https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91433
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91641
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I have a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86549
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91433
--- Comment #3 from George Fan ---
Pls help.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91494
--- Comment #1 from George Fan ---
Please help.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91556
--- Comment #24 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 06:51:23PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91556
>
> --- Comment #23 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91601
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 2 07:06:54 2019
New Revision: 275291
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275291=gcc=rev
Log:
Consider also negative edges in cycle detection.
2019-09-02 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91155
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 2 07:07:11 2019
New Revision: 275292
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275292=gcc=rev
Log:
Use cxx_printable_name for __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ in cp_fname_init.
2019-09-02
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91601
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 2 08:58:17 2019
New Revision: 275301
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275301=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport r275291
2019-09-02 Martin Liska
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91633
Bug ID: 91633
Summary: Why -funroll-loops affect code without loop.
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91155
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 2 08:58:39 2019
New Revision: 275302
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275302=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport r275292
2019-09-02 Martin Liska
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91633
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
It's at least confusing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 2 Sep 2019, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
>
> --- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Created attachment 46797
> -->
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91628
--- Comment #5 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #4)
> (In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #3)
> > The use of the function is for the garbage collector to be able to scan
> > native TLS data.
> >
> > The logic of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91612
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91613
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91614
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91617
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91619
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 07:12:11 2019
New Revision: 275294
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275294=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/91619
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81740
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91615
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91626
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91633
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 2 Sep 2019, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
>
> --- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > Other than that my view is that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91601
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Known to fail|10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91155
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[9/10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91619
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91628
--- Comment #4 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #3)
> The use of the function is for the garbage collector to be able to scan
> native TLS data.
>
> The logic of said function pretty much matches what the glibc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91617
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91155
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91628
--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ---
The use of the function is for the garbage collector to be able to scan native
TLS data.
The logic of said function pretty much matches what the glibc macro
__TLS_GET_ADDR is doing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91628
--- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer ---
__tls_get_offset looks like this:
__tls_get_offset:
la %r2,0(%r2,%r12)
jg __tls_get_addr
The caller should be able to prepare for the la instruction, by subtracting r12
from r2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91623
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #6)
> For the missed constant folding, it seems that we end up in fold_vec_perm,
> with type a vector of "long long", while arg0 and arg1 are vectors of
> "long", and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91616
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
Created attachment 46797
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46797=edit
Proposed wording change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91619
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sat, 31 Aug 2019, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
>
> Eric Botcazou changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91632
Bug ID: 91632
Summary: [10 Regression] Probably wrong code since r275026
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91632
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91617
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Sep 2 08:38:13 2019
New Revision: 275299
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275299=gcc=rev
Log:
PR go/91617
* fold-const.c (range_check_type): For enumeral and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
--- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Other than that my view is that the GENERIC/GIMPLE side is correct.
> Besides even RTL "high-level" get's this consistent (may_trap_p_1),
> likewise simplify-rtx if my quick survey is correct.
Yes, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91601
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91601
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|SUSPENDED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91634
Bug ID: 91634
Summary: [10 Regression] 508.namd_r (and 435.gromacs) speed
regression after r274994
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91634
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-linux-gnu
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91137
--- Comment #15 from bin cheng ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Sep 2 10:10:44 2019
New Revision: 275304
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275304=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2019-07-18 Bin Cheng
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91062
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51333
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51333
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 2 11:10:00 2019
New Revision: 275309
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275309=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/51333 Define recursive_init_error constructor non-inline
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89303
--- Comment #35 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 2 11:10:08 2019
New Revision: 275312
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275312=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/89303 add testcase for std::enable_shared_from_this
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91308
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 2 11:10:04 2019
New Revision: 275311
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275311=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/91308 fix constraints on unique_ptr assignment
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83661
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90770
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 2 11:09:55 2019
New Revision: 275308
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275308=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/90770 fix missing src/debug/Makefile
Backport from mainline
=/usr/bin/riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu-as --disable-multilib
--disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-275299-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-riscv64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91308
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91636
Bug ID: 91636
Summary: performance regression about const string optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91636
--- Comment #2 from Chan Lewis ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> (In reply to Chan Lewis from comment #0)
> > My gcc 7.3.1 version info is:
> >
> > [root@VM_11_190_centos /data1/ethencao]# gcc -v
> > Using built-in specs.
