https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69352
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
Jan Smets changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jan.sm...@alcatel-lucent.co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69352
Jan Smets changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jan.sm...@alcatel-lucent.co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69324
Yu Xiaolei changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69326
Bug 69326 depends on bug 69320, which changed state.
Bug 69320 Summary: [6 Regression] wrong code generation at -O2 and higher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
--- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Fixed by commit on the trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69325
Bug 69325 depends on bug 69320, which changed state.
Bug 69320 Summary: [6 Regression] wrong code generation at -O2 and higher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Jan 19 06:43:54 2016
New Revision: 232548
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232548&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-18 Jeff Law
PR tree-optimization/69320
* tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60465
--- Comment #43 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Mike, consider this approval for backporting the fix to the release branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69352
Bug ID: 69352
Summary: [6 Regression] profiledbootstrap failure with
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69251
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-linux-gnu |
Summary|[6 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Mark changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev.kram5 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #20 from M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24664
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too ear
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too ear
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24663
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too ear
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11858
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too ear
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68692
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68176
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The original concept for stdc-predef.h includes that it might include
other headers - in particular, that it might #include_next
, so that e.g. libdfp could provide its own stdc-predef.h
t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69351
Bug ID: 69351
Summary: response files on linux don't get populated and leave
undeleted temporary files
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
LGTM, builds fine as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68820
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|ubizjak at gmail dot com |
Component|lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60465
Mike Frysinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69252
--- Comment #13 from Roman Zhuykov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> Thus, Roman, can you please post your patch to gcc-patches?
Ok, in addition to comment 3 link, reposted it right now
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69144
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69350
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69350
Bug ID: 69350
Summary: Don't define the C99 functions in -std=c++98
mode
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69176
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69176
--- Comment #17 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Mon Jan 18 20:56:13 2016
New Revision: 232540
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232540&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69176
* config/aarch64/aarch64.md (add3): Move long immedi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69349
Bug ID: 69349
Summary: template substitution error for flexible array members
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67314
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> The trouble is that while gcc
> makes it easy to assign without a warning values to enums that are outside
> the range of the enumerated type, it makes it di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67314
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Jakub, does the following patch look good to you?
Just don't want to intermix tsan and sanitizer_common interceptor macros.
I think it's better to define and initialize an interceptor in a single file.
Inde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at redhat dot com
--- Comment #8 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69253
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Patch posted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01325.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68662
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|lto |target
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69253
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6 Regression] g++ ICE at |[6 Regression] ICE in
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I've backtested against all 4 duplicates and my change fixes all of them.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65779
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69326
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69325
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Jakub. I'll certainly backtest against the referenced BZs
While the fix is trivial, I'm seriously considering just turning the
exploitation of ranges off for gcc-6. It didn't help as much as I had wanted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68820
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka ---
... and in case anyone is curious, with -fuse-linker-plugin we inline the
memcpys as we work out the block size. This is why they pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68820
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69338
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Another test case (derived from the test case in bug 69253), this one even
shows a -Warray-bounds warning with -O2. With 69253 fixed (and the test case
still accepted), 6.0 also aborts but doesn't print the -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69133
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
The following has even chance to work :)
Index: cgraph.c
===
--- cgraph.c(revision 232466)
+++ cgraph.c(working copy)
@@ -3305,10 +3295,1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69133
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
The problem seems to be that cgraph_node::get_untransformed_body checks
presence of body by DECL_RESULT which is NULL for thunks. Rest of places seems
to check for DECL_ARGUMENTS.
