https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104130
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104127
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104122
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|On Zen3, 510.parest_r |On Zen3, 510.parest_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104120
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |11.2.1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104117
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> I wonder if it's possible to create a simple RTL frontend testcase for this,
> feeding into RA?
I hope so, because the C++ and C test cases are very fragile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104119
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104117
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104116
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener ---
Oh, and btw. strlen no longer uses EVRP it seems - it still performs a DOM walk
but is using ranger now (but my guess is still the ptr-query caching is what is
broken - one could try simply bypassing it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
--- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 19 Jan 2022, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
>
> --- Comment #22 from Andrew Macleod ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
Bug ID: 104141
Summary: Access to private member function from requires-clause
accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104140
Bug ID: 104140
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE verify_gimple failed: type
mismatch in binary expression since
r12-6434-g0752c75536e
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103063
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=104134
--- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Rimvydas (RJ) from comment #13)
> Error is triggered on Linux (LFS-next testing) builds too, but only when
> configured as:
> ../configure --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103655
--- Comment #1 from Jiang An ---
It seems that MS implemented the "x" mode in 2020:
https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/cpp-docs/commit/3e0701d935614423e1f09a6712cb5b5e28c43022#diff-be5df6fa41d451f0736c5cd8d863fb3bccfd2b49fbd6b0f7f5de6c07c87700ac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104066
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-20
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
BTW, cris-elf structure layout is "default packed"; byte boundaries all over.
(I don't know what pru-elf does.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
Bug ID: 104139
Summary: [12 Regression] g++.dg/abi/no_unique_address2.C at
r12-6028 (a37e8ce3b663)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104138
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to qingzhe huang from comment #2)
> Can we remove the phrase "with -g" from subject because it doesn't require
> to compile with "-g" option? This will help for future subject search.
godbot adds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104138
--- Comment #2 from qingzhe huang ---
Can we remove the phrase "with -g" from subject because it doesn't require to
compile with "-g" option? This will help for future subject search.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102300
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
Rimvydas (RJ) changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104138
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87983
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104138
Bug ID: 104138
Summary: ICE when lambda is passed as parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103881
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102300
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:30f2c22def7392119f1ffaca30ef998b3b43f336
commit r12-6754-g30f2c22def7392119f1ffaca30ef998b3b43f336
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 104137, which changed state.
Bug 104137 Summary: ICE when lambda has parameter of decltype of a
non-convertable lambda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104137
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99505
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 104137 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104137
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104137
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
It is infinite recurse while trying to print an error:
#3 0x00a977d8 in dump_aggr_type(cxx_pretty_printer*, tree_node*, int)
[clone .constprop.0] () at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103724
--- Comment #5 from Frank Heckenbach ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> One thing we could do is annotate struct loop * with the (high level)
> optimizations we've applied so that when we emit this warning we could say
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104137
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104137
Bug ID: 104137
Summary: ICE when lambda has parameter of decltype of a
non-convertable lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103874
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
RISCV is the only (modern) target which does not have HAVE_AS_LEB128 defined
really; see PR 91602 for the reasons why.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104120
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
now I wonder if the C++ front-end emits worse debugging info than the C
front-end too
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104120
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect it is this part which introduced more debug statements which made it
slower:
* c-typeck.c (c_finish_loop): Add COND_LOCUS and INCR_LOCUS arguments,
emit DEBUG_BEGIN_STMTs if needed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:29:18AM +, sgk at troutmask dot
apl.washington.edu wrote:
>
> Note, I justed started a bootstrap with FreeBSD system compiler
> clang/clang++. I'll report back later if it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104119
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In the FreeBSD case it is:
pp_printf (pp, ((cxx_pp)->translate_identifiers ? ("") : ("")), variety);
so no translation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:25:35AM +, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
>
> --- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
> The code uses the M_ macro:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
The code uses the M_ macro:
pp_printf (pp, M_(""), variety);
on my machine it expands into:
pp_printf (pp, ((cxx_pp)->translate_identifiers ? gettext ("") :
("")), variety);
and GCC doesn't warn most
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #8 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> The file uses
> #if __GNUC__ >= 10
> # pragma GCC diagnostic push
> # pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wformat-diag"
> #endif
> ...
> #if __GNUC__ >=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 52237
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52237=edit
gzipped error.ii
Seems bugzilla stripped the attachment which was 2.6 MB
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:54:25PM +, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> For this PR, I guess the big question is what is different between FreeBSD and
> Linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103721
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #9)
>
>
>
>1 2 3
>| \ /
>|4
>| / \
>+->5 6
> / \
> 7 8
>
>
> Note how BB4 does not dominate BB5. If we try to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
Bug ID: 104136
Summary: Gcc cannot compile wrf_r for power10 using -Ofast
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The file uses
#if __GNUC__ >= 10
# pragma GCC diagnostic push
# pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wformat-diag"
#endif
...
#if __GNUC__ >= 10
# pragma GCC diagnostic pop
#endif
but in a region different
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> Did the file compile without these warnings prior to r12-6729?
