https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105733
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kito at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
A little more reduced:
namespace hh {
struct nothing {};
template
struct s {
s h();
};
}
template
void bar() {
auto m = hh::s(hh::s{}.h());
m.~s();
}
void foo() { ba
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jeremy R. from comment #1)
> More minimal: https://godbolt.org/z/WcGab4W8T
>// only fails when this stuff is in a namespace, for some reason
You found that at the same time I did :).
Here is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.2
Summary|Regression: Inc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Reduced testcase:
> namespace hh {
> struct nothing {};
> template
> struct expression_decomposer {
> auto h() {
> return expres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
namespace hh {
struct nothing {};
template
struct expression_decomposer {
auto h() {
return expression_decomposer();
}
};
}
template
void bar(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
--- Comment #1 from Jeremy R. ---
More minimal: https://godbolt.org/z/WcGab4W8T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105734
Bug ID: 105734
Summary: Regression: Incorrect "error: invalid use of 'auto'"
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105722
--- Comment #5 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I do not see it in my gcc 11 test runs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105733
Bug ID: 105733
Summary: riscv: Poor codegen for large stack frames
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
/* PR preprocessor/105732 */
#define m1(p1, p2, p3) p3
#define m2(p1, ...) 1##__VA_OPT__(foo)
#define M(...) m1(1, 2, m2)
#if M(,)(,)
#endif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.4|9.5
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Loren Osborn from comment #4)
> 2) I filed this bug against 11.3.0, as that is when the regression appeared,
> but Compiler Explorer seems to show that this is still a current bug on trunk
Righ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
--- Comment #6 from Loren Osborn ---
This is unlikely to be helpful or relevant, but just in case, this is the
source of the original code: https://developer.blender.org/D14947
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
--- Comment #4 from Loren Osborn ---
(*Comment lost in submit collision*)
Just a couple last notes:
1) Go here first: https://godbolt.org/z/bsenoqdjv. (Easy to reproduce bug in a
simple link.)
2) I filed this bug against 11.3.0, as that is whe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed.
Reduced as much as I could:
#define _VA_FEATURE_DETECT__3RD_ARG(_placeholder_1, _placeholder_2, value, ...)
value
# define _VA_FEATURE_OPT_DISAPPEARS 1
# define _VA_FEATURE_OPT_DISAPP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
--- Comment #2 from Loren Osborn ---
Just noting that this is my **THIRD** time submitting this bug. @jwakely had to
come bail me out twice after spam assassin did it's thing. You may want to:
1) Turn down the sensitivity on spam assassin
2) Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
--- Comment #1 from Loren Osborn ---
Created attachment 53034
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53034&action=edit
Complete Compiler output
Only allowed to attach one file to initial bug report
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105732
Bug ID: 105732
Summary: [REGRESSION] internal compiler error: unspellable
token PADDING
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104352
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-25
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105731
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105731
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Combine:
Trying 41 -> 44:
41: r120:SI=r119:SI<<0x1a
REG_DEAD r119:SI
44: pc={(r120:SI<0)?L114:pc}
REG_BR_PROB 283038348
Failed to match this instruction:
(parallel [
(set (pc)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #33 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #32)
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #26)
> > That's one option, certainly easier for the users. At the least, the
> > issue should be documen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105731
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53032
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53032&action=edit
testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105731
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10) |unknown
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96637
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105731
Bug ID: 105731
Summary: superfluous second operation before conditional branch
-O2 -mcpu=cortex-m0plus
Product: gcc
Version: og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10)
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96637
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:da2c56ee601ac696a76e469e33c88313428c5c5a
commit r13-770-gda2c56ee601ac696a76e469e33c88313428c5c5a
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96204
Martin Jansa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Martin.Jansa at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105655
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:34970d08c6297e12f3f9117b6ac19fb2de522e24
commit r13-769-g34970d08c6297e12f3f9117b6ac19fb2de522e24
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104330
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105730
Bug ID: 105730
Summary: Issue with commit - Allow std::condition_variable
waits to be cancelled
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105690
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> somehow function splitting exposes this,
With options:
-O2 -Warray-bounds -S -fno-inline-functions-called-once --param
inline-unit-growth=0 --param max-inline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105623
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j-l.wynen at hotmail dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105716
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105722
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102629
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.4|11.3
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102307
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5022f4af0d1e2f3fdf2bb159d4372ee3cf34b052
commit r10-10760-g5022f4af0d1e2f3fdf2bb159d4372ee3cf34b052
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105722
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bea4429004b02b834c6a15dcc3bfbd953b230585
commit r10-10759-gbea4429004b02b834c6a15dcc3bfbd953b230585
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105722
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Component|libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105704
--- Comment #3 from Jürgen Urban ---
>From security point of view the compiler should not put jump tables into the
code, because this creates new attack vectors. The code might be used by
different types of security attacks, as it can contain in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Jeddeloh ---
Hi, I wanted to follow up now that GCC 13 development has opened up. Any news
on including it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84774
Bug 84774 depends on bug 93517, which changed state.
Bug 93517 Summary: bogus -Wrestrict on sprintf with unknown strings bounded by
array size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93517
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93517
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105729
Bug ID: 105729
Summary: False positive UBsan "reference binding to null
pointer of type" when evaluating array indexing which
throws exception
Product: gcc
Versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
--- Comment #12 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> > My guess is that the
> > BUILD_BUG();
> > line is the sole thing that is wrong, it should be just break;
> > as the memory_is_poisoned_n(addr, size); will handle all the sizes,
> > regar
> > My guess is that the
> > BUILD_BUG();
> > line is the sole thing that is wrong, it should be just break;
> > as the memory_is_poisoned_n(addr, size); will handle all the sizes,
> > regardless if they are constants or not.
