https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83575
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
Now it is fixed. It needs both patches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83575
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Jan 11 08:02:26 2018
New Revision: 256479
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256479&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/83575
* cfgrtl.c (rtl_verify_edges): Only v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83768
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83775
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #0)
> Hi,
> For the following test-case:
>
> #define STR "1234567"
>
> const char str[] = STR;
>
> char dst[10];
>
> void copy_from_global_str (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83770
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83771
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83772
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |middle-end
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83775
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83189
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Jan 11 08:14:33 2018
New Revision: 256480
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256480&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/83189
* gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83514
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||prathamesh3492 at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83776
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83774
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> Does the kernel still need this workaround? Shall we just add the option
> and gradually add the checks?
Yes - note I got stuck in the attempt to do the -f[n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83761
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Huber ---
Created attachment 43096
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43096&action=edit
Test case.
/home/sh/b-gcc-bfin/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/sh/b-gcc-bfin/./gcc/ -c sum_c8.i -O2 -g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83785
Bug ID: 83785
Summary: sh: ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at
dwarf2cfi.c:2344
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83653
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, matthew at wil dot cx wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83653
>
> --- Comment #5 from Matthew Wilcox ---
> Hi Aldy!
>
> Thanks for looking into this. Y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83777
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83778
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83779
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83780
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83784
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83590
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
With that change, we end up with weird array, TYPE_SIZE_UNIT/TYPE_SIZE on its
type is constant, but DECL_SIZE_UNIT/DECL_SIZE on the decl is non-constant
(pedantically it is a VLA, but we know the sizes at com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83784
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'm afraid the bswap pass infrastructure is really unusable here, extending it
so that it handles bit twiddling would be too expensive.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83786
Bug ID: 83786
Summary: Add VEC_ORDERED_REMOVE_IF
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83786
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83772
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83772
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83435
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
I have a patch robustifying VRP. Yes, we don't want to leak overflow constants
into the IL but we're not there yet and I'd rather have this done in a robust
way but couldn't yet thing of one (like not creat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83590
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43098
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43098&action=edit
gcc8-pr83590.patch
Actually, the problem is much more severe. The thing is, neither the
TYPE_SIZE_UNIT nor DEC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81819
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo ---
I can confirm that the problem still exists on GCC 7 branch and probably also
on trunk (trunk does not build the app because of another bug). The patch
above fixes the problem and the app runs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #57 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #56 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
[...]
> I can reproduce that with -ffat-lto-objects where indeed we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83787
Bug ID: 83787
Summary: [8 regression] Many 32-bit Solaris/SPARC Go tests FAIL
after Go1.10beta1 update
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83787
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83761
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Thu Jan 11 09:54:26 2018
New Revision: 256525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix mode_for_size units in caller-save.c (PR83761)
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83590
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Created attachment 43098 [details]
> gcc8-pr83590.patch
> Can you give this a spin?
Will do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83761
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #58 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
>
> --- Comment #57 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83780
--- Comment #2 from Ivan Bodrov ---
I have reported the same bug for Clang:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35902
Unlike GCC, Clang is also eager to generate unaligned "movaps" instructions,
crashing the program. Afaik GCC does not generat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83788
Bug ID: 83788
Summary: Add .loc is_stmt support test
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83788
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83789
Bug ID: 83789
Summary: __builtin_altivec_lvx fails for powerpc for
altivec-4.c
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83790
Bug ID: 83790
Summary: Update nvptx target to work with cuda 9
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #59 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #58 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
[...]
>> [I'm continuing this with examples from a build using gas 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83791
Bug ID: 83791
Summary: Move tests to libgomp.c-c++-common
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83791
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp, patch
--- Comment #1 from Tom de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83792
Bug ID: 83792
Summary: [openacc] Factor out async argument utility functions
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83792
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openacc, patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83793
Bug ID: 83793
Summary: Pack expansion outside of lambda containing the pack
incorrectly rejected
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83795
Bug ID: 83795
Summary: Call atexit (gomp_target_fini) before calling target
plugin
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83794
Bug ID: 83794
Summary: misc/cgo/test uses gigabytes of memory
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83795
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82096
--- Comment #7 from sudi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sudi
Date: Thu Jan 11 10:46:59 2018
New Revision: 256526
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256526&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR82096] Fix ICE in int_mode_for_mode with arm-linux-gnueabi
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83794
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Looks like no useful logs are there btw, I killed the process and all I got (in
gotools/cgo-testlog!?) is
cd cgo-test-dir/misc/cgo/test &&
PATH=/abuild/rguenther/obj/gotools:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83794
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82682
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82682
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The effect of the patch on the testcase is:
.L3:
movzbl (%edx), %esi
addl$2, %edx
movzbl -1(%edx), %eax
addl$1, %ecx
- movl%esi, %ebx
imull $3847
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83590
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> > Created attachment 43098 [details]
> > gcc8-pr83590.patch
>
> > Can you give this a spin?
