https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 50300
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50300&action=edit
preprocessed source of the important Botan TU
This is the full preprocessed source of the TU. When compiled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #21)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #20)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> > > Even on Skylake it's 2 (movq) + 3 (vpinsr), so there it's 6 vs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99400
Bug ID: 99400
Summary: OpenMP: ICE in install_var_field, at omp-low.c:789
with "map(alloc: A) map(to: A)"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyword
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99217
--- Comment #4 from huangpei at loongson dot cn
---
what do you mean " move the call to mips16_build_function_stub" ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399
--- Comment #1 from jim x ---
All the quotes refer to n4861.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399
Bug ID: 99399
Summary: why does not a pack expansion that is a
using-delcaration which intends to introduce the base
classes's constructor accept by GCC
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99398
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99398
Bug ID: 99398
Summary: Miss to optimize vector permutation fed by CTOR and
CTOR/CST
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95401
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #2)
> > I would like to see __builtin_cpp_rotl and __builtin_cpp_rotr to allow more
> > aggressive optimizations since rotl and rotr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #2)
> I would like to see __builtin_cpp_rotl and __builtin_cpp_rotr to allow more
> aggressive optimizations since rotl and rotr are so important for
> cryptography.
You do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99314
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
--- Comment #23 from David Edelsohn ---
The AIX failure is:
printf_buffer=
1.442695040888963387004650940070860088
to_chars_buffer=
1.442695040888963387004650940070860087871551513
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #2 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> return std::rotr(v,((unsigned int)t)&63);
> Fixes the problem
> int a = std::abs(t);
> a &= 63;
> return std::rotr(v,a);
>
> Also improves the si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-02-23 00:00:00 |2021-3-5
--- Comment #16 from Hans-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8d240b3f0615a890d8bdd9319842601a48292522
commit r11-7518-g8d240b3f0615a890d8bdd9319842601a48292522
Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|std::rotl and std::rotr do |std::rotl and std::rotr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |tree-optimization
Status|UNC
addl$1, d(%rip)
jmp .L3
.cfi_endproc
.LFE1:
.size main, .-main
.local d
.comm d,4,4
.local a
.comm a,4,4
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 11.0.1 20210304 (experimental) [master revision
cdfc2f6a6dc:ab3cea6cccd:f36
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99393
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97607
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jonathan.poelen at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99394
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Here we fail with:
tsvc.c:1526:27: note: vect_is_simple_use: operand x_30 = PHI <_2(8),
x_18(3)>, type of def: unknown
tsvc.c:1526:27: missed: Unsupported pattern.
tsvc.c:1527:26: missed: not vectorized:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99395
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Loop is:
real_t s116 (struct args_t * func_args)
{
int i;
int nl;
static const char __func__[5] = "s116";
struct timeval * _1;
int _2;
float _3;
float _4;
float _5;
int _6;
float _7;
floa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99397
Bug ID: 99397
Summary: s152 benchmark of TSVC is vectorized by clang and not
by gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Bug ID: 99396
Summary: std::rotl and std::rotr do not invoke intrinsics,
leading to serious performance issues
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99395
Bug ID: 99395
Summary: s116 benchmark of TSVC is vectorized by clang and not
by gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99360
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Worked a treat! on both x86_64 (for the code in the reproducer, which of
> course then went on to fail because of partial RTS) and for the original
> arm-eabi problem, which then executed its test code perf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99394
Bug ID: 99394
Summary: s254 benchmark of TSVC is vectorized by clang and not
by gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99393
Bug ID: 99393
Summary: Unoptimized tailcall with char and short as parameter
(x86)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99360
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2)
> Created attachment 50297 [details]
> Stopgap fix
>
> To be applied on the 11 branch only.
Worked a treat! on both x86_64 (for the code in the reprodu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #16 from Tobias Burnus ---
Patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/566301.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90448
--- Comment #11 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This (still) fails on powerpc BE 32 bit compiler for both gcc 10 and trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90448
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99392
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99392
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is probably a duplicate of PR90448
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99392
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64-linux-gnu |powerpc-linux-gnu
--- Comment #2 from Pe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99392
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build||powerpc64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99392
Bug ID: 99392
Summary: [10/11 regression] ICE for
g++.dg/cpp1y/lambda-generic-variadic20.C
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93605
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97607
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mike.k at digitalcarbide dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97607
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gabravier at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jonathan.poelen at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99384
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44262
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-04
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96749
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99391
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
There may well be a similar issue with exception-handling.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99391
Bug ID: 99391
Summary: Analyzer call summaries don't handle longjmp
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99390
Bug ID: 99390
Summary: [meta-bug] tracker bug for call summaries in
-fanalyzer
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: meta-bug
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99389
Bug ID: 99389
Summary: [modules] bad serialization of data
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99374
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99374
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93235
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ad6de3883a1641f7ec0bd9cf56d41fa5b313dae
commit r11-7515-g0ad6de3883a1641f7ec0bd9cf56d41fa5b313dae
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99377
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-04
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99383
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The code would need to also verify the constants are all pointers, just having
a relocation nested somewhere in a struct wouldn't work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #21 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #20)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> > Even on Skylake it's 2 (movq) + 3 (vpinsr), so there it's 6 vs. 3. Not
> > sure if we should somehow do this late
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #20 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> Even on Skylake it's 2 (movq) + 3 (vpinsr), so there it's 6 vs. 3. Not
> sure if we should somehow do this late somehow (peephole or splitter) since
> it requir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99383
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, it could be even POINTER_DIFF_EXPR of the value and the first value in
the table or something similar.
