https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614
--- Comment #13 from Chris Packham ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #12)
> Please provide info about how libsanitizer end up building with GCC 11.3 and
> MIPS64 (such a combination is not supported and libsanitizer should not be
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106136
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #12 from Xi Ruoyao
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106141
--- Comment #2 from Jason Liam ---
Note that if `child.hh` is included in multiple TUs, then the program will have
UB NDR as in each TU as the template argument in `Base` is a pointer to
an entity with internal linkage meaning in each TU it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86491
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> A variable declared 'static' has internal linkage, and so does a variable in
> an anonymous namespace, which is probably the source of the mix-up in GCC's
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106141
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86491
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jlame646 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106141
Bug ID: 106141
Summary: Better wording for warning: ‘Child’ has a base
‘Base<(& hello)>’ whose type uses the anonymous
namespace [-Wsubobject-linkage]
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106136
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614
--- Comment #11 from Xi Ruoyao ---
> Removing my "fix" resolves the issue for GCC 12 but I suspect something like
> the suggestion from https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614#c7
> might resolve the issue properly.
I don't think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106022
--- Comment #17 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #16)
> Created attachment 53227 [details]
> The v4 patch
>
> Here is a different approach by supporting 2/4/8 byte constant vector stores.
It LGTM.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
--- Comment #13 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Otherwise we need record first_bb when conditions_in_bbs->is_empty, then check
that in is_beneficial, ordered_remove the info entry if that bb is not the
first "if condition" with side_effect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
--- Comment #12 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
conditions_in_bbs->is_empty doesn't mean that range is at the start of switch
condition:(, so couldn't assume to ignore the no_side_effect_bb check?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106113
--- Comment #3 from kong lingling ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Has the definition of these intrinsics changed over time?
Yes, intrinsic `_mm_comieq_ss ` old operation is `RETURN ( a[31:0] == b[31:0]
) ? 1 : 0`, and new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
--- Comment #11 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry for breaking, my bugzilla account is luo...@gcc.gnu.org.
The patch seems reasonable to fold 65-90 ('A'-'Z') to switch statement,
4,6c4,6
< ;; Canonical GIMPLE case clusters: 33 60 62
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106113
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-06-30
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kito Cheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f6eef398045deb2a62d18b526831719c7c20c8a
commit r13-1357-g0f6eef398045deb2a62d18b526831719c7c20c8a
Author: Kito Cheng
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 106097, which changed state.
Bug 106097 Summary: undefined behaviors regarding integer shifts in
loongarch_build_integer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106114
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:918bb0e78ae42bfcf808a1e93a8f6b9d02ea
commit r13-1356-g918bb0e78ae42bfcf808a1e93a8f6b9d02ea
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106131
--- Comment #6 from Xue Zhenliang <18307130172 at fudan dot edu.cn> ---
I'm trying to reducing it further. Now I've eliminated the dependency on STL:
struct Pair {
int a, b;
Pair(const Pair &) = default;
Pair(int _a, int _b) :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106095
Antoni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106095
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Antoni Boucher :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e484755aecd543b4c9e2adb4f348118c1e43cfd0
commit r13-1355-ge484755aecd543b4c9e2adb4f348118c1e43cfd0
Author: Antoni Boucher
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105812
Antoni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105812
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Antoni Boucher :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e3a5c77388ae3791afed4f4286ec7e41e5b9f7c3
commit r13-1353-ge3a5c77388ae3791afed4f4286ec7e41e5b9f7c3
Author: Antoni Boucher
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100157
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
GCC doesn't support template-like built-ins, but I have a patch to add a
function-like __builtin_type_pack_element(N, T...) instead. I don't like the
name "type pack element" much though. To me that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100157
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100157
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-06-29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104477
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am going to be like Johnathan and say I wish these compiler intrinsic were
defined by the standard rather than having to define them ourselves.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104477
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106140
Bug ID: 106140
Summary: RFE: analyzer could complain about misuses of socket
APIs
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106022
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53186|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106117
--- Comment #8 from John McCall ---
Oh, that's what I get for having two different draft standards open at once.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106139
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:329bef49da30158d30fed1106002bb71674776bd
commit r13-1351-g329bef49da30158d30fed1106002bb71674776bd
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106139
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
Note, gdc-11 and gdc-10 error as a result to a different issue.
---
cannot resolve type for cast(__vector(int[8]))arr
---
Fix was made in a newer version of upstream dmd, so that'll be handled in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105243
--- Comment #11 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:42:30PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> when using your patch from comment#2 and moving it up slightly, it will
> also improve error handling for unlimited polymorphic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106117
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
FLT_EVAL_METHOD of 0 gives _Float16 excess precision ("evaluate all
operations and constants, whose semantic type comprises a set of values
that is a strict subset of the values of float,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105243
--- Comment #10 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-June/057972.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105243
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106131
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with
commit 8403c2cf5f66758fc78a01a675b0d218fded0202
Author: Richard Biener
Date: Mon Nov 24 14:07:18 2014 +
re PR target/63679 ([AArch64] Failure to constant fold.)
