https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121097
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121097
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Arthur O'Dwyer from comment #1)
> Er, PC-Lint 2.0 with a config file that *we* made to roughly emulate GCC 10,
> apparently. I can't blame PC-Lint itself for the weird setting of these
> macro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121097
--- Comment #4 from Arthur O'Dwyer ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> (In reply to Arthur O'Dwyer from comment #1)
> > Er, PC-Lint 2.0 with a config file that *we* made
>
> Don't do that then? or change your config file to fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121098
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121095
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|enhancement |normal
Summary|Possibly unne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120389
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121095
--- Comment #2 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu ---
My take, without having any serious knowledge of what's going on, is:
If a C function doesn't involve (set, read, manipulate, ...) FP8 values or the
fpmr register in any way, then this PRE pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119962
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0828600f586e75a2056a4fc7eb0a340c363d6c66
commit r16-2271-g0828600f586e75a2056a4fc7eb0a340c363d6c66
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121091
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-July/689666.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120378
--- Comment #7 from Edwin Lu ---
Progress update:
After discussing with Vineet and Robin, the optab for generating vnclipu does
exist through IFN_SAT_TRUNC, which can be seen in a couple of the saturating
arithmetic testcases Pan has been workin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||13.1.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
--- Comment #1 from Andr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82134
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:32ff6f4728e4021ff33fb1da6eb3bafe3ea5a15e
commit r16-2280-g32ff6f4728e4021ff33fb1da6eb3bafe3ea5a15e
Author: Jeremy Rifkin
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93738
Kishan Parmar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #11 from Kishan Par
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121081
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121099
Bug ID: 121099
Summary: GCC doesn't optimize `_mm_set_ps()` very well
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121099
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121060
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:82e912344d28cf1a69e5f8e047203ea7eb625302
commit r16-2282-g82e912344d28cf1a69e5f8e047203ea7eb625302
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121102
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120898
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bic60176 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121103
Bug ID: 121103
Summary: ICE at O2: in single_succ_edge, at basic-block.h:332
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121102
Bug ID: 121102
Summary: ICE at O2: in make_ssa_name_fn, at
tree-ssanames.cc:355
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121103
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121104
Bug ID: 121104
Summary: ICE at O2: verify_gimple_in_cfg(function*, bool, bool)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121105
Bug ID: 121105
Summary: `svfloat32x4_t{}` does not zero the registers
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121104
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121089
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121093
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
we don't elide inlined_function_outer_scope_p IIRC, so not sure why this would
happen? But the flow of conditions is a bit odd:
/* When not generating debug info we can eliminate info on unused
v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121096
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121096
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 61879
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61879&action=edit
testcase with less compiler flags
$ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -Os -mstringop-strategy=unrolled_loop -mtune=btver2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121079
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113264
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiangchangwu at smail dot
nju.edu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121100
Bug ID: 121100
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault at contains_struct_check
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121099
--- Comment #1 from LIU Hao ---
Given `y` in XMM0 and `x` in XMM1, `_mm_set_ps(x, x, y, y)` is clearly just
`vshufps xmm2, xmm0, xmm1, 0` no matter what.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121101
Bug ID: 121101
Summary: ICE at O2: in copy_reference_ops_from_ref, at
tree-ssa-sccvn.cc:1113
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121101
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-07-16
Component|tree-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121078
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121078
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121106
Bug ID: 121106
Summary: ICE at O2: in expand_fn_using_insn, at
internal-fn.cc:268
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121107
Bug ID: 121107
Summary: ICE at O2: in try_make_edge_direct_simple_call, at
ipa-prop.cc:4052
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121108
Bug ID: 121108
Summary: [16 Regression] ICE: in setmem_epilogue_gen_val, at
config/i386/i386-expand.cc:8438 with
-mstringop-strategy=rep_4byte
Product: gcc
Versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121106
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121107
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.1.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121076
Bug ID: 121076
Summary: PPCLE: Inefficient implementation of __builtin_bswap16
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121083
Bug ID: 121083
Summary: internal compiler error: in
process_init_constructor_record, at cp/typeck2.cc:1796
in 15.1 and trunk
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121084
Bug ID: 121084
Summary: [GCOV] Loops containing goto cause incorrect coverage
statistics.
