https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95451
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95430
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Already doing such address arithmetics is UB (though of course a + 10 is ok
above), but we don't have a warning for that and as I said in another PR, ubsan
could detect only the cases where the compiler can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455
--- Comment #3 from Avi Kivity ---
Here's a valid version (which gcc accepts):
void f() {
int foo = 4;
auto lambda = [bar = foo] {};
static_assert(requires (decltype(lambda) x) {
x;
});
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93429
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Feng Xue :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:32633ec815b4d741a9a4b1b75de235844f6d691c
commit r11-763-g32633ec815b4d741a9a4b1b75de235844f6d691c
Author: Feng Xue
Date: Fri Jan 24
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455
Bug ID: 95455
Summary: ICE in capture with initializer in requires block
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95400
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Can we backport the change to active branches?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95452
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95455
--- Comment #2 from Avi Kivity ---
Appears to be invalid. Clang rejects it even after some massaging (lambda in
unevaluated context).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95430
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95453
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
Duplicated as PR95076?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
ICEs are "fixed" by the first hunk, the testcase in Comment #0 by the second:
--cut here--
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 060e2df62ea..cd7abaf7e04 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95456
Bug ID: 95456
Summary: [11 Regression] gcc/gcc.c:6035:16: runtime error: null
pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to
never be null
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95456
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
All right, there are results for a micro-benchmark that we have in contrib
folder:
ZNVER1 (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X):
64-bit:
contrib/bench-stringop 64 32000 gcc -march=znver1
memcpy
block size libcall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95471
Bug ID: 95471
Summary: vrndvq_f32 not supported on armv8
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237
--- Comment #6 from Kito Cheng ---
Created attachment 48658
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48658=edit
i386-Implement-ROUND_TYPE_ALIGN-to-make-sure-alignme.patch
Some optimization might made decision depend on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92633
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897
commit r11-779-gc2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92838
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897
commit r11-779-gc2449995ca36ea955e3c6d4ee7f0d401b512c897
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #36 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> If the compiler knew say from PGO that pos is usually a multiple of certain
> power of two and that the loop usually iterates many times (I guess the
> latter can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95472
Bug ID: 95472
Summary: various diagnostics for C/C++ hyperlinks to gfortran
doc
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37759
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95472
--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #0)
> This also happens to -Wreturn-type and -Wuninitialized. Strangely these two
> entries don't even exist in gfortran doc. But it does not happens to
> -Wformat or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93691
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95311
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591
commit r11-775-g172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95221
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591
commit r11-775-g172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591
commit r11-775-g172f2c42a10fd470c93f1e84575de9766c157591
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2a0de88ccf2ecc6659b0f1e4580c1ce5cff976b3
commit r9-8643-g2a0de88ccf2ecc6659b0f1e4580c1ce5cff976b3
Author: Thomas Koenig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:75f5824b77632ef583a7a65302b326e8bf1b851c
commit r8-10289-g75f5824b77632ef583a7a65302b326e8bf1b851c
Author: Thomas Koenig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50439
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95468
Bug ID: 95468
Summary: ICE in expression sfinae
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:832c1192eba6dd100e2f757e30ea6373f782ff55
commit r11-774-g832c1192eba6dd100e2f757e30ea6373f782ff55
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b703627d668257c0955a43838288e91973bf2721
commit r10-8218-gb703627d668257c0955a43838288e91973bf2721
Author: Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95465
Bug ID: 95465
Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE on jump into a statement
expression
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466
Bug ID: 95466
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in tree_operand_check, at
tree.h:3794 since r11-578-g72af65b91cc2a2eb
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95465
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gabravier at gmail dot com
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
Bug 37336 depends on bug 94361, which changed state.
Bug 94361 Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] Memory leak in nested types with final
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95466
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95181
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95371
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95467
Bug ID: 95467
Summary: ICE in parse_omp_structured_block: OpenMP Offload
(target_parallel__simd)
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95237
--- Comment #4 from Sunil Pandey ---
This test case and many other regression on x86 caused by following change set
r11-508
Good
$
/local/skpandey/gccwork/pr95237/tools-build/gcc-debug-r11-507/release/usr/gcc-11.0.0-x86-64/bin/gcc
-m32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95350
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:88f48e2967ead9be262483618238efa9c7c842ec
commit r11-773-g88f48e2967ead9be262483618238efa9c7c842ec
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94109
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
So, fixed with the patch for PR 94109?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95426
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 48657
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48657=edit
Reduced test case
I've reduced the reproducer you posted to this test case.
Seems to require a call to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95464
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Jakub, thank you for working on the PR and providing the test case.
It seems to me that the problem occurs in inheritance sub-pass of LRA. It is a
very complicated sub-pass. Making a fix and testing it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348
--- Comment #18 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> > For our application, all processes generating profiling feedback data to a
> > single directory seems is not a choice.
>
> Why is it problem?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461
Bug ID: 95461
Summary: GCC misses -Warray-bounds warning message
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35587
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||haoxintu at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 95461, which changed state.
Bug 95461 Summary: GCC misses -Warray-bounds warning message
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95461
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78678
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.1.0, 11.0, 7.3.0, 8.2.0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95464
Bug ID: 95464
Summary: [10/11 Regression] Miscompilation of mesa on
x86_64-linux since r10-6426
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95464
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348
--- Comment #19 from Qing Zhao ---
Hi, Martin,
I attached 3 profiling data files with this email (among over 5000 files under
one typical directory),
Hope this is helpful.
Thanks.
Qing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348
--- Comment #20 from Qing Zhao ---
Created attachment 48653
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48653=edit
A.data
--- Comment #21 from Qing Zhao ---
Created attachment 48654
-->
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95462
Bug ID: 95462
Summary: Different int types for the same call to
gcc_jit_context_get_int_type()
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65461
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-Warray-bounds warnings in |-Warray-bounds due to loop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
There's no tuning tables for memcmp at all, existing structs cover only memset
and memcpy. So as far as I see retuning memset/memcpy doesn't need to wait for
[1], because there's no infrastructure in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #8)
> There's no tuning tables for memcmp at all, existing structs cover only
> memset and memcpy. So as far as I see retuning memset/memcpy doesn't need to
> wait
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94485
--- Comment #6 from Dimitri Gorokhovik ---
I bisected this issue to the commit:
commit 35a952ba70028b50fbd2fd19f7dc91f2da45371e
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: Tue Jun 13 13:34:51 2017 +0200
[PR80803 1/2] Streamline SRA access enqueuing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42693
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markeggleston at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94867
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348
--- Comment #17 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
more details:
>
> Which means one run takes 100MB is size, right? As you mentioned, having
> 1000 .gcda files, it means that one takes 0.1MB?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95252
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kito.cheng at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92633
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95385
--- Comment #4 from Haoxin Tu ---
(In reply to Haoxin Tu from comment #3)
Hi, so sorry to bother you.
Is still there any problem here? Please take a look at test3.cc and test4.cc.
Thank you so much.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95463
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||56456
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95463
Bug ID: 95463
Summary: missing -Warray-bounds caused by assuming unsigned
integer wrapping
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
And this is for znver2:
AMD EPYC 7502P 32-Core Processor
64-bit:
memcpy
block size libcall rep1noalg rep4noalg rep8noalg loop
noalg unrlnoalg sse noalg bytePGO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79451
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85121
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80700
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95458
Bug ID: 95458
Summary: Inline strncmp is *much* slower than glibc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84302
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82138
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87083
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81288
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79438
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85170
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81628
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94867
--- Comment #4 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> It's gone since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797d6.
This commit is included in releases/gcc-10.1.0 tag, but I still see the warning
with the provided example when using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95459
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95460
Bug ID: 95460
Summary: ice in execute, at adjust-alignment.c:74
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428
--- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell ---
i have filed ABI issue 104
https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/104
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95202
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95457
Bug ID: 95457
Summary: Inadequate diagnostics on constrained coroutines
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95459
Bug ID: 95459
Summary: aarch64: ICE in in aarch64_short_vector_p, at
config/aarch64/aarch64.c:16803
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94867
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95460
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84553
--- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Gentoo runs the patch for a while system-wide and it seems to work fine. Worth
submitting the patch for review?
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
