https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Another option is to elide the promotion?
int foo (unsigned short x)
{
return __builtin_bswap16 (x);
}
return (int) __builtin_bswap16 ((int) x);
but BUILT_IN_BSWAP16 is BT_FN_UINT16_UINT16, not sure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
Bug ID: 91946
Summary: wrong result comparing pointer with pointer+offset
with -m32
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Untested WIP patch that does both.
If it finds vectorize_bswap will work (the corresponding permutation is
supported), it will just undo the promotion, if target supports vector rotates,
will use vector
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91935
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91941
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91452
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Oct 1 08:55:28 2019
New Revision: 276392
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276392=gcc=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Use calls for SVE TLSDESC
One (unintended) side effect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91452
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91947
Bug ID: 91947
Summary: std::filesystem::file_size will return wrong value on
32bit platforms with large files support
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
--- Comment #2 from Tim Ruehsen ---
Is ssize_t C99 ?
Could you point to the specs so that any reader can verify that ?
And by UB you mean, gcc sometimes gives 0 and sometimes 1 ? Even if it's UB,
the behavior should be consistent.
Since this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Sorry i mean ptrdiff_t .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91945
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91854
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2019-07-22 00:00:00 |2019-10-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91937
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91269
--- Comment #20 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Oct 1 08:10:17 2019
New Revision: 276390
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276390=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/91854
Backport from mainline
2019-09-20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91854
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Oct 1 08:10:17 2019
New Revision: 276390
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276390=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/91854
Backport from mainline
2019-09-20 Eric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Lauri Kasanen from comment #7)
> Are you sure about the smaller ones? To me they should not care about 64-bit
> swaps,
"swappable" here means you can swap the low and high half on all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222
--- Comment #20 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Still seeing this today building cactuBSSN_r with -flto
Sorry for that - I had some unexpected developments after cauldron.
I am back from vacation now and will fix it ASAP.
Honza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14167
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #8 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
--- Comment #21 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #7 from Lauri Kasanen ---
Thanks for working on this. Per my experience, this is fast for gcc ;)
Are you sure about the smaller ones? To me they should not care about 64-bit
swaps, but clang lists them all as lane-sensitive:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
I mean comparisons which are not equals or not equals outside of array bounds
is undefined.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #9 from Lauri Kasanen ---
Can -mno-optimize-swaps be used per-function, in the code via some pragma?
Alternatively, does calling the instruction via inline asm prevent the
swapping?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
--- Comment #7 from Tim Ruehsen ---
Thanks for the explanations :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||87105, 87746, 87800
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69471
--- Comment #14 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Oct 1 10:28:40 2019
New Revision: 276397
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276397=gcc=rev
Log:
driver: Also prune joined switches with negation
2019-10-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
So the difference between good and bad is data-ref access analysis which
figures
single-element interleaving in GCC 8 and nicer interleaving in GCC 9 where
I rewrote parts of that analysis:
t.c:15:9: note:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.4
Summary|Performance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91949
Bug ID: 91949
Summary: [10 Regression] bootstrap failure on
arm-linux-gnueabihf and s390x-linux-gnu (cannot
convert 'bool' to 'const predefined_function_abi*')
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91949
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91934
--- Comment #10 from Dmitrii Tochanskii ---
Anyway thanks for your work. Now we know where problem is and users can make
their own decision about patch.
RedHat 8 uses gcc 8.2 but debian 10 - gcc 8.3...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Also this was an a broken ABI mistake a long time ago. Also comparing for non
equality outside an array bounds (besides one past the end) is also undefined
behavior. Undefined behavior does NOT need to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Looks good from a quick look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Summary|SEGV in reload
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt ---
I don't *believe* that "#pragma target" works with -mno-optimize-swaps, but you
could try it. I think that mechanism only works for certain flags, but I
haven't tried that one.
I think inline asm should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91853
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91946
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
You can use -fwrapv-pointer to make pointer-wrapping defined.
