https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
NOTE:
use, public :: C
is not (yet) permitted, but might well be added in the future. See
https://github.com/j3-fortran/fortran_proposals/issues/88 and
https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2019-Novem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Note that one needs to handle:
module A; integer, parameter :: A1 = 1, A2 = 2; end module A
module B; use A; end module B
module C; use A; end module B
module D
use B
use C
private
private B
public
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90885
--- Comment #21 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Dávid Bolvanský from comment #20)
> Clang implemented [0] this diagnostic under -Wxor-used-as-pow.
> From user perspective it would be reasonable if GCC follows this naming.
>
> [0] https://rev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64534
--- Comment #2 from Viktor Yu. Kovalskii ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
> Confirmed:
>
> $ echo | /home/msebor/build/gcc-trunk-svn/gcc/xgcc
> -B/home/msebor/build/gcc-trunk-svn/gcc -S -march=foobar -march=core2
> -o/dev/null -xc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92539
Bug ID: 92539
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] -Warray-bounds false positive
(loop unroll?)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92538
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||4131
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92538
Bug ID: 92538
Summary: Proposal for IPA init() constant propagation
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92522
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Even PR 53068 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92522
--- Comment #2 from John ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Isn't this undefined since you require 'test' to be constructed before
> 'sample'
> but the order of global CTORs is undefined between translation units?
>
> IIRC there'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92536
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
No but I'll commit it soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91962
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
Still broken a few weeks later. Did the patch every make it into trunk ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92537
Bug ID: 92537
Summary: [10 Regression] internal compiler error: in
vect_slp_analyze_node_operations, at
tree-vect-slp.c:2775
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92536
Bug ID: 92536
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE when trying to using deduction
guide following unknown type error
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92532
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Please fix this soon. I think we still have the 48h rule?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 90734, which changed state.
Bug 90734 Summary: [concepts] Pre-normalization substitution into constraints
of templated function breaks subsumption
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90734
What|Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90734
Casey Carter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92532
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92493
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92535
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Forgot bloaty report for GCC9 and disabling ICF
$ bloaty libxul.so -- libxul.so.old
VM SIZE FILE SIZE
++ GROWING++
+2.3% +1.87Mi .text
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92535
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 47276
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47276&action=edit
Memory use of gcc9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92535
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 47277
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47277&action=edit
Meory use of gcc9 with ICF disabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92535
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 47275
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47275&action=edit
memory use of GCC10 with icf disabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92535
Bug ID: 92535
Summary: [10 regression] ICF is relatively expensive and became
less effective
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89913
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90287
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92186
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redbeard0531 at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 90287, which changed state.
Bug 90287 Summary: [concepts] bogus error on overload failure inside
requires-expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90287
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65649
--- Comment #7 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: nsz
Date: Fri Nov 15 17:39:14 2019
New Revision: 278308
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278308&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
microblaze: fix PR65649
microblaze-linux-musl build fails without t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
Bug ID: 92534
Summary: [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-42.c fails after
r278262
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #9 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> @David: Are you reducing that or not?
I was, but other folks are more keen than me in this area
and so my efforts are overtaken by events.
Good news on a prom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89442
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> There is no need to clear polymorphic call context. It does not refer to the
> parameters of caller. If it was valid for all possible contexts it is still
> valid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92533
Bug ID: 92533
Summary: [F2018] Permit module names in access-stmt
(public::/private::)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89913
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90287
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91353
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92532
Bug ID: 92532
Summary: ICE in
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91365
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91366
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323
Bug 88323 depends on bug 91366, which changed state.
Bug 91366 Summary: Implement P1816R0: Class template argument deduction for
aggregates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91366
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90734
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92531
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91515
--- Comment #2 from Konstantin Kharlamov ---
I think this is a duplicate of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71761
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92024
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #4)
> Is there a backport pending? I cannot reproduce this ICE on release branches.
Hmm, interesting, I would have expected this to ICE.
However this patch is not c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #7 from fxue at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: fxue
Date: Fri Nov 15 15:03:24 2019
New Revision: 278300
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278300&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-15 Feng Xue
PR ipa/92528
* ipa-prop.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64120
--- Comment #14 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #13)
> (In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #12)
snip
>
> It seems to me that what is true for an explicit save is true for an
> implicit one too and that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92462
--- Comment #19 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> So I see before DSE1:
>
> (insn 16 15 17 2 (set (mem/c:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 102 sfp)
> (const_int -8 [0xfff8])) [1 cur+0 S4 A64])
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92531
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64120
--- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #12)
> Paul, getting back to this one? At first glance seems not overly much work
> left for the remaining case.