Yes (with the caveat I don't know if error.c was renamed to error.cc
during the great
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104135
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104135
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
No, that is a different problem with the same warning now turned into error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104135
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104135
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104135
Bug ID: 104135
Summary: [12 Regression] -Werror=format-diag breaks rtl
checking bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103721
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I think Andrew has raised a really interesting issue. If the relation code is
designed around seeing things in dominator order, then don't we have to stop
using it once we traverse any edge where the edge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||*-*-*freebsd*
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Removing the '<' and '>' characters allows bootstrap to continue.
Probably not the desired patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104134
Bug ID: 104134
Summary: Bootstrap on FreeBSD files compiling gcc/cp/error.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103686
--- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt ---
It turns out not to be undocumented -- but I'd like to remove it anyway. Any
objections?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103695
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |sandra at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104128
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Tentative, semi-obvious patch:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/target-memory.cc b/gcc/fortran/target-memory.cc
index 361907b0e51..7ce7d736629 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/target-memory.cc
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102911
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
Also fixed for GCC 11.3, 10.4 and 9.5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51620
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffe873471fb59dbe95a31afa089cfcac1a9327d4
commit r9-9918-gffe873471fb59dbe95a31afa089cfcac1a9327d4
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102911
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffe873471fb59dbe95a31afa089cfcac1a9327d4
commit r9-9918-gffe873471fb59dbe95a31afa089cfcac1a9327d4
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104133
Bug ID: 104133
Summary: OpenACC 'kernels' decomposition: internal compiler
error: 'verify_gimple' failed, error: invalid operands
in binary operation
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104132
Bug ID: 104132
Summary: OpenACC 'kernels' decomposition: internal compiler
error: verify_gimple failed, error: non-register as
LHS of binary operation
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #20 from Martin Sebor ---
This warning, like all others, is meant to help find common bugs in ordinary
code. It shouldn't be expected to reflect implementation-defined behavior or
to be free of false positives. Tricky code that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100400
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-05-11 00:00:00 |2022-1-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104127
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Tentative patch:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc b/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
index 3881370d947..366b00c28dd 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
@@ -8162,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, actually because of the glibc and AIX behavior, after the first realloc
returns NULL if size is 0, then ptr has been freed and so the code actually is
a use after free. For BSD it is not a use after
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #14)
> Removing the test for !size from the first conditional avoids the warning.
> I don't fully understand what the code tries to do but the following avoids
> it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor ---
Having spent some time trying to understand the function I think the following
simplification should capture its intent. It compiles without warnings at all
levels:
void *xrealloc (void *ptr, size_t size)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2396.htm#dr_400
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think the new code in comment #14 is the only code which is well defined in
c17 really. Before c17 (dr400), realloc for sizes of 0 the return value was
unspecified which means it could return null or an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #14 from Martin Sebor ---
Removing the test for !size from the first conditional avoids the warning. I
don't fully understand what the code tries to do but the following avoids it at
-O2 (only):
void *xrealloc (void *ptr, int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069
--- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor ---
I confused things (including myself) yesterday, sorry.
Let me try again, with just the -O2 behavior for the test case in comment #2:
void *xrealloc (void *ptr, int size)
{
void *ret = __builtin_realloc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102911
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:666eb85627e961db200dd5db639a1831d81188e1
commit r10-10408-g666eb85627e961db200dd5db639a1831d81188e1
Author: H.J. Lu
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51620
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:666eb85627e961db200dd5db639a1831d81188e1
commit r10-10408-g666eb85627e961db200dd5db639a1831d81188e1
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104127
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
We die here:
(gdb) l 7244
7239case EXPR_ARRAY:
7240
7241 /* This is somewhat brutal. The expression for the first
7242 element of the array is evaluated and assigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104128
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104127
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104103
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104129
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104131
Bug ID: 104131
Summary: ICE in gfc_conv_array_ref, at
fortran/trans-array.c:3810
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104130
Bug ID: 104130
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_add_class_array_ref, at
fortran/class.c:274
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104129
Bug ID: 104129
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr57147-2.c -O2 -flto
-fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for
excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104128
Bug ID: 104128
Summary: ICE in gfc_widechar_to_char, at fortran/scanner.c:199
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101389
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #3 from Gaius Mulley ---
> I've pushed some changes to gcc/m2/Makefile.in on Tue Jan 11 19:21:06 2022
> +
> which fix parallel build errors on stage1 binaries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104127
Bug ID: 104127
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in get_array_charlen, at
fortran/trans-array.c:7244
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104126
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
Just simplified a bit :
program p
call s(null())
contains
subroutine s(x) bind(c)
character(:), pointer :: x
end
end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104126
Bug ID: 104126
Summary: ICE in gfc_conv_gfc_desc_to_cfi_desc, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:5649
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103538
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103538
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9e76f4d32f00633bc0e1e51c20f685d58ae8a74f
commit r10-10407-g9e76f4d32f00633bc0e1e51c20f685d58ae8a74f
Author: H.J. Lu
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103538
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e076d8f8153f4b9feb149f62292927ceffb8eeec
commit r10-10406-ge076d8f8153f4b9feb149f62292927ceffb8eeec
Author: H.J. Lu
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104119
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Summary|unexpected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104121
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
1 - 100 of 233 matches
Mail list logo