>
> Will do.
The patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83768
--- Comment #4 from Sergey Organov ---
Well, except how one can be sure the cause is actually fixed and not just
[temporary?] hidden, if we only have the fact that it works fine in GCC 6+?
No objection to closing this though, provided no one is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82096
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=82096
--- Comment #9 from sudi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes I at least 6 and 7 need backports. Haven't gone beyond that yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82096
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in int_mode_for_mode, |[6/7 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83796
Bug ID: 83796
Summary: Abstract classes allowed to be instantiated when
initialised as default parameter to function or
constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #60 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 11 12:12:39 2018
New Revision: 256528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256528&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-01-11 Richard Biener
Rainer Orth
PR lto/819
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83514
--- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: prathamesh3492
Date: Thu Jan 11 12:13:42 2018
New Revision: 256529
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256529&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-01-11 Prathamesh Kulkarni
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83189
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83514
--- Comment #6 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Committed patch to conditionally set arch_to_print after Kyrill's approval.
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83288
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83797
Bug ID: 83797
Summary: Inconsistent error messages for main
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83590
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> [ But I see new failures. I've
> investigated the first failure, and it's due to a missing cuda.h, which
> seems to have gone missing on my nvidia testing laptop. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83786
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Latest version: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00899.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83798
Bug ID: 83798
Summary: Enhancement to Wmain warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78609
Matthijs Kooijman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matthijs at stdin dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83712
sudi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83799
Bug ID: 83799
Summary: [8 Regression] bogus "no matching function for call
to" error when building llvm
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83435
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83800
Bug ID: 83800
Summary: [libquadmath] M_SQRT2q & sqrtq(2.0Q) off by one ULP ?
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83435
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 11 13:42:29 2018
New Revision: 256535
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256535&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-01-11 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/83435
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83777
--- Comment #2 from Zahira Ammarguellat
---
>From my understanding, the test case is trying to instantiate "C" with "void *"
type, which doesn't have a member called "M".
I think this should generate an error?
Clang and MSVC both give an error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83801
Bug ID: 83801
Summary: [avr] String constant in __flash not put into .progmem
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83801
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83729
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to gandalf from comment #3)
> Another regression test case (compile with -O):
>
> void code_to_ascii(char buf[1], unsigned int code)
> {
> __attribute__((used))
> static const char __flash t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83799
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Priority|P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83799
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78875
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83802
Bug ID: 83802
Summary: Caller doesn't destroy default argument passed to a
constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79140
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83653
--- Comment #7 from Matthew Wilcox ---
OK, so how should we write this function/macro to accomplish what we want?
And the requirement is "If the argument is one of these eight special
constants, use this special instruction, otherwise call this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83803
Bug ID: 83803
Summary: Using -fc-prototypes on modules with empty dummy arg
lists does not close paren.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82518
--- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon ---
Indeed it looks like the testcase has been failing with -fno-vect-cost-model
for a very long time.
Trying the find the 'good' starting point for a bisect.
(I'm using qemu, I have no such board either)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68860
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> Yes, early LTO debug is in now. While we can probably stream
> DECL_DEBUG_EXPR directly as we do now given that is set only for
> function-local decls we can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83799
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83804
Bug ID: 83804
Summary: [meta] LTO memory consumption
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83804
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 43102
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43102&action=edit
-fmem-report-wpa for Inkscape with -O2 for GCC 7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83804
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 43103
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43103&action=edit
-fmem-report-wpa for Inkscape with -O2 for GCC 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83804
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 43104
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43104&action=edit
CPU & memory consumption for Inkscape with GCC 7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83804
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 43105
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43105&action=edit
CPU & memory consumption for Inkscape with GCC 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83804
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
So comparing memory footprint of GCC 7 and GCC 8, I see small increase for WPA
phase (~5%).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83203
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79383
--- Comment #3 from Walt Brainerd ---
Yes, Sounds like you have it fixed. Thanks.
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 7:06 PM, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79383
>
> kargl at gcc
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