Hi Juergen,
I am in the midst of a triage of my assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92515
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Nov 15 14:37:57 2019
New Revision: 278295
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278295&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix vector/scalar to vector/vector conversion (PR92515)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90243
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||patrick at motec dot com.au
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92519
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92024
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92531
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
Even this is enough:
template
void ky () noexcept ([]{});
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #14)
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2019, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> [...] But yes, for your example we'd copy-prop out c and b which
> might then have created "misma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92531
Bug ID: 92531
Summary: [9/10 Regression] ICE in uses_template_parms, at
cp/pt.c:10471
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92508
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Aha, that makes sense for sreal it is not sure that
a == a * 1 / 1
and the code was inconsistent about guaring the noop scales.
Thanks for tracking this down! I suppose it would also make sense to
pre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org |fxue at os dot
amperecomputing.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78314
--- Comment #28 from Richard Earnshaw ---
The last release of gcc-7 has now been made, so it's end-of-life and no further
fixes for it will be made.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92508
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Disappeared on trunk with r278222.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90243
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is still present on gcc-8-branch and gcc-9-branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92512
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 15 13:52:09 2019
New Revision: 278293
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278293&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-15 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92512
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92512
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78314
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92530
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92506
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Full backtrace with the reduced test-case:
$ during IPA pass: inline
pr92528.cc:61:1: internal compiler error: in ipa_get_parm_lattices, at
ipa-cp.c:386
61 | }
| ^
0x8ba588 ipa_get_parm_lattices
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 92098, which changed state.
Bug 92098 Summary: [9 Regression] After r262333, the following code cannot be
vectorized on powerpc64le.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92098
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92098
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92078
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92313
--- Comment #4 from Tony E Lewis ---
This is now fixed.
The bug we decided this was probably a duplicate of
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92206) is now fixed. I've
confirmed that trunk (on Godbolt) is also now behaving itself wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92515
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Nov 15 12:57:47 2019
New Revision: 278292
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278292&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[rs6000] Use VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR to reinterpret vectors (P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92430
--- Comment #8 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: iii
Date: Fri Nov 15 12:55:05 2019
New Revision: 278291
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278291&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Free dominance info at the beginning of pass_jump_after_combine
try
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84061
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92324
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 15 12:48:34 2019
New Revision: 278289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278289&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-15 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92324
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69654
--- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Nov 15 12:42:29 2019
New Revision: 278287
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278287&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-15 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/69654
* trans-expr.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 47273
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47273&action=edit
Reduced test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92530
Bug ID: 92530
Summary: Absent error on static_assert expression
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92529
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92529
Bug ID: 92529
Summary: [10 Regression] Wrong code with ICF since r278207
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 15 Nov 2019, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
>
> --- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #10)
> [...] But total scalarization works with the premise
> that we don't see any direct accesses to source or destination
That is not true, total scalarization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
/home/dcb/gcc/results.278200/bin/gcc
/home/dcb/gcc/results.278250/bin/gcc
../tests/catch.hpp:9423:27: internal compiler error: in ipa_get_parm_lattices,
at ipa-cp.c:386
So the problem first seems to occur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66773
Vincent Lefèvre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92462
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
Bug ID: 92528
Summary: ice in ipa_get_parm_lattices
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92516
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
Reduced C++ code:
class a {
public:
typedef int b;
operator b();
};
class c {
public:
constexpr int m_fn1() const;
constexpr int d() const;
int e;
int f;
};
constexpr int c::m_fn1() const { ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92527
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92527
Bug ID: 92527
Summary: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-div-2.c etc. FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92527
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 47270
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47270&action=edit
32-bit sparc-sun-solaris2.11 bb-slp-21.c.168t.slp2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92513
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92039
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 15 09:09:16 2019
New Revision: 278281
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278281&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-15 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92039
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92039
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 92039, which changed state.
Bug 92039 Summary: [10 Regression] Spurious -Warray-bounds warnings building
32-bit glibc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92039
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91975
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 15 09:09:16 2019
New Revision: 278281
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278281&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-11-15 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92039
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48200
--- Comment #40 from Jan Hubicka ---
I posted initial patch here
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg01334.html
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