I am testing:
Index: cgraph.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69136
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Aha, it is abstract decl. I am testing:
Index: ../../gcc/lto/lto-symtab.c
===
--- ../../gcc/lto/lto-symtab.c (revision 232466)
+++ ../../gcc/lt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69136
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
Hmm, we have:
>
QI
size
unit size
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1 structural equality method basetype
arg-types
chain
chain
nothr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #219 from Jan Hubicka ---
devirtualization issue is now fixed, so we are down to -fno-lifetime-dse.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #57 from Jan Hubicka ---
The alias-2.c should be now fixed on targets with anchors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62051
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 37388
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37388&action=edit
patch
Hi,
this patch adds the logic to gimple-fold.c which makes the offending dtor
non-refeable. It is bit ugl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69181
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66877
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69181
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Jan 18 17:26:58 2016
New Revision: 232535
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232535&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/69181: ensure expected multiline outputs is cleared per-te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69345
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Fomin ---
Looks like it's r232401.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60637
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Jan 18 17:15:42 2016
New Revision: 232534
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232534&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add test for PR 60637
PR libstdc++/60637
* testsuite/26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68148
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67895
--- Comment #3 from afomin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: afomin
Date: Mon Jan 18 17:09:06 2016
New Revision: 232533
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232533&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport to mainline
2015-10-09 Alexander Fomin
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60637
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69348
Bug ID: 69348
Summary: alias declarations can not be used inside qualifiers
of declarators
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Bug ID: 69347
Summary: excessive compile time with -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60637
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Jan 18 16:28:48 2016
New Revision: 232532
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232532&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix C++98 std::signbit
PR libstdc++/60637
* include/c_gl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60637
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Jan 18 16:28:16 2016
New Revision: 232531
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232531&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix C++98 std::signbit
PR libstdc++/60637
* include/c_gl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58638
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Daniel Richard G. from comment #8)
> First, GCC can't find its own runtime library when linking programs:
>
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcc_s
That's Bug 35248, it's a problem with --ena
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69140
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69140
--- Comment #20 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Jan 18 16:19:53 2016
New Revision: 232528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232528&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-01-07 Uros Bizjak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60743
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60743
Tyrel Haveman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tyrel at kulshanconcepts dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69003
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9/5/6 Regression]|[4.9/5 Regression]
|Unde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69003
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Jan 18 15:58:06 2016
New Revision: 232525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/69003
* lto-partition.c (rename_statics): Fix pasto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69181
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Updated patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01300.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jan 18 15:54:14 2016
New Revision: 232522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/68767
gcc/c-family/
* c-common.c (check_function_a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69328
--- Comment #5 from Ilya Enkovich ---
This patch works for me:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
index 635c797..9d4d286 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
@@ -7441,6 +7441,10 @@ vect_is_simple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66680
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
--- Comment #32 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to neil.n.carlson from comment #31)
> Sorry, ignore the example of comment 30. I had already reported this in PR
> 67564 (not a duplicate of this one). I'm getting old ...
Thanks for your apprecia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Works for me but
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2016-01/msg01237.html still has it.
>
> Maybe some as feature stuff? Tom, what target did you reproduce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68176
--- Comment #5 from Nix ---
I didn't think of that (I try to forget that fixincludes exists because it
gives me nightmares). But much though I hate fixincludes, this sort of fix (to
headers for an obsolete program which will by definition never b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47122
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
--- Comment #31 from neil.n.carlson at gmail dot com ---
Sorry, ignore the example of comment 30. I had already reported this in PR
67564 (not a duplicate of this one). I'm getting old ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69052
Igor Zamyatin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69336
alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
--- Comment #30 from neil.n.carlson at gmail dot com ---
Paul, you've done a lot of great work here (a huge thanks!) and I can confirm
that many of my deferred-length character issues seem to be resolved now with
the trunk (r232457, 1/15/2016). I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #30 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to The Written Word from comment #29)
> (In reply to Alexander from comment #28)
> > this one file should recompile with -O1 optimization
>
> Thanks. I rebuilt with charset.c with -O1 and it c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #29 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to Alexander from comment #28)
> this one file should recompile with -O1 optimization
Thanks. I rebuilt with charset.c with -O1 and it compiled. I resumed the build
and the compile now fails w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69345
Alexander Fomin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||afomin.mailbox at gmail dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69345
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
candidates are r232435 and r232401 I think (which would be both mine).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69297
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69297
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 18 14:25:56 2016
New Revision: 232519
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232519&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-18 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/69297
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69328
--- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> > ./cc1 -quiet t.c -O3
> t.c: In function ‘fn1’:
> t.c:2:6: internal compiler error: in vector_compare_rtx, at optabs.c:5290
> void fn1() {
> ^~~
>
> 0xc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68542
--- Comment #5 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Mon Jan 18 14:14:35 2016
New Revision: 232518
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232518&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
2016-01-18 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR middle-end/68542
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68176
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69133
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> The patterns are just weird.
All that comes from the addti3 expander in aarch64.md
If I delete it the testcase doesn't abort.
I'll have a closer loo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The patterns are just weird.
(insn 10 7 11 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:CC_NZ 66 cc)
(compare:CC_NZ (plus:DI (reg:DI 79)
(reg:DI 85 [ x ]))
(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43052
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67515
--- Comment #11 from Yury V. Zaytsev ---
Hi Roger,
Thank you for the hint! I've tried the solution from the linked ticket, but I'm
still getting the same problem, albeit at a different place in the code (not
sure why?!). In addition I'm still st
1 - 100 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
