL like this:
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr43842.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr43842.c (test for excess errors)
/vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83641
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83641
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Jan 3 21:25:10 2018
New Revision: 256191
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256191&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/83641
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_adjust_stack_and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83621
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jan 3 20:59:50 2018
New Revision: 256190
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256190&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/83621
* cfgexpand.c (expand_debug_expr): Return N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83645
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jan 3 20:58:48 2018
New Revision: 256189
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256189&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/83645
* var-tracking.c (delete_vta_debug_insn): N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #16 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Even if create_mem_ref_raw created a MEM_REF, we'd still allocate a new pseudo
for the reg - 1 at cfgexpand, and that ends up preventing the post_inc
addressing mode from being selected.
The more I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83496
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83559
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83559
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Jan 3 20:43:47 2018
New Revision: 256188
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256188&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/83559 - -Wsuggest-attribute=const conflicts with -Wattributes warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83496
--- Comment #5 from Hauke Mehrtens ---
The description already contains the full function incl. 4006fc.
Do you need more?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83555
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jan 3 20:37:41 2018
New Revision: 256186
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256186&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/83555
* typeck.c (build_static_cast_1): For static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #15 from Alexandre Oliva ---
As we create_mem_ref within ivopts, create_mem_ref_raw requires a
valid_mem_ref_p, which in memory_address_addr_space_p calls
targetm.addr_space.legitimate_address_p, and that's
avr_addr_space_legitimate_a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83674
Bug ID: 83674
Summary: strcpy folding of small strings defeats strlen
optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82915
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
SIMD ISAa for other CPU types (e.g. ARM/AARCH64 NEON) also can benefit from
this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83666
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83666
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83673
Bug ID: 83673
Summary: missing strlen optimization on multiple strcpy calls
with same length strings
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83569
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83580
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
*** Bug 83569 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83672
Bug ID: 83672
Summary: Unable to take the address of a template function
parameter pack specialization with a function argument
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83654
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83654
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Jan 3 18:22:28 2018
New Revision: 256182
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256182&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/83654
* explow.c (anti_adjust_stack_and_probe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51513
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #11 from Peter Bergne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80724
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #6)
> (In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #5)
> > template int Foo (T);
> >
> > template class TPL;
> >
> > template
> > constexpr TPL Foo (); // #1
> >
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83569
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.6
Summary|Wrong constant fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81897
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83569
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83585
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43021
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43021&action=edit
gcc8-pr83585.patch
Untested fix. Another option would be to introduce a new flag next to
has_bb_partition, e.g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83671
Bug ID: 83671
Summary: Fix for false positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow
does not work with inlining
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
int Foo (void *);
template class TPL;
template TPL Baz ();
int Foo (float);
template TPL Baz ();
constexpr int Foo (int) {return 0;}int Foo (int);
A less templatey case.
83529.ii:6:26: error: call t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83585
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with my r254989 aka PR82718 fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61638
dank at kegel dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dank at kegel dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83586
Sylvestre Ledru changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8 regression] Invalid |[8 regression] Invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83585
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83586
--- Comment #2 from Sylvestre Ledru ---
Created attachment 43020
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43020&action=edit
preprocessed file
Here is the same issue on a smaller file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #5)
> template int Foo (T);
>
> template class TPL;
>
> template
> constexpr TPL Foo (); // #1
>
> template
> constexpr TPL Foo (); // #2
>
> What I think is h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83569
Bug ID: 83569
Summary: Wrong constant folding
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83579
Bug ID: 83579
Summary: Wrong constant folding
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83629
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
--- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell ---
template int Foo (T);
template class TPL;
template
constexpr TPL Foo (); // #1
template
constexpr TPL Foo (); // #2
What I think is happening is that the definition at #1 changes the overload set
to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83501
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Jan 3 16:26:49 2018
New Revision: 256181
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256181&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/83501 - strlen(a) not folded after strcpy(a, "...")
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83556
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83501
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Reso
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83501
--- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: prathamesh3492
Date: Wed Jan 3 16:07:32 2018
New Revision: 256180
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256180&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-01-03 Prathamesh Kulkarni
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83621
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43019
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43019&action=edit
gcc8-pr83621.patch
Untested patch for that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83667
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83667
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Wed Jan 3 16:01:31 2018
New Revision: 256179
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256179&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/83667] Fix tree_dump ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83621
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82439
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> "(x | y) == x" is simpler than "(y & ~x) == 0" on the tree level. 2 gimple
> vs 3.
We do indeed tend to use the number of stmts to chose canonical forms on
gimple,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83621
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Created attachment 43018
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43018&action=edit
Candidate patch
I'm testing the attached fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83660
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64*-*-* |powerpc*-*-*
--- Comment #3 from Se
lease submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 8.0.0 20180103 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83621
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82249
--- Comment #3 from Benjamin Buch ---
Bug is still present in trunk.
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 8.0.0 20180103 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83645
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43017
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43017&action=edit
gcc8-pr83645.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83387
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |bergner at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81933
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
The c++17/c++14 difference lies in:
4321 if (cxx_dialect >= cxx17 && !BINFO_VIRTUAL_P (binfo))
4322 {
4323 tree decl = build_base_field_1 (t, basetype, next_field);
4324 DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83593
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83593
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Jan 3 14:53:39 2018
New Revision: 256178
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256178&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Clean-up EH after strlen transformation (PR tree-optimization/83593).
201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39170
--- Comment #18 from Florin Iucha ---
Even this version creates a warning:
#include
struct foo
{
unsigned bar: 30;
unsigned fill: 2;
};
struct foo test(uint32_t value)
{
struct foo foo;
foo.bar = (value >> 2) & 0x3fffU;
r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83645
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Likely started with
r181118: PR c++/45114 - Support C++11 alias-declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Actually with -std=c++11 it started to ICE way before that. Checking...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83634
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83660
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Also fails with -mcpu=power6 -maltivec.
Also succeeds with -mcpu=power9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83660
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|powe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83666
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83621
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83670
Bug ID: 83670
Summary: m32c ICE in leaf_function_p, at final.c:4368
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83549
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Jan 3 14:15:58 2018
New Revision: 256177
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256177&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not inline variadic thunks (PR ipa/83549).
2018-01-03 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83549
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83355
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 154 matches
Mail list logo
