On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:37 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 1:24 PM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > On 4/26/23 21:23, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 11/15/22 16:47, Martin Liška wrote:
> > >>> Hi.
> > >>>
> > >>> I've just pus
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 1:24 PM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 4/26/23 21:23, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/15/22 16:47, Martin Liška wrote:
> >>> Hi.
> >>>
> >>> I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and
> >>> p
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 11/15/22 16:47, Martin Liška wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and
> > ppc64le-linux systems.
> > Moreover, I run bootstrap on x86_64-linux and checked ABI difference with
> > abi
On Sun, Dec 25, 2022 at 4:58 PM Steve Kargl via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 07:27:11PM -0500, Lipeng Zhu via Fortran wrote:
> > This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
> > unit_root tree and unit_cache with rwlock instead of the mutex to
> > increase C
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 4:05 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
> Status
> ==
>
> The GCC development branch now is open for general bugfixing (Stage 3).
>
> Take the quality data below with a big grain of salt - most of the
> new P3 classified bugs will become P1 or P2 (generally ev
On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 11:02 AM Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
>
> On 9/5/21 7:31 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 7:31 PM Sandra Loosemore
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> The testcase gfortran.dg/PR100914.f90 that I recently checked in
> >> (originally written by José Rui Faustino de Sousa) depends
On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 7:31 PM Sandra Loosemore wrote:
>
> The testcase gfortran.dg/PR100914.f90 that I recently checked in
> (originally written by José Rui Faustino de Sousa) depends on the
> header file to obtain a typedef for __complex128. It
> appears not to be possible to define an equival
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 10:25 AM Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
>
> On 9/2/21 11:37 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> > On 9/2/21 10:18 PM, sunil.k.pandey wrote:
> >> On Linux/x86_64,
> >>
> >> 93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d7 is the first bad commit
> >> commit 93b6b2f614eb692d1d8126ec6cb946984a9d01d
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:12 PM Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi Tobias,
>
> > I am inclined to say that the Intel compiler has a bug by not
> > accepting it – but as written before, I regard sub-string length
> > (esp. with const expr) inquiries as an odd corner case which
> > is unli
