https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 104581, which changed state.
Bug 104581 Summary: [12 Regression] Huge compile-time regression building SPEC
2017 538.imagick_r with PGO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fe79d652c96b53384ddfa43e312cb0010251391b
commit r12-7293-gfe79d652c96b53384ddfa43e312cb0010251391b
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96881
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:422d1d378e52418d821781ad756cf3eafc3fa9a2
commit r12-7292-g422d1d378e52418d821781ad756cf3eafc3fa9a2
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104589
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104588
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> The costs look weird:
> _1 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
> _5 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
> _1 1 times vector_store costs 12 in body
> 1 time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99197
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102798
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||97043
--- Comment #19 from Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102798
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102798
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104586
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104586
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, it depends on the PR96522 fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104586
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
>
> --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to qinzhao from comment #11)
>
--prefix=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.1 20220217 (experimental) [master -g837eb1262] (GCC)
$
$ cat preprocessed.c
short a, b;
int c, d;
__attribute__((always_inline)) __attribute__((optimize(1))) short e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79078
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104004
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104588
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |middle-end
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104588
Bug ID: 104588
Summary: user-defined constructor loses alignment information
about `*this`
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103628
--- Comment #4 from Arseny Solokha ---
Yes, I actually have both. But that's the peculiarity of the way I build my
test corpus, which I build from multiple sources, and not really important.
Sorry for mistakenly pointing you at the wrong file co
<<< image/jpg: EXCLUDED >>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94944
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94944
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:36278f48cbc08c78e4ed588e5a049bd45fd1c55a
commit r12-7291-g36278f48cbc08c78e4ed588e5a049bd45fd1c55a
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104577
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104566
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94960
--- Comment #9 from Erich Keane ---
> But in C++20 every function is 'constexpr' now, so every function is inline
> anyway, right? Even the large functions that aren't good candidates for
> inlining (see also PR 93008). So The 'inline' keyword ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-18
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103035
Bug 103035 depends on bug 104551, which changed state.
Bug 104551 Summary: [12 Regression] Wrong code with -O3 for skylake-avx512,
icelake-server, and sapphirerapids
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104551
What|Remove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104551
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94960
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Erich Keane from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> > And if we have to mark every single function as 'inline' then maybe the
> > compiler shouldn't be using it as a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104559
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104559
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104559
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:12a88e6e208fa45a449775bfb9353c777a6081aa
commit r12-7289-g12a88e6e208fa45a449775bfb9353c777a6081aa
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104476
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.4|11.3
Summary|[10/11/12 Regre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104476
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b4e92ae2cacb0ef539326249fc59f790423a0766
commit r10-10467-gb4e92ae2cacb0ef539326249fc59f790423a0766
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104587
Bug ID: 104587
Summary: Cygwin fails wide-character regex match to class
[[:xdigit:]]
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104476
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90451
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104539
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|12.0|
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104539
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c9b7077b72529fbbe896212a0088bff6025c5e7
commit r12-7288-g2c9b7077b72529fbbe896212a0088bff6025c5e7
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #20 from Svante Signell ---
Hi again,
Attached are patch #1 to patch #9 to make libgo.so.21.0.0 to build
successfully, from the source gcc-12-12-20220214.
I see that the first patch: "Adding hurd to unixsock_readmsg_cloexec.go" wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #19 from Svante Signell ---
Hi again,
Attached are patch #1 to patch #9 to make libgo.so.21.0.0 to build
successfully, from the source gcc-12-12-20220214.