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mario.rodriguezb1 at um dot es
Target Milestone: ---
ICE in:
Program:
```
#include
int main()
{
std::reference_wrapper e{};
}
```
Stack dump
```
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20250715/include/c++/16.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
--- Comment #24 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #23)
> testcase.c
> enum { ST, SB, ET, EB, WT, WB }
> LBM_initializeGrid() {
> double *grid;
> grid[ST] = grid[SB] = grid[ET] = grid[EB] =
> grid[WT] = gr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121082
Bug ID: 121082
Summary: [GCOV] Anonymous structure initialization combined
with return statement leads to incorrect coverage
count
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
--- Comment #23 from Filip Kastl ---
testcase.c
enum { ST, SB, ET, EB, WT, WB }
LBM_initializeGrid() {
double *grid;
grid[ST] = grid[SB] = grid[ET] = grid[EB] =
grid[WT] = grid[WB] = 1.0 / 36.0;
}
Compile with -Ofa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120614
--- Comment #20 from Jan Hubicka ---
> We were also looking at the profile count issues with CSE/ICF like
> optimisations.
> https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-November/146694.html looks like
> the way to go.
CSE should be safe if d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121045
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120986
--- Comment #7 from Alex Coplan ---
(In reply to Spencer Abson from comment #6)
> > The insn is recognised if +fp8dot4 is added, so I suspect the gating of
> > this insn is also wrong in the backend.
>
> Yeah, I suspect the issue is that:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96710
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57b9afc9dad76f529969c548214b65dfe43652a7
commit r16-2253-g57b9afc9dad76f529969c548214b65dfe43652a7
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121024
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a63b663c7bf77e38d90cebe993a3de8a548f8d66
commit r16-2256-ga63b663c7bf77e38d90cebe993a3de8a548f8d66
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a63b663c7bf77e38d90cebe993a3de8a548f8d66
commit r16-2256-ga63b663c7bf77e38d90cebe993a3de8a548f8d66
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
--- Comment #25 from Filip Kastl ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #24)
> Why is it bad for znver2?
Oh, I thought we are trying to figure that out. Spilling because of register
pressure, as richi suggested in comment 3, is the best guess w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120614
--- Comment #19 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I did the spec2017 runs few days ago and the .gcov files looks OK. I can see
them with dump_gcov.
I am seeing hot/cold blocks switched in __material_mod_MOD_mat_updatee/13 of
fotonik3d_r (see the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121081
Bug ID: 121081
Summary: ICE on x86_64-linux-gnu: in composite_type, at
c/c-typeck.cc:1011 with visibility attribute on atomic
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120637
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1cb95b3006dd615a03d3e4bade5605532c4ab65e
commit r15-9978-g1cb95b3006dd615a03d3e4bade5605532c4ab65e
Author: Andre Vehr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121086
Bug ID: 121086
Summary: Raw Segmentation fault with virtual static unsigned
since version 3.4.6
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121087
Bug ID: 121087
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
initialize_vtbl_ptrs since 14.1
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120637
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121073
--- Comment #2 from Robin Dapp ---
Yes, the issue is that Wdm was a memory constraint before, giving reload more
freedom. In the case here we have a real mask operand that only the strided
alternatives support. Need to think of another solutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121088
Bug ID: 121088
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
finish_static_data_member_decl since 12.1
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121089
Bug ID: 121089
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
splay_tree_foreach since 13.1
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121090
Bug ID: 121090
Summary: internal compiler error: error reporting routines
re-entered. diagnostic_context::finish() in 15.1 and
trunk only
Product: gcc
Version: 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63164
--- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill ---
As I commented at
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/75ff8af8-af03-42fa-b68b-e6c16a34c...@redhat.com/
we could optimize the dynamic_cast to type_info::operator== instead of vtable
comparison.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63164
--- Comment #18 from Thomas de Bock ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #17)
> As I commented at
>
> https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/75ff8af8-af03-42fa-b68b-
> e6c16a34c...@redhat.com/
>
> we could optimize the dynamic_cast to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121093
Bug ID: 121093
Summary: Missed location of inlined function
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63164
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #17)
> As I commented at
>
> https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/75ff8af8-af03-42fa-b68b-