>
> Sure, I'm going to suggest such a change.
To me it looked like a pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105728
--- Comment #1 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> To me, all of these do the same thing and should generate the same code.
> As nobody else can see removeme, and we aren't leaking its address, shouldn't
> the compiler be able to deduce tha
> To me, all of these do the same thing and should generate the same code.
> As nobody else can see removeme, and we aren't leaking its address, shouldn't
> the compiler be able to deduce that all accesses to removeme are
> inconsequential and can be removed?
>
> My gcc 11.3 generates a condidion
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96363
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105655
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36685
--- Comment #5 from James Y Knight ---
(oops submitted commit by mistake, continuing...)
Strangely, it appears that Clang and GCC both have odd behaviors currently, but
somewhat opposites:
- GCC appears to evaluate weak constants _only_ in fron
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105623
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:850a9ce8bcca59c7efabcdeeca14c5bd905e8363
commit r13-768-g850a9ce8bcca59c7efabcdeeca14c5bd905e8363
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36685
James Y Knight changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||foom at fuhm dot net
--- Comment #4 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100252
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12/13 Regression] |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100252
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1b661f3f5e712c951e774b3b91fffe4dac734cc7
commit r13-765-g1b661f3f5e712c951e774b3b91fffe4dac734cc7
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105708
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:75c4e4909ae2667f56487434f99c2915b4570794
commit r13-764-g75c4e4909ae2667f56487434f99c2915b4570794
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104799
Lance Fredrickson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lancethepants at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105266
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105728
Bug ID: 105728
Summary: dead store to static var not optimized out
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105714
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13 Regression] ASan in |[12 Regression] ASan in gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> My guess is that the
> BUILD_BUG();
> line is the sole thing that is wrong, it should be just break;
> as the memory_is_poisoned_n(addr, size); will handle all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
My guess is that the
BUILD_BUG();
line is the sole thing that is wrong, it should be just break;
as the memory_is_poisoned_n(addr, size); will handle all the sizes, regardless
if they are constants or not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
> Sure, we might not inline or ipa cp/vrp all of them...
That's the explanation as
bool kasan_check_range(unsigned long addr, size_t size, bool write,
unsigned long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105722
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, it used to work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104493
--- Comment #3 from Ye Luo ---
Thank you for the answer with well explained development procedure of gcc. I
was intended to keep this bug report active. I just adopted OpenMP offload
options adjusted in gcc 12 but OG11 doesn't have them due to u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
--- Comment #49 from Lewis Hyatt ---
I rebased the patches so they apply to the current master branch and pinged
them on gcc-patches here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595556.html
-Lewis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94793
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> I don't know what clang does, but GCC keeps builtin_constant_p till late
> optimization and resolves it then. So here we cross module inline (or
> constant propagat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46897
Tomáš Trnka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trnka at scm dot com
--- Comment #15 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101668
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 53031
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53031&action=edit
patch
This works now - the support for enhanced vec_perm_const is still not complete
on trunk (it claims all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91134
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91134
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a3ee77a2e33b8b8ad31aea27996ebe92a5c8d83
commit r13-759-g7a3ee77a2e33b8b8ad31aea27996ebe92a5c8d83
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
I don't know what clang does, but GCC keeps builtin_constant_p till late
optimization and resolves it then. So here we cross module inline (or constant
propagate) and then it becomes constant.
Outcome of __bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105725
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-25
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105714
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:af02daff557a0abbf5521c143f1cdda406848a9b
commit r13-756-gaf02daff557a0abbf5521c143f1cdda406848a9b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105726
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|spurious warning with |[10/11/12/13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105726
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> The following fixes the bogus diagnostic:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.cc
> b/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.cc
> index b678e806da3..25c63f99c6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I don't see anything wrong on it.
If memory_is_poisoned is inlined into main, size is constant, if
memory_is_poisoned is cloned and ipa-cp or ipa-vrp optimized, likewise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105727
Bug ID: 105727
Summary: __builtin_constant_p expansion in LTO
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104493
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Ye Luo from comment #1)
> gcc 12 rejects the code but devel/omp/gcc-11 was happy.
Note: the devel/omp/gcc-* branch contains both patches backported ("git
cherry-picked") from the mainline (cure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105726
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The following fixes the bogus diagnostic:
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.cc b/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.cc
index b678e806da3..25c63f99c61 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.cc
+++ b/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105726
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105725
--- Comment #1 from tim blechmann ---
it also ICEs on valid code:
```
template struct enable_if;
template using enable_if_t = typename enable_if<_Cond>::type;
template bool is_class_v;
template bool IsPrivateSignalArg;
template
bool IsPriv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104689
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104689
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0d344b557604e966dc7f91739881f03e1f221efd
commit r13-753-g0d344b557604e966dc7f91739881f03e1f221efd
Author: Szabolcs Nagy
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105459
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #8)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #7)
> > I wonder if it's fine to move init_function_start downward after
> > execute_all_ipa_transforms call? the testing is ongoing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105726
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105723
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105722
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.0
Target Milestone|---
97 matches
Mail list logo