2014-11-24
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106131
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-06-29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106131
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104637
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.5|10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106131
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|10.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106131
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104637
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106114
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 53226
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53226=edit
proposed patch
Patch in testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106102
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sergei Trofimovich :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:49d508065bdd36fb1a9b6aad9666b1edb5e06474
commit r13-1350-g49d508065bdd36fb1a9b6aad9666b1edb5e06474
Author: Sergei Trofimovich
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95372
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103993
--- Comment #4 from Ed Catmur ---
And another example, provoked by throwing new (this only happens at -Og):
#include
struct D {
D();
static void* operator new (std::size_t s) {
if (void* p = ::malloc(s))
return p;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104637
--- Comment #16 from tt_1 ---
May I kindly ask why this was retargeted to gcc-10.5.0? It seems to me that all
the patches were merged into gcc-10.4.0, is there more to come?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106114
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod ---
The routine which tries to fold relations in && or || statements is getting
stale information.
GORI maintains a dependency cache which is mostly use by the temporal mechanism
to decide when statements are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106117
--- Comment #6 from John McCall ---
Ah, I can see how the FLT_EVAL_METHOD schema gives us a unifying scheme, thank
you. Just to be clear, though, the actual value of FLT_EVAL_METHOD in that
mode should be 0, correct?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106117
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The idea with "16" is to say that's the exact FLT_EVAL_METHOD value
(defined in C23 Annex H) whose semantics should be followed. It would
affect float/double promotion on i386 as well
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106121
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106121
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b8f284d3673004dffae714b56ed663467c2a52a7
commit r13-1349-gb8f284d3673004dffae714b56ed663467c2a52a7
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at behdad dot org
--- Comment #50
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100125
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106101
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
There is structural RTL checking in rtl.h (see RTL_CHECK{1,2,C1,C2,C3} and the
various ELT and INT accessors). This would be easier to use here if we used
some STRICT_LOW_PART_P everywhere :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106117
--- Comment #4 from John McCall ---
Ah, thank you, we weren't aware of -fexcess-precision=16. If that's the
precedent, we can certainly follow it.
The idea around "16" was to make it clear that this just affects _Float16? If
the option were
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106137
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c022c0de2a6c9110350cd50275be97d061a19530
commit r13-1344-gc022c0de2a6c9110350cd50275be97d061a19530
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103413
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 08:11:01AM +, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103413
>
> --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
> (In reply to kargl from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106138
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106119
--- Comment #2 from Tom Cosgrove ---
Further addendum:
If you use a `void *` to save the value of the pointer, you don't get the
warning!
See https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/fof8a747z
i.e. this code does not generate the warning:
#include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106139
Bug ID: 106139
Summary: d: aggregate value used where floating point was
expected
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106138
Bug ID: 106138
Summary: Inefficient code generation for cases when results can
be deduced at compile time
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106122
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-06-29
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106123
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106122
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105231
Bug 105231 depends on bug 106082, which changed state.
Bug 106082 Summary: [13 Regression] Recent change broke m68k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106082
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106082
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #8)
> I seem strangely unable to add email address xionghu...@tencent.com to this
> email,
> for their opinion on this bug report.
Yeah, he hasn't registered a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106082
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0282c4acf720e4cc073cf95594aa890444c5ca82
commit r13-1342-g0282c4acf720e4cc073cf95594aa890444c5ca82
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|tree check fail in |[12 Regression] tree check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106136
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105614
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||immoloism at googlemail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106137
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Created attachment 53224 [details]
> gcc13-pr106137.patch
>
> Perhaps this patch could fix this?
The patch does fix the build! I also have the 4 files you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
I seem strangely unable to add email address xionghu...@tencent.com to this
email,
for their opinion on this bug report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
--- Comment #7 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #5)
> Seems good. Current range appears to be [607118dfa47a1865, f1fcd6e3ad911945].
Tried 57424087e82db140 and that looked bad, so current range is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106124
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
int q;
struct A
{
typedef int T;
#pragma omp declare reduction (x : T : omp_out += omp_in + [] (){ return q;
}()) initializer (omp_priv = [](){ return 0; }())
static void foo ();
};
void bar (int &,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106103
--- Comment #1 from Ivan ---
Created attachment 53225
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53225=edit
Single file and smaller version of the original testcase
To compile this, do:
x86_64-w64-mingw32-g++ -r -flto -Os
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106137
--- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Could you please attach
> */libgfortran/Makefile
> */libgfortran/config.h
> from the build dir before/after that commit?
Waiting for a build to finish to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106137
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 53224
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53224=edit
gcc13-pr106137.patch
Perhaps this patch could fix this?
We no longer need __float128 type in libgfortran (except I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106134
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Version|12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106129
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106126
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106124
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106122
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106120
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |testsuite
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106137
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Could you please attach
*/libgfortran/Makefile
*/libgfortran/config.h
from the build dir before/after that commit?
I believe aarch64 has IEEE754 quad long double, doesn't build libquadmath as it
isn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105551
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a6a0f3423f3053999c0eb6e7183319c1dca6455d
commit r12-8526-ga6a0f3423f3053999c0eb6e7183319c1dca6455d
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106136
Immolo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53222|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> I mean backport thereof to 12 branch.
Can you push it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106135
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106131
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||85811545 at qq dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I mean backport thereof to 12 branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106112
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.1.0
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
