https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68226
--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf ---
The code in comment#0 compiles with current trunk. The ICE is gone.
Not sure if the code is valid, but NAG accepts it
without complaining.
Adding a line
print *, a
prints
1 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84537
Bug ID: 84537
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in get_string, at spellcheck-tree.h
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84537
--- Comment #1 from Volker Reichelt ---
With a slightly modified testcase (namespace std instead of N) I get
a different stack-trace:
===
namespace std
{
template struct A {};
}
std::template A<> a;
1/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/nfs/home/abenson/Galacticus/Tools
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180223 (experimental) (GCC)
$ gfortran bug.F90
$ a.out
FROM PROGRAM8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68226
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84532
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Feb 23 23:23:43 2018
New Revision: 257956
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257956=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/84532 prevent unwrapping of reference_wrapper arguments
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84523
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84535
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84536
Bug ID: 84536
Summary: [7/8 Regression] ICE with non-type template parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70468
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
Neil Carlson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |8.0.1
--- Comment #26 from Neil Carlson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30792
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51652
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=69563
Neil Carlson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|6.0 |8.0.1
--- Comment #2 from Neil Carlson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84539
--- Comment #1 from Neil Carlson ---
And same example but using character data. This compiles but gives a segfault
when run at the assignment statement.
class(*), allocatable :: x(:)
x = ['foo','bar']
select type (x)
type is (character(*))
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118
--- Comment #4 from Neil Carlson ---
Note that if the sourced allocation in the comment 0 test case
allocate(x%v,source=['foo','bar'])
is replaced by the equivalent (I think) assignment
x%v = ['foo','bar']
Then the code produces a run
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84539
Bug ID: 84539
Summary: ICE and segfault with assignment to CLASS(*) array
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52036
zac changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xaxxon at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12 from zac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84422
--- Comment #2 from Carl Love ---
Moved Power 8 vec_float2, vec_signed2 and vec_unsigned2 builtin tests to new
file builtins-3-runnable-p8.c. Fixed ICE for vec_signed2 and vec_unsigned2
which were found in builtins-3-runnable.c once the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83149
--- Comment #11 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Feb 23 17:55:13 2018
New Revision: 257938
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257938=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/83149
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84527
--- Comment #4 from Kai Tietz ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> ..., but that just means it is not the right code for f1 and f3.
Right, that produced code depends on the sign of the condition arguments seems
to be pretty wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84532
Bug ID: 84532
Summary: [7/8 Regression] std::thread::__make_invoker
prematurely unwraps reference_wrappers
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84525
--- Comment #2 from Zhao Chun ---
Thanks for you explain.
It looks some weird to me.
If the type was int64_t or others, this can work.
Is there some specs to say that __int128 is 16-byte aligned?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84525
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Zhao Chun from comment #2)
> Thanks for you explain.
> It looks some weird to me.
> If the type was int64_t or others, this can work.
No, it would be invalid too. It may appear to work.
> Is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84521
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Even when you find another PR for __builtin_longjmp (clearly RA related), that
doesn't mean that __builtin_{setjmp,longjmp} are totally broken and should not
be fixed on aarch64. As ruby (which for some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84521
--- Comment #14 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> Even when you find another PR for __builtin_longjmp (clearly RA related),
> that doesn't mean that __builtin_{setjmp,longjmp} are totally broken and
> should not be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
Bug ID: 84526
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in generic_overlap at
gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.c:927 since r257860
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84524
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84525
--- Comment #4 from Zhao Chun ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Zhao Chun from comment #2)
> > Thanks for you explain.
> > It looks some weird to me.
> > If the type was int64_t or others, this can work.
>
> No, it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84525
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I wrote it above. memcpy or packed struct. And there is no reason to think
about memcpy as something inefficient, GCC will turn those single element
memcpy calls into efficient unaligned loads or stores.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84525
--- Comment #6 from Zhao Chun ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> I wrote it above. memcpy or packed struct. And there is no reason to think
> about memcpy as something inefficient, GCC will turn those single element
> memcpy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84529
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84412
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||albandil at atlas dot cz
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84527
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
No, signed comparison is very different from unsigned comparison, and only
unsigned comparison < is usable for this. Borrow flag reflects unsigned signed
comparison result rather than signed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #7)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> >
> > What is the TREE_OPERAND (expr, 0) in:
> > base = get_inner_reference (expr, , , _off,
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84447
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
My understanding is that this is because cand->fn in this case (the B ctor) is
not DECL_DELETED_FN, but strip_inheriting_ctors (cand->fn) is, we somehow
haven't tried to instantiate it (bailed early) and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80551
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80551
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|7.0 |8.0
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80551
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
The affected bit of code assumes dstref->base is an array and doesn't check to
see if it's something else. In both of these cases it's a VAR_DECL so
TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (dstref->base)) returns null.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84531
Bug ID: 84531
Summary: c/c++: bogus warning for functions with different
argument lengths but compatible arguments
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83149
--- Comment #10 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Feb 23 16:22:28 2018
New Revision: 257934
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257934=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/83149
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84527
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
>
> What is the TREE_OPERAND (expr, 0) in:
> base = get_inner_reference (expr, , , _off,
> , , , );
>
> poly_int64 bytepos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84506
--- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Feb 23 18:40:14 2018
New Revision: 257941
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257941=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/84506
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84523
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83765
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at uplinklabs dot net
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84511
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 23 18:59:38 2018
New Revision: 257943
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257943=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83149
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84506
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Fixed on trunk.