> e6c16a34c...@redhat.com/
>
> we could optimize the dynamic_cast to t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121073
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-07-15
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120986
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #8 from Alex Coplan --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88982
--- Comment #6 from MARIO RODRIGUEZ BEJAR ---
Shall i open a separate bug?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121075
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121091
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
# pg_3 = PHI
So not a POLY_INT_CST but rather a VECTOR_CST that does not have a constant
size.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108409
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|*-*aix* *-*-mingw* |*-*aix*
Summary|std::chron
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120986
--- Comment #9 from Alex Coplan ---
I'm now going to be away until Mon 4th August, so won't be able to post the
re-spun patches until then (although they are ready to go and have passed
testing).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121097
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121086
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
So I think it is trying to print out the field name but since this is an
anonymous bitfield, it is crashing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121083
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced:
```
struct Xint
{
int x;
};
auto x = new Xint[3]({[0]=20});
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121083
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121086
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||3.4.6
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44677
--- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #28)
> It seems that to get -Wunused-but-set-parameter=3 implicitly, one needs
> -Wextra (contrary to -Wunused-but-set-variable=3). So the condition
>
> -Wunused
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44677
--- Comment #29 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:35b19980046fc57d9d6851b8f4349bd22de3fa03
commit r16-2270-g35b19980046fc57d9d6851b8f4349bd22de3fa03
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121091
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121097
--- Comment #1 from Arthur O'Dwyer ---
Er, PC-Lint 2.0 with a config file that *we* made to roughly emulate GCC 10,
apparently. I can't blame PC-Lint itself for the weird setting of these macros.
:)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121097
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Sure, we could do, but I'm not convinced it's a real issue, only a hypothetical
one. Your config seems self-inflicted, due to an incomplete emulation of GCC 10
(which did define __cpp_fold_expressions).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119921
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121097
Bug ID: 121097
Summary: hypot uses __promoted_t even when
__cpp_fold_expressions is not defined
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120577
--- Comment #7 from Nikolas Klauser ---
The patch fixes the non-reduced reproducer as well. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121098
Bug ID: 121098
Summary: target macro HARDREG_PRE_REGNOS is NOT documented
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: documentation, internal-improvement
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120792
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2a521eee58da7c0d0f2262181b804aa148e60aaf
commit r16-2274-g2a521eee58da7c0d0f2262181b804aa148e60aaf
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
--- Comment #26 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025, pheeck at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
>
> --- Comment #25 from Filip Kastl ---
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #24)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120920
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Dusan posted a patch here, but I'm not convinced it's correct. Also note the
patch failed its own test:
https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/patch/pr3pr08mb5738ed049e790435a3b5a8aebe...@pr3pr08mb5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104428
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kwok Yeung :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a05c4f4ee48f76e518dbd2a96e5083f4df833df7
commit r16-2263-ga05c4f4ee48f76e518dbd2a96e5083f4df833df7
Author: Kwok Cheung Yeung
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121091
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.1.0, 10.5.0, 16.0
--- Comment #3 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63164
--- Comment #16 from Thomas de Bock ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> Sure, but that is the only way how to make the optimization reliable.
> If the a local type (i.e. mangled for RTTI with * character at the start),
> it can jus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44677
--- Comment #27 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Nothing changed in what options imply -Wunused-but-set-variable or
-Wunused-but-set-parameter, just that those 2 options now mean the =3 level and
users can explicitly use say -Wunused-but-set-variable=1 etc
1 - 100 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