I see that the first patch: "Adding hurd to unixsock_readmsg_cloexec.go" wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103195
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #18 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52472
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52472&action=edit
patch #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #17 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52471
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52471&action=edit
Patch #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #16 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52470
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52470&action=edit
patch #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71196
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #15 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52469
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52469&action=edit
patch #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #14 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52468
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52468&action=edit
patch #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #13 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52467
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52467&action=edit
patch #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #12 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52466
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52466&action=edit
patch #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #11 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52465
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52465&action=edit
pathch #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #10 from Svante Signell ---
Created attachment 52464
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52464&action=edit
patch #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104583
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner ---
Fixed on trunk. Mike mentioned we need backports.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104121
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva ---
I mean, even with commit 50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104121
--- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva ---
No luck, even with commit
./xgcc -B./ -O2 -g pr104121.c -mv850e2v3 -mno-app-regs -msmall-sld
-fbuilding-libgcc -fno-stack-protector
do I actually need binutils to enable something essential in GCC to t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Not with "macros" plural.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90451
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c352ef0ed90cfc07d494dfec21bc683e337b
commit r12-7285-gc352ef0ed90cfc07d494dfec21bc683e337b
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
But "an" + "invalid" does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104586
Bug ID: 104586
Summary: New test case gcc.dg/pr102798.c in
523f5950c70d65714bedf9d5fe164d9e6d69dd87 fails
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104552
--- Comment #4 from Roland Illig ---
>From common.opt:
> an invalid linenum macros
"an" + "macros" doesn't match
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102369
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||a.shahmoradi at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104585
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102276
--- Comment #14 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> and so for flag_auto_var_init > AUTO_INIT_UNINITIALIZED perhaps we could also
> avoid warnings on:
> 1) call to .DEFERRED_INIT
> 2) call to __built
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104257
pc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pc at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104121
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Do you still get this? I can't trigger the problem with the reduced testcase
with -O2 -g -mv850e2v3, on a cross to v850-rtems hosted on x86_64-linux-gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104585
Bug ID: 104585
Summary: incorrect error for dummy arguments with both VALUE
and DIMENSION attributes
Product: gcc
Version: og11 (devel/omp/gcc-11)
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104257
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Clarke :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:efbb17db52afd802300c4dcce208fab326ec2915
commit r12-7284-gefbb17db52afd802300c4dcce208fab326ec2915
Author: Paul A. Clarke
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104535
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104335
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fac15bf84807a58f83c741b1034c1bc96348319d
commit r12-7283-gfac15bf84807a58f83c741b1034c1bc96348319d
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Thu Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104256
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 52463
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52463&action=edit
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104256
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |meissner at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104539
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104584
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91903
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79754
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5b9b6f31d22539b7e85bea966f48ad84ebb2e8c
commit r11-9589-gd5b9b6f31d22539b7e85bea966f48ad84ebb2e8c
Author: Eric Botcazou
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79754
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bc6d2f460a4c12e89c02525abdb182828ae8a27e
commit r12-7281-gbc6d2f460a4c12e89c02525abdb182828ae8a27e
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103573
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ian Lance Taylor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3f2a6b041d910cab08332ae01a8a9fcfe2e9036a
commit r12-7280-g3f2a6b041d910cab08332ae01a8a9fcfe2e9036a
Author: Ian Lance Taylor
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ian Lance Taylor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3f2a6b041d910cab08332ae01a8a9fcfe2e9036a
commit r12-7280-g3f2a6b041d910cab08332ae01a8a9fcfe2e9036a
Author: Ian Lance Taylor
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104584
Bug ID: 104584
Summary: Bad diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104583
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Summary|[12 regression] I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104563
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Trying the hopefully matching rewrite of the test into C/C++:
void
foo (void)
{
int x, scalar;
int a[10];
struct S { int var; int b[10]; } test_struct;
int i;
test_struct.var = 1;
for (i = 0; i <
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94960
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
C++17 and below said,
Except for inline functions and variables, declarations with types deduced from
their initializer or return value (10.1.7.4), const variables of literal types,
variables of reference t
algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.1 20220217 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > Even in that case, filling the memory with pattern & mask instead of filling
> > the memory with pattern + __builtin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104447
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Vladimir Makarov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:db69f666a728ce800a840115829f6b64bc3174d2
commit r12-7278-gdb69f666a728ce800a840115829f6b64bc3174d2
Author: Vladimir N. Makarov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
--- Comment #14 from Qing Zhao ---
> On Feb 17, 2022, at 1:54 AM, rguenther at suse dot de
> wrote:
>>
>> If padding clearing is exposed too late till RTL expansion, some tree
>> optimization will not be able to be applied on the expanded sto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Confirmed. The first patch there.
I will still prepare a patch with the testcase to avoid an independent
regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The costs look weird:
_1 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
_5 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
_1 1 times vector_store costs 12 in body
1 times vec_construct costs 8 in prologue
vec_construct is ce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
What slp does is just
- w.s.low = _1;
- w.s.high = _5;
+ _14 = {_1, _5};
+ MEM[(union *)&w] = _14;
I must say I don't really see that as a beneficial optimization, construction
of a vector from scalars
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100537
--- Comment #20 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
There's no perfect way to handle the MERGE file on the release branches. What
I usually do is to resolve the patch by replacing the existing revision number
with the new one. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102656
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84201
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> One option is to introduce a less invasive optimization option[...]
I think that would be useful, yes. It could even be a param if we do not want
to commit t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||104263
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Sum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102513
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
I am very well aware that my patch was just a mitigation, not
something that would avoid the problem under all circumstances. We
can attempt to look at array access indices during the summary
creation phas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