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91636
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53075
Kamlesh Kumar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kamleshbhalui at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91616
--- Comment #3 from Marc POULHIÈS ---
Ok, sorry for the incorrect report.
The problem was found in our port of GCC where the code actually really
accesses an incorrect memory location and seeing this very large offset added
to data array lead
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91625
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-09-01 8:08 p.m., msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> What value does the function return at runtime?
By default, snprintf on HP-UX returns a negative value if maxsize is smaller
than the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91155
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|9.2.0 |9.2.1
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91200
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 12:56:24 2019
New Revision: 275317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275317=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-07-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90278
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.4.1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91131
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91200
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91617
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91632
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91632
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Sep 2 13:35:54 2019
New Revision: 275318
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275318=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/91632
* gcc.c-torture/execute/pr91632.c: New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89710
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 89296, which changed state.
Bug 89296 Summary: [7 Regression] tree copy-header masking uninitialized warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89296
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89392
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91638
Bug ID: 91638
Summary: powerpc -mlong-double-NN (documentation) issues
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89710
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 14:14:14 2019
New Revision: 275319
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275319=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-03-14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89296
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89572
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 14:14:14 2019
New Revision: 275319
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275319=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-03-14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91605
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Author: edlinger
Date: Mon Sep 2 14:26:26 2019
New Revision: 275320
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275320=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Bernd Edlinger
PR middle-end/91605
* expr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91635
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Can't reproduce.
> I get:
> foo:
> not a4,a0
> lui a5,%hi(b)
> sllia0,a0,17
> sh a4,%lo(b)(a5)
> srli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91639
Bug ID: 91639
Summary: [10 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.dg/plugin/location-overflow-test-pr83173.c
-fplugin=./location_overflo w_plugin.so scan-file-not
# (?!1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91155
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Frey ---
Thanks for working on this.
I'm a bit confused about the "Known to work: 9.2.0" - shouldn't this be 9.3.0
given that GCC 9.2 was already released and does not contain this fix?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91635
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew at sifive dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91635
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91323
--- Comment #20 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Sep 2 10:10:23 2019
New Revision: 275303
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275303=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/91323
* doc/generic.texi (LTGT_EXPR): Merge with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90770
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91637
Bug ID: 91637
Summary: Make efficient ISR prologues and epilogues on AVR
available to Ada/GNAT
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
The reduced testcase isn't vectorized on the GCC 7 branch for other reasons.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91636
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There is no standard output because there's no standard build of GCC. The
output depends how it's configured and built.
On RHEL/CentOS 6 and 7 the devtoolset compiler only supports the old
std::string
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83661
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83661
--- Comment #9 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Christophe Monat from comment #4)
> Hi Pratamesh,
>
> You're absolutely right - maybe it's more efficient when there is some
> hardware sincos available (Intel FSINCOS ?) but I would check also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89572
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91512
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 12:56:24 2019
New Revision: 275317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275317=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-07-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 12:56:24 2019
New Revision: 275317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275317=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-07-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90278
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 12:56:24 2019
New Revision: 275317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275317=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-07-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91131
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 12:56:24 2019
New Revision: 275317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275317=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-07-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91162
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 2 12:56:24 2019
New Revision: 275317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275317=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-02 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2019-07-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91612
--- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #2)
> Created attachment 46792 [details]
> untested patch
>
> This is a untested patch it should fix
> pr91612 pr91613 pr91615 (?)
> pr91603
> and pr91605 (i386)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80986
--- Comment #8 from linzj ---
(In reply to Anssi Hannula from comment #7)
> Created attachment 46772 [details]
> Simple testcase for the issue
>
> The regression still exists on GCC trunk.
>
> We also hit the issue with
>
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo