https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97792
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-11-11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97792
Bug ID: 97792
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2315
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97788
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97787
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> I guess it succeeds when you do not enable -g? Can you check if reverting
> 63a2bdbfb42628800a6999e98804928855592ce7 or
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97789
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-11-11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97788
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97779
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97787
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97784
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Oh and for the GIMPLE side there's still my TODO item of "finishing" turning
late GIMPLE to -fwrapv as to make the last reassoc pass effective here. But
it's again a bit late for that. Hmm, I might simply
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97768
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:81372618277bfae682434fcdc80b311ee6007476
commit r11-4902-g81372618277bfae682434fcdc80b311ee6007476
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97784
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97783
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
Levy changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #49542|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
Levy changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #49536|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97779
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
Fixed in GCC10,GCC9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96238
roland at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roland at gnu dot org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97771
--- Comment #5 from Erez Strauss ---
Yes, thanks, the asm() works - but if it can be expressed in C++, why add the
dependency on assembly?
1. attribute constructor - fails to compile
2. placing the address into the .init_array fails to generate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
--- Comment #30 from Jim Wilson ---
Looking at your v2 patch, the first verison fails because you are passing
mismatched modes to emit_move_insn. The version with gen_lowpart solves that
problem, but fails because of infinite recursion.
The v4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42857
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Untested patch:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/compatibility.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/compatibility.cc
@@ -88,7 +88,9 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42857
--- Comment #9 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> Probably changed by one of the patches for PR 94749 or PR 96161, although I
> still see two reads for the first example.
Thank you, I was mistaken.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42857
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Probably changed by one of the patches for PR 94749 or PR 96161, although I
still see two reads for the first example.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68703
--- Comment #9 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
This bug appears not to manifest in g++-8, 9, and 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66028
--- Comment #2 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
This bug appears not to manifest in g++-10.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42857
--- Comment #7 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
This bug appears not to manifest in g++-10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58855
--- Comment #2 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
This bug is still present in g++-10.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94342
roland at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roland at gnu dot org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97791
Bug ID: 97791
Summary: GNU attributes for long double could be improved on
PowerPC
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97790
--- Comment #1 from Luke Dalessandro ---
It is possible to workaround this bug by creating a symbol for the offending
allocation in the IILE.
https://godbolt.org/z/jeoEra
```
struct vector {
int *data;
int n;
constexpr vector() :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97790
Bug ID: 97790
Summary: constexpr evaluation reports false positive memory
leak
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97789
Bug ID: 97789
Summary: valgrind error with ./gcc.dg/c11-atomic-2.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97788
Bug ID: 97788
Summary: [11 regression] g++.dg/ubsan/pr61272.C fails after
r11-4852
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97518
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97787
Bug ID: 97787
Summary: [10/11 regression] 64bit mips lto: .symtab local
symbol at index x (>= sh_info of y)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97518
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c0c83feb04d7486ccf9cbe86dcd5668f0a21ef9
commit r11-4891-g8c0c83feb04d7486ccf9cbe86dcd5668f0a21ef9
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89565
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
commit r11-4890-ga210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90799
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
commit r11-4890-ga210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87765
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
commit r11-4890-ga210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88982
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
commit r11-4890-ga210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52830
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
commit r11-4890-ga210d404d08e363af4b2e2a60986c3cb08f8ebc5
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97415
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ced70ebaa372945ec8d73703d81e4a10d6d51c9b
commit r11-4887-gced70ebaa372945ec8d73703d81e4a10d6d51c9b
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97786
Bug ID: 97786
Summary: rs6000 isinf etc. are pretty horrible
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97784
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
No, it is exactly the same with unsigned types :-(
Use -Dlong="unsigned long" or use #define O ^ (as in my original test).
I forgot about this signed thing, but it has nothing to do with it (that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56842
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85979
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65943
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94057
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97785
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71219
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-05-26 00:00:00 |2020-11-10
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97785
Bug ID: 97785
Summary: const_cast shows diagnostic about Y*
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97784
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reassociation is done for signed types and places where it could introduce
overflows.
If you -fwrapv, you should get the optimization. Likewise for unsigned types.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97784
Bug ID: 97784
Summary: Expressions evaluated as long chain instead of as tree
or the like
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
--- Comment #10 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to abebeos from comment #9)
> So, if it's ok for the backers, reduce the scope of the bounty to "just get
> avr into gcc11 and keep generated code as much as possible unchanged".
