https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97527
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
The machine is gcc220.fsffrance.org ; if anybody has an account there
and wants to peek into /home/tkoenig to look into more details, be my
guest.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97527
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 49422
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49422&action=edit
Generated gimple-match.c
All the temporary files were generated by manually adding -save-temps
to the Makefile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97527
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-unknown-openbsd6.8
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97527
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 49421
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49421&action=edit
config.log from the main build directory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97527
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 49420
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49420&action=edit
Resulting assember file (which is incomplete)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97527
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 49419
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49419&action=edit
Preprocessed source of gimple-match.ii (compressed)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97527
Bug ID: 97527
Summary: OpenBSD bootstrap fails with error: C++ preprocessor
"/lib/cpp" fails sanity check
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97526
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97313
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97526
Bug ID: 97526
Summary: ICE in lra_set_insn_recog_data, at lra.c:1004
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97524
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-10-22
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97249
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97249
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52e7f09698ecb5ba6d9e921ffe912d1f66158e9e
commit r11-4204-g52e7f09698ecb5ba6d9e921ffe912d1f66158e9e
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Oct 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87767
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4de7b010038933dd6ca96bf186ca49f243d0def6
commit r11-4202-g4de7b010038933dd6ca96bf186ca49f243d0def6
Author: liuhongt
Date: Sat Sep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87767
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7026bb9504eb0f95e114f832cd6dd14302376861
commit r11-4203-g7026bb9504eb0f95e114f832cd6dd14302376861
Author: liuhongt
Date: Sat Sep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97515
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod ---
Furthermore, this PR is also a good example of a case where we want to inject
updated values into the Ranger's iterator.
:
goto ; [INV]
:
ui_8 = ~xe_3;
if (ui_8 == 0)
goto ; [INV]
else
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97520
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:966fdb2e12c0347aa3f9efaf5f4e1cd8237fa024
commit r11-4200-g966fdb2e12c0347aa3f9efaf5f4e1cd8237fa024
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97515
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ca5f4666f7a9404cdb04832324de3dd7d71e35c3
commit r11-4198-gca5f4666f7a9404cdb04832324de3dd7d71e35c3
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
--- Comment #56 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3fd5876793ddf882994acafc9c5b28e3be8897bd
commit r11-4196-g3fd5876793ddf882994acafc9c5b28e3be8897bd
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Thu O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97525
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19808
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||smuccione at agisent dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97525
Bug ID: 97525
Summary: failed to report use before initialization in
constructor initialization
Product: gcc
Version: og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10)
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43892
--- Comment #31 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Performing a jump based on the carry bit is not something we can
easily do (there are no simple insns for it, and those sequences
that will do the trick are expensive). But I'll look at that,
thanks fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80076
--- Comment #4 from Andres Freund ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> Fixed for GCC 11. Thanks for the report.
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43892
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #30
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80076
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97515
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 49417
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49417&action=edit
check for undefined before not returning a constant value
The ranger deals with UNDEFINED slightly differently
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #37 from Peter Bergner ---
Fixed on trunk. I'll let this bake a week before backporting the rs6000 part
of the fix to GCC 10 (approved by Segher).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #36 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:84cc3370d6d5972fe495b2114fb32f7b4a49a98d
commit r11-4193-g84cc3370d6d5972fe495b2114fb32f7b4a49a98d
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43892
--- Comment #29 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yup, and that is a more elegant way of writing this anyway. But we
still do not handle the exact testcase code optimally ;-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97524
Bug ID: 97524
Summary: Compiling with -flto=auto fails in make is not
installed
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97523
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97523
Bug ID: 97523
Summary: [11 Regression] bogus "would use explicit constructor"
error for new[]()
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
--- Comment #55 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #54)
> > > It goes from 1 to 1<<63, so each of tests translates to a range.
> >
> > Yes, but these ranges are very large, nothing for a jump table or a
> > bit-test.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97520
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97520
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-10-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
--- Comment #54 from Jan Hubicka ---
> > It goes from 1 to 1<<63, so each of tests translates to a range.
>
> Yes, but these ranges are very large, nothing for a jump table or a bit-test.
Yep, but theoretically you can recover the decision table
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97520
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
--- Comment #53 from Martin Liška ---
> It goes from 1 to 1<<63, so each of tests translates to a range.
Yes, but these ranges are very large, nothing for a jump table or a bit-test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
--- Comment #52 from Jan Hubicka ---
> I don't see how can if-to-switch conversion pass help us here. It's designed
> to
> identify compact intervals. In this case we see:
>
>:
> _16 = _2 & 576460752303423488;
> if (_16 == 0)
> goto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
--- Comment #51 from Martin Liška ---
> Martin, how does the if chain conversion behave on the example?
I don't see how can if-to-switch conversion pass help us here. It's designed to
identify compact intervals. In this case we see:
:
_16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97511
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
--- Comment #50 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:caaa218f912ccf932fdb79243ded68bb462bbe63
commit r11-4192-gcaaa218f912ccf932fdb79243ded68bb462bbe63
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Wed O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97522
Bug ID: 97522
Summary: [11 regression] test cases fail on powerpc64 BE after
r11-4077
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And we do that because:
case VECTOR_CST:
{
tree tmp = NULL_TREE;
if (VECTOR_MODE_P (mode))
return const_vector_from_tree (exp);
scalar_int_mode int_mode;
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It seems that
vector(2) _1;
vector(2) _2;
...
_1 = _2 & { 0, -1 };
remains in the IL after that change, which results in expansion of TImode AND,
but the second operand of that is (const_int 2 [0x2])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97521
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
1114306-gd9409301387-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 11.0.0 20201021 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118
--- Comment #37 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #36)
> Created attachment 49412 [details]
> An updated patch
>
> The patch has been evolving... slowly.
>
> I found that dependency_57.f90 segfaulted in runtime so I hav
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97519
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97519
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97518
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
A related case I encounter often is:
static_assert( sizeof(T) == 4 );
if the assertion fails I would like to know what the size is, rather than just
"not 4", so I have to add something like Barry's verify
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97520
Bug ID: 97520
Summary: ICE in calc_stmt, at gimple-range.cc:399 with "-O1
-fno-tree-fre -ftree-vrp"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||97519, 97503
--- Comment #49 from Jan Hubi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97519
Bug ID: 97519
Summary: builtin_constant_p (x + cst) should be optimized to
builtin_constant_p (x)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97445
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |ipa
--- Comment #48 from Jan Hubicka ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97518
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97518
Bug ID: 97518
Summary: Improving static_assert diagnostics
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97517
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97517
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97517
Bug ID: 97517
Summary: _Up = 'nullptr_type' not supported by
simple_type_specifier'nullptr_type' not supported by
direct_abstract_declarator
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97512
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97512
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a186ab670e97c4c3883d96506655c4621e7c5515
commit r11-4188-ga186ab670e97c4c3883d96506655c4621e7c5515
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14319
--- Comment #18 from James Kuyper Jr.
---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #17)
> (In reply to Tim Rentsch from comment #10)
> > Four: Despite the last observation, the "one special guarantee" clause
> > (and hence also DR 257) is clea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97512
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97513
--- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon ---
Right, but the builds were broken before that (did not work with gcc-4.8.5 on
the host), so I didn't notice this problem ealier.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97513
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97516
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97516
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97515
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97514
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97511
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45516
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:310fe80babe04ccb7d2e15c8fca7dc98180701a8
commit r11-4186-g310fe80babe04ccb7d2e15c8fca7dc98180701a8
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97514
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-10-21
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97516
Bug ID: 97516
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class
'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in
useless_type_conversion_p, at gimple-expr.c:87
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97515
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97515
Bug ID: 97515
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: type
mismatch in 'rshift_expr')
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97453
--- Comment #2 from Kamlesh Kumar ---
patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/556672.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97514
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |target
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97514
Bug ID: 97514
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in add_function_entry, at
analyzer/engine.cc:1958
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-val
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14319
Vincent Lefèvre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97500
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97506
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:36ee59a2640712a6e24d9e27290bc5ebbef39709
commit r10-8933-g36ee59a2640712a6e24d9e27290bc5ebbef39709
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97500
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d94093013877cde3dce5c243099ad54668849400
commit r11-4185-gd94093013877cde3dce5c243099ad54668849400
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97506
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yes, looks safe to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97513
Bug ID: 97513
Summary: [11 regression] aarch64 SVE regressions since r11-3822
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97506
--- Comment #7 from Hongtao.liu ---
Should i backport to GCC10?
Although it's exposed in GCC11, but it's still a potential bug in GCC10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97506
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9b5d50b7c6e34267b40bdeb4c145e9132d83762d
commit r11-4184-g9b5d50b7c6e34267b40bdeb4c145e9132d83762d
Author: liuhongt
Date: Wed Oct 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97512
Bug ID: 97512
Summary: Move std::ranges::subrange structured bindings stuff
from to
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97511
Bug ID: 97511
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in template_parm_to_arg, at
cp/pt.c:4744
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97509
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97510
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97510
Bug ID: 97510
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in check_bool_attrs, at
recog.c:2168 since r9-2793-gf6b95f78f8048e2f
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97414
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97414
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Martin Liska
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98cd020ebc50a197de17aecd15afdff718cb06d3
commit r10-8932-g98cd020ebc50a197de17aecd15afdff718cb06d3
Author: Martin Liska
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97494
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97509
Bug ID: 97509
Summary: [nvptx, offloading] dg-excess-errors directive no
longer working in some test-cases
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