In C you are only allowed to use relational compares on pointers to the same
object. On x86-linux there is no valid object at address zero
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Component|middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46985
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46985=edit
gcc10-pr91940.patch
Full untested patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606
--- Comment #6 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Just a wild guess, but maybe it is related to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90858 and there it just manifests
itself in compilation error because it is in constexpr context.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948
Bug ID: 91948
Summary: SEGV in reload with r276389
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
There were subsequent reload-related commits, but building still fails as above
at r276395.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91507
--- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Tue Oct 1 11:36:31 2019
New Revision: 276403
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276403=gcc=rev
Log:
DWARF array bounds missing from C++ array definitions
A variable redeclaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
I tested #pragma target -mno-optimize-swaps, and it doesn't help. The only
options that can be specified with #pragma target for Power are listed here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950
Bug ID: 91950
Summary: -Wreturn-type false positive due to CWG 1766
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77918
--- Comment #5 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: iii
Date: Tue Oct 1 14:04:08 2019
New Revision: 276409
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276409=gcc=rev
Log:
S/390: Remove code duplication in vec_* comparison expanders
s390.md uses a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> for example _31->__delta gets alias-set 4 and the store alias-set 6. It
> looks
> like the C++ FE creates separate pfn structure types without any TBAA measure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91948
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Oct 1 12:55:16 2019
New Revision: 276407
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276407=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix reload after function-abi patches (PR91948)
The code was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77918
--- Comment #4 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: iii
Date: Tue Oct 1 14:03:08 2019
New Revision: 276408
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276408=gcc=rev
Log:
S/390: Implement vcond expander for V1TI,V1TF
Currently gcc does not emit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91953
Bug ID: 91953
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] G++ rejects lambda with constexpr
variable
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Oct 1 15:00:40 2019
New Revision: 276413
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276413=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/
2019-10-01 Oleg Endo
Backport from mainline
2019-10-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sh4 |sh*-*-*
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt ---
Committed to trunk with 276410. Forgot to annotate the ChangeLog with the PR,
so here it is:
[gcc]
2019-10-01 Bill Schmidt
* config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.c (rtx_is_swappable_p): Don't swap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91951
Bug ID: 91951
Summary: goto + mixed declarations + cleanup attribute
considered harmful
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91952
Bug ID: 91952
Summary: [rfe] __attribute__((__default_value__()))
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91951
--- Comment #1 from Allison Karlitskaya
---
Two notes:
First: Owen Taylor (the author of the blog post) pointed out that with -O2, GCC
is able to notice the uninitialised use of the variable in my example and warn
about it. Note that this is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562
--- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Oct 1 14:55:34 2019
New Revision: 276411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276411=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/
2019-10-01 Oleg Endo
PR target/88562
* config/sh/sh.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91606
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And the reason for alias set 5 is that it is TYPE_ALIAS_SET of pointer to the
METHOD_TYPE.
reference_alias_ptr_type_1 in the D.10827._M_elems[0].D.10649.f1.__pfn case
skips through the f1 and __pfn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Oct 1 14:58:10 2019
New Revision: 276412
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276412=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/
2019-10-01 Oleg Endo
Backport from mainline
2019-10-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Oct 1 15:02:25 2019
New Revision: 276414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276414=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/
2019-10-01 Oleg Endo
Backport from mainline
2019-10-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #14 from Lauri Kasanen ---
Inline asm works on the buggy versions. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91947
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88630
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 46987
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46987=edit
Trial patch
The ST-40 manual describes the fneg and fabs instructions separately for single
and double precision. I take
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275
--- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt ---
Excellent! I'm glad you have a workaround for the time being.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562
--- Comment #11 from Zavadovsky Yan ---
Thanks for fixing!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91925
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 1 16:19:04 2019
New Revision: 276415
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276415=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/91925
* c-warn.c (check_alignment_of_packed_member): Ignore
|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
that fixes the issue, however the armhf bootstrap is still broken in
libstdc++v3.
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-snapshot/1:20191001-1ubuntu2/+build/17831585
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91269
--- Comment #22 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Funny how the fix for the gcc-8.3.0 branch was a backport of this patch!
Nothing funny though, just an analysis of the behavior of the GCC 8 compiler
with a testcase that triggers a failure; the original
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88630
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91785
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69531
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91961
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91593
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Oct 2 02:35:14 2019
New Revision: 276439
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276439=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-10-01 Jerry DeLisle
PR libfortran/91593
* io/read.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91954
Bug ID: 91954
Summary: gcc.dg/vect/pr66142.c should not need early inlining
to be vectorized
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962
Bug ID: 91962
Summary: ice in build_target_expr, at cp/tree.c:488
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88562
--- Comment #12 from Zavadovsky Yan ---
I've checked this patch locally on our STiH237 hardware.
Using GCC 8.2 built by crosstool-ng.
It works!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91864
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Oct 1 19:21:05 2019
New Revision: 276425
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276425=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-10-01 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91864
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91958
Alisdair Meredith changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83534
Alisdair Meredith changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alisdairm at me dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91222
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Oct 1 18:21:31 2019
New Revision: 276420
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276420=gcc=rev
Log:
PR lto/91222
* ipa-devirt.c (warn_types_mismatch): Do not ICE when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950
--- Comment #3 from John Boyer ---
Actually, I believe Jonathan is correct. I misread the CWG. The "range" of an
enum class has nothing to do with how many enumerators it has.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91802
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91953
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91960
Bug ID: 91960
Summary: ICE: backend decl for module variable 'j' already
exists
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91269
--- Comment #21 from Matt Turner ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #16)
> > I believe the Known to work field is wrong and gcc-8.3.0 has this bug as
> > well.
>
> No, the field is correct and you're wrong.
Funny how the fix for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91950
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2)
> I think this is actually a dup of another bug that asked the same thing, but
> I forget its number...
There are dozens of them, because nobody understands how
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26241
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91641
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Oct 1 18:16:36 2019
New Revision: 276419
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276419=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-10-01 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91641
* check.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Oct 1 19:25:31 2019
New Revision: 276426
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276426=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/85401
* ira-color.c (allocno_copy_cost_saving): Call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91959
Bug ID: 91959
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] Accepts invalid variable
declaration %x
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91959
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
--- Comment #1 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91958
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
PR 83534 ? (it could also be related to bug 67772, but it is a bit further)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91959
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