It
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
abebeos at lazaridis dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abebeos at lazaridis dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97783
--- Comment #1 from Quentin Armitage ---
I don't know if the following addition output from gcc -v when compiling
glob_err.c is useful:
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-save-temps' '-O1' '-D' 'TEST1' '-o' 'glob_err'
'-mtune=generic' '-march=x86-64'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97783
Bug ID: 97783
Summary: Optimizer assumes global static variable cannot be
updated by external function, even though function is
passed address of local functions
Product:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97748
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ea4fb4eaacbd2c954d78d7f8e9f03c7be739
commit r11-4878-gea4fb4eaacbd2c954d78d7f8e9f03c7be739
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97771
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97771
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97782
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Technically, the issue is (was): The input_location is used which is obtained
when finishing the the block (= '!$acc end kernels') - or rather whatever comes
before and bumps the line location.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97782
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 49540
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49540=edit
Draft patch
There are probably more – like 'omp sections', 'omp parallel', if I glanced at
it correctly. (Search for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97771
--- Comment #2 from Erez Strauss ---
Thanks, I tried, it fails with:
$ g++ -O2 -std=c++20 init_array5c.cpp -o init_array5c
init_array5c.cpp: In function ‘void localFunc(const char*)’:
init_array5c.cpp:17:55: warning: ‘constructor’ attribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64194
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janezz55 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97778
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97782
Bug ID: 97782
Summary: [Fortran] Confused location information for OpenACC
compute constructs
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97778
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Looks like a dup of PR 64194, checking ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97769
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
Thanks Richi!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97769
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97769
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1693746302e4306b43cb66a0afe589137069bd8e
commit r11-4877-g1693746302e4306b43cb66a0afe589137069bd8e
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97769
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
OK, it's just an overzealeous assert that is too difficult to update for the
additional cases we now handle. I'll remove it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97779
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-11-10
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97781
Bug ID: 97781
Summary: basic_stringbuf::swap is not exception safe
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97780
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97780
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:960c4712c8e1e08f29af999d4198bd96fcccb93c
commit r11-4876-g960c4712c8e1e08f29af999d4198bd96fcccb93c
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97779
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
patch posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-November/558578.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97779
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97778
--- Comment #2 from Janez Zemva ---
t.cpp:57:22: error: no matching function for call to 'apply(, const std::tuple >, std::chrono::time_point > >,
std::basic_string_view > >&)'
57 | return std::apply(hash_combine, t);
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97780
Bug ID: 97780
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE Segmentation fault since
r11-4831-g17c25a454e056f46
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97780
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.2.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97779
Bug ID: 97779
Summary: Newest releases/gcc-10 cannot build because lack of
PTA_CLDEMOTE
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97778
--- Comment #1 from Janez Zemva ---
oh, once, again, -std=c++20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97778
Bug ID: 97778
Summary: return type not deduced with gcc but get deduced with
clang
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
--disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r11-4863-20201110102300-gfb54c3032b8-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 11.0.0 20201110 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97776
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As p is array of pointers, if it was say p[i:2][0:C] it would be
non-contiguous, but in this particular case, while such array sections are
blurry (because
the array section describes the p[i][0], p[i][1]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97776
Bug ID: 97776
Summary: [C/C++][OpenMP] 'error: array section is not
contiguous in ‘map’ clause' for: map(alloc: p[i][0:C])
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
Levy changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #49534|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85468
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97773
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #12)
> Started to ICE with -std=c++17 since r6-3372-g378b307d0d7e789c.
That's the commit that added C++17 fold expressions, but the ICE doesn't depend
on fold
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97773
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82099
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janezz55 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97773
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think it's just a dup of PR 82099.
Reduced further to only use C++14
template
struct hash
{
int operator()(T) const noexcept { return 0; }
};
template
int hash_combine(T v)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97764
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97764
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97775
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97773
--- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
Started to ICE with -std=c++17 since r6-3372-g378b307d0d7e789c. Before that it
was rejected:
pr97773-2.C:30:40: error: expected primary-expression before ‘...’ token
((hash>()(v)), ...)))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97773
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97773
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
using size_t = decltype(sizeof(0));
template struct remove_reference { using type = T; };
template struct remove_reference { using type = T; };
template struct remove_reference { using type =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97775
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Forgot to say, flags to reproduce are: -Os t2.c -fno-tree-sra -fno-ipa-modref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97775
Bug ID: 97775
Summary: Wrong code with bitfield
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97764
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4b47f86c40a071fbcad5bce5001b1b689748a2e8
commit r10-8998-g4b47f86c40a071fbcad5bce5001b1b689748a2e8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97764
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c69325a5db450dbac198f76f1162734af05a1061
commit r11-4867-gc69325a5db450dbac198f76f1162734af05a1061
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