The generic code would need to ensure for flag_pic that either reloc is
null_pointer_node for all e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99378
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Thank you for reporting this.
I've reproduced the bug. The fix will be ready this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99387
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Does the patch of comment 11 produce the expected result?
Quick test, yes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
So to recover performance we need both, avoiding the latency on the vector plus
avoiding the spilling. This variant is fast:
.L56:
.cfi_restore_state
vmovdqu (%rsi), %xmm4
movq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99379
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #13)
> I have changed the test in pr57871 comment 0 to [...]
> It is not the result I expect.
Does the patch of comment 11 produce the expected result?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99352
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
rs6000 has check_effective_target_powerpc_fprs already (with slightly
different semantics).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99383
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Combining the separate strings into a single one if they have the same length
and aren't many would have the disadvantage that the returned value then
wouldn't be pointer equal to constant literal containing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99383
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That was an intentional change, see the PR.
With -fPIC/-fPIE, when the switch isn't optimized into a table of values but
kept as a switch, it doesn't need runtime relocations on many targets. Just
try to com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
There's another thing - we end up with
vmovq %rax, %xmm3
vpinsrq $1, %rdx, %xmm3, %xmm0
but that has way worse latency than the alternative you'd get w/o SSE 4.1:
vmovq %rax,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99105
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99105
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a8fc0c31a9ae759fe9bf59b5418abf2af938f91
commit r11-7513-g6a8fc0c31a9ae759fe9bf59b5418abf2af938f91
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99347
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qianchao9 at huawei dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95636
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99387
--- Comment #1 from Omer Rosler ---
Simplified example:
https://godbolt.org/z/b814o7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99362
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] invalid |[10 Regression] invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99362
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c9816196328a4f4b927f08cf2f66cf255849da0b
commit r11-7512-gc9816196328a4f4b927f08cf2f66cf255849da0b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88146
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c9816196328a4f4b927f08cf2f66cf255849da0b
commit r11-7512-gc9816196328a4f4b927f08cf2f66cf255849da0b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99325
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a1b56c3ef70036af6d171d61ea48ad4c368fcb5b
commit r11-7511-ga1b56c3ef70036af6d171d61ea48ad4c368fcb5b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99388
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The above patch changes:
--- pr99388.s 2021-03-04 15:47:31.151944020 +0100
+++ pr99388.s 2021-03-04 15:51:51.404086604 +0100
@@ -267,18 +267,21 @@ foo:
.byte 0x4 // uleb128 0x4; Location exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99388
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-04
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99216
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99388
Bug ID: 99388
Summary: Invalid debug info for __fp16
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99386
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See PR 78113 and PR 86912
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99381
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have changed the test in pr57871 comment 0 to
implicit none
integer,parameter:: p1 = 4, dp = kind(1d0)
print *,'kind(1.0_4) ',kind(1.0_4),'precision(1.0_4) ',precision(1.0_4)
print *,'kind(1.0_p1)'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99381
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
Fixed on trunk. Needs backporting to GCC 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99387
Bug ID: 99387
Summary: ICE when mixing CNTTP with deduction guides
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99381
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a6bc1680a493de356d6a381718021c6a44401201
commit r11-7510-ga6bc1680a493de356d6a381718021c6a44401201
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Thu Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99352
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99341
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed on the glibc side:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=glibc.git;h=f0419e6a10740a672b28e112c409ae24f5e890ab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122
--- Comment #24 from Martin Jambor ---
*** Bug 99194 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99194
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus ---
Additional patch – my need some cleanup & check whether the
other flags agree with the description. However, it should
match the implementation:
--- a/gcc/fortran/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/fortran/invoke.texi
@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99386
--- Comment #4 from Milian Wolff ---
Ah, but LTO only helps with the variant that contains a single type. The
variant with two types remains very slow:
variant with single type:
```
Performance counter stats for './variant 1' (5 runs):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #8)
> r11-7501 changed the output of the test in comment O, is this expected?
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #10)
> % gfc pr57871.f90
I am sli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35014
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99386
--- Comment #3 from Milian Wolff ---
Ah, seems like `-O2 -flto` fixes the issue for me, but how come clang can pull
this off without LTO?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99170
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9553c8a1b9dd2ca2f0f30d8b23fc6844c7e4a223
commit r11-7509-g9553c8a1b9dd2ca2f0f30d8b23fc6844c7e4a223
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99386
--- Comment #2 from Milian Wolff ---
in both cases libstdc++ is being used:
```
gcc:
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffdc9f93000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x7f1449b2d000)
libm.so.6 => /usr/lib/libm.so.6 (0x0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99386
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Is that clang++ using libstdc++ from GCC or libc++? In the end the difference
might boil down to inlining decision differences.
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