Jakub, thanks for the report. This will be backported to 6 and 7 shortly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84450
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83327
--- Comment #10 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Any news about the patch testing on MIPS. It would be nice to move forward
with the PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84506
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Feb 23 19:16:00 2018
New Revision: 257945
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257945=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Jerry DeLisle
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84346
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 23 18:57:41 2018
New Revision: 257942
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257942=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84019
--- Comment #8 from Allan Jensen ---
Yes, I will take a look again and produce the intermediate results
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84532
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84346
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83496
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83496
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|mipsbe |mips-*-*
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84506
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Feb 23 19:53:04 2018
New Revision: 257951
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257951=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Jerry DeLisle
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84346
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 23 19:35:51 2018
New Revision: 257946
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257946=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84511
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 23 19:37:57 2018
New Revision: 257948
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257948=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84346
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 23 19:41:27 2018
New Revision: 257949
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257949=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84511
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 23 19:42:43 2018
New Revision: 257950
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257950=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-02-23 Steven G. Kargl
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84511
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84533
Bug ID: 84533
Summary: [7/8 Regression] ICE with duplicate enum value
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84506
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84523
--- Comment #2 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #1)
> Doesn't crash for me, but I get a valgrind error:
Trying -fsanitize=undefined, I get:
### destruct: size(rc% spots)= 80
### destruct: allocated (vm)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84143
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Looking at the tree dump we have:
_gfortran_st_write (_parm.0);
{
struct Pdtfoo_1 * D.3772;
D.3772 =
_gfortran_transfer_integer_write (_parm.0, >k1, 4);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84534
Bug ID: 84534
Summary: [8 regression] several powerpc test cases fail
starting with r257915
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84535
Bug ID: 84535
Summary: std::thread constructor missing constraint on first
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.4 |6.5
--- Comment #64 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
One more test-case with a bit different BT:
$ cat sis.i
typedef struct
{
int a;
char b[10];
} c;
c d;
unsigned long s;
void e (void) { __builtin_strncpy (d.b, (char*), s); }
$ gcc -O2 sis.i -Wall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84524
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43493
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43493=edit
gcc8-pr84524.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84528
Bug ID: 84528
Summary: [8 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/960419-2.c -O3
fails with -fno-omit-frame-pointer
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84528
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83496
--- Comment #19 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Laurent GUERBY from comment #18)
> Marxin, you have a cfarm account and access to gcc22 / 23 / 24 which are
> mips64 machines. If you need to change ssh keys see here:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83344
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83975
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78534
Bug 78534 depends on bug 83344, which changed state.
Bug 83344 Summary: Use of uninitialized memory with ASSOCIATE and strings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83344
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84527
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Try with the unsigned arguments.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84527
--- Comment #1 from Kai Tietz ---
For x86 we produce for sample:
movl8(%esp), %eax
cmpl%eax, 4(%esp)
setge %al
movzbl %al, %eax
leal-1(%eax,%eax), %eax
ret
which could be expressed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84528
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84519
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|jb at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84509
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|STOP and PAUSE statements |STOP and ERROR STOP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80598
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.2.1, 4.5.4, 4.7.4, 4.8.5,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60212
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84524
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
A side note, this shows how badly we need a type demotion pass, perhaps just on
the LOOP_VECTORIZED copy of loop before vectorization:
vect__27.7_175 = [vec_unpack_lo_expr] vect_v_16.5_173;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84524
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It reproduces even with __attribute__((noipa)) on foo, so the problem is just
in that function. In assembly we can see:
vpsllw $8, %zmm6, %zmm5
addq$64, %rdi
vpmovzxwd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84527
Bug ID: 84527
Summary: missed optimization for special ternary operation
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84168
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84524
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84526
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> So where is ytab.i?
Sorry, it's here:
$ cat ytab.i
struct
{
char a[1];
} b;
int i;
void c (void) { __builtin_strcpy ([i], b.a); }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402
--- Comment #19 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #17)
> The results in comment #13 seem to be missing some compilations --
> I would have expected to see more files from libcpp in there.
> As it is I only see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402
--- Comment #18 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 43492
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43492=edit
Parallel build of make all-host on 128 core EPYC machine (log file)
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo