https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
After fixing the ICEs by replacing 's1->ns->proc_name->attr.module_procedure'
with 's1->ns->proc_name && s1->ns->proc_name->attr.module_procedure' I am left
with two regressions:
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #15 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Bother - I left the diagnostic line in the patch:
+ gfc_warning_now (0, "s1 %i s2 %i \n", s1->as->type, s2->as->type);
Sorry about that
Paul
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92396
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96323
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96328
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96356
Bug ID: 96356
Summary: RTTI for non-polymorphic typeid
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96335
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92703
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96357
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.2.1, 11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96092
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Apparently we've got a patch in queue that does something similar:
>
> +fprofile-prefix-path=
> +Common·Joined·RejectNegative·Var(profile_prefix_path)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
--- Comment #2 from Tiziano Müller ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Can you please provide steps how to build the project? I can reproduce it
> locally then.
Of course! :)
After unpacking you don't even have to configure it,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96356
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka ---
>
> Maybe you want to use same GCC version as phoronix used (GCC 10.2)?
OK, I will give it a try, but there are no inliner changes in gcc 10.2
compared to 10.1.
Honza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96058
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Martin Liska
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c0438ced53bcf57e4ebb1c38c226e41571aca892
commit r10-8542-gc0438ced53bcf57e4ebb1c38c226e41571aca892
Author: Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92396
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 48943
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48943=edit
Time trace prototype
So I've just created a prototype patch, but I don't see it much useful:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96355
Bug ID: 96355
Summary: [concepts] internal compiler error: in
tsubst_pack_expansion, at cp/pt.c:12928
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96353
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96323
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ae49af94850b26e50268031e24f1559d5a51edec
commit r11-2384-gae49af94850b26e50268031e24f1559d5a51edec
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Sure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96356
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes it's expected. The typeid operator has to return a std::typeinfo object. If
you disable generation of std::typeinfo objects, what is it supposed to return?
The savings from -fno-rtti come from not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/interface.c 2020-07-11 20:06:47.0 +0200
+++ gcc/fortran/interface.c 2020-07-28 11:41:57.0 +0200
@@ -1466,8 +1466,19 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So we have:
# DEBUG this => &
={v} {CLOBBER};
# DEBUG D#1 => &.d
# DEBUG D#2 => MEM[(double *)&]
# DEBUG __trans_tmp_3 => D#2
in matmul during inlining, and inline it as:
# DEBUG this => [_13]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96350
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 48944
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48944=edit
An experimental patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96137
--- Comment #4 from Haoxin Tu ---
Add two cases. I guess the reason is the same.
//case1
static_assert (->operator a, "")
//case2
alignas (->operator a)
>
> Maybe you want to use same GCC version as phoronix used (GCC 10.2)?
OK, I will give it a try, but there are no inliner changes in gcc 10.2
compared to 10.1.
Honza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94307
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96356
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96058
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.2.1
Summary|[11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
Bug ID: 96354
Summary: [10 regression] ICE in
maybe_canonicalize_mem_ref_addr, at gimple-fold.c:4903
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96353
Bug ID: 96353
Summary: GCC internal compiler error: in implicitly_declare_fn,
at cp/method.c:2058 when using coverage
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96353
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96353
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Wall ---
I tried to attach the .ii file when I created this bug, but it is 1.2MB, so too
large to attach.
When I use the -E flag on the command line the error doesn't occur.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96353
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Wall ---
Created attachment 48945
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48945=edit
Zipped up TestAll_Of.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96335
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d88f924ad8d773cceb08e123cb2831f20d40cb4
commit r10-8541-g7d88f924ad8d773cceb08e123cb2831f20d40cb4
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96347
--- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw ---
Possibly some useful information for context.
At expand_expr_real_1 (expr.c:10567) there is the following expression.
---
MEM [(struct Darray *) + 8B]
---
Lowered to RTL as
---
(plus:DI (unspec:DI [
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96328
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:86cb35983f55d6039b99b82ace30d2730fcb1eb1
commit r11-2385-g86cb35983f55d6039b99b82ace30d2730fcb1eb1
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #17 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 10:32:50AM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
>
> What I guessed, but I still see (not new)
>
> /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/whole_file_23.f90:18:32:
>
>18 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96357
Bug ID: 96357
Summary: [10/11 Regression] could not split insn
UNSPEC_COND_FSUB with AArch64 SVE
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96335
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9264b9008386ac3b5c795472c222fa524b127b0
commit r11-2379-gf9264b9008386ac3b5c795472c222fa524b127b0
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Bother - I left the diagnostic line in the patch:
>
> + gfc_warning_now (0, "s1 %i s2 %i \n", s1->as->type, s2->as->type);
>
>Sorry about that
What I guessed, but I still see (not new)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96347
--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ---
Created attachment 48946
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48946=edit
disallow tpoff+offset from being stored in a temp
Patch prevents the forced temp from being used to replace the rhs of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96362
--- Comment #2 from Nick Briggs ---
binutils/as version is:
/opt/binutils/bin/as --version
GNU assembler (GNU Binutils) 2.35
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96291
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sergei Trofimovich :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cbf10ac51c0b889e930f260a3d1fb601332befdf
commit r11-2391-gcbf10ac51c0b889e930f260a3d1fb601332befdf
Author: Sergei Trofimovich
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96362
Bug ID: 96362
Summary: bootstrapping gcc 9.3.0 on sparc-sun-solaris2.11 fails
compiling libgcc2.c (.group in output)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95977
Paul Keir changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pkeir at outlook dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is a nasty bug, and I've run out of ideas on how to find a fix. :(
Simplified testcase
implicit none
type t2
integer r1
end type
type(t2) :: t
integer :: a
a =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64529
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96362
--- Comment #1 from Nick Briggs ---
Created attachment 48948
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48948=edit
Intermediate output from gcc-9.3.0 compiling libgcc2 during bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
--- Comment #7 from Kirill Chilikin ---
Result of git bisect:
$ git bisect log
git bisect start
# bad: [6e6e3f144a33ae504149dc992453b4f6dea12fdb] Update ChangeLog and version
files for release
git bisect bad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96363
Bug ID: 96363
Summary: bogus error with constrained partial specialization
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #8 from kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96362
--- Comment #6 from Nick Briggs ---
Perhaps the info at https://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html could be updated
in the sparc*solaris section to include the notes about gnu as in the same way
that the x86*solaris section mentions it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96184
--- Comment #1 from Haoxin Tu ---
This behavior still exists in the current trunk.
Is this a bug or not?
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96235
--- Comment #9 from suochenyao at 163 dot com ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #8)
> It is clearly a duplicate of PR 93385.
>
> What was the reason to switch off DCE in the first place? Was it just meant
> as a stress test for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50584
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #16 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96362
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96362
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is documented on https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html too:
Confusion may also result if the compiler finds the GNU assembler but has not
been configured with --with-gnu-as.
...
The following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96364
Bug ID: 96364
Summary: ICE on valid code in cp_finish_decl, at cp/decl.c:7537
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at charter dot net ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #10)
---snip---
> Thanks for testing. Does the patch that follows fix the regressions?
> gfortran treats components and type bound procedures separately. I've
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
jvdelisle at charter dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at charter dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96362
--- Comment #3 from Nick Briggs ---
Could not configuring with "--with-gnu-as" have caused this?
Also, since it seems to be related to COMDAT, would "--disable-comdat" (if such
an option exists, since only --enable-comdat is documented) have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to jvdelisle from comment #9)
> I regression tested the patch in comment 8 and see these failures.
>
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr93423.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
> FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96310
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96360
Bug ID: 96360
Summary: ICE in tree check: expected integer_cst, have
truth_orif_expr in get_len, at tree.h:5954
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96319
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96359
Bug ID: 96359
Summary: ICE in cxx_eval_logical_expression, at
cp/constexpr.c:3875
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On July 28, 2020 4:45:59 PM GMT+02:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
>
>--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>So we have:
> # DEBUG this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96358
Bug ID: 96358
Summary: d: Merge indirect_ref and build_deref, represent with
a MEM_REF expression
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96354
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #8)
> We could allow this in debug stmts but pretty much any (or very many)
> workers on MEM_REFs will be quite unhappy about this. Of course we're not
> likely to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80076
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96361
Bug ID: 96361
Summary: return type not deduced for a function template
specialization given as argument of a template
function
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
X265
GCC 9:
y4m [info]: 1920x1080 fps 30/1 i420p8 frames 0 - 599 of 600
raw [info]: output file: /dev/null
x265 [info]: HEVC encoder version 3.1.2+1-76650bab70f9
x265 [info]: build info [Linux][GCC 9.3.1][64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96352
Bug ID: 96352
Summary: inflated text section with ipa inline
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
This is the built withour release flags override as seems to be done by
phoronix:
GCC 9:
y4m [info]: 1920x1080 fps 30/1 i420p8 frames 0 - 599 of 600
raw [info]: output file: /dev/null
x265 [info]: HEVC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96352
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
It was a bugfix. If you want to have small binaries use -Os. You can also
tune the inliner with various knobs, the most important maybe
--param inline-unit-growth which defaults to 40 (40% growth).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
scimark
GCC 9:
** **
** SciMark2 Numeric Benchmark, see http://math.nist.gov/scimark **
** for details. (Results can be submitted to p...@nist.gov)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
--- Comment #10 from Dávid Bolvanský ---
>> Compiler version : GCC10.1.1
Maybe you want to use same GCC version as phoronix used (GCC 10.2)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96351
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96345
--- Comment #5 from V ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Does c++filt demangle it?
I've fed output of nm into c++filt and this function came out mangled, while
others were demangled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Coremark.
GCC 9 run1:
CoreMark Size: 666
Total ticks : 12310
Total time (secs): 12.31
Iterations/Sec : 24370.430544
Iterations : 30
Compiler version : GCC9.3.1 20200406 [revision
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96284
--- Comment #6 from David Brown ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #5)
> (In reply to David Brown from comment #0)
> > Could this be made an error by default
> > (-Werror=implicit-function-declarations) ? Let those who want to compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96349
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96351
Bug ID: 96351
Summary: missed opportunity to optimize out redundant loop
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96284
--- Comment #7 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to David Brown from comment #6)
> I'm not bothered about my own code - I have makefiles with the relevant
> options set in case I make mistakes. My hope is for gcc to be able to have
> stricter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95889
--- Comment #3 from Tiziano Müller ---
Created attachment 48941
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48941=edit
fix __has_include with traditional-cpp
as posted on the gcc-patches ml
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxue at os dot
amperecomputing.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
There was changes to -O2 inliner. I have
- enabled auto-inlininig
- reduced early inlining a bit
- reduced limits for inlining functions declared inline
The second two was needed to keep code size under
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96336
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96343
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96337
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|ipa
Summary|GCC 10.2: twice
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96344
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96350
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The endbr are way too short to make this practical - ISTR I raised this exact
issue at a presentation about CET ... CET simply makes the gadget finding less
likely to succeed.
There's always the
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
