https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106793
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106793
康桓瑋 changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hewillk at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106798
Bug ID: 106798
Summary: adjacent_view::_Iterator(_Iterator) requires
random_access_iterator
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106682
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:023c5b36e476976cb3b45ff32c7c64990c5a6d45
commit r13-2332-g023c5b36e476976cb3b45ff32c7c64990c5a6d45
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Thu Sep 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101322
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2985049049f12b0aa3366ca244d387820385b9e8
commit r13-2331-g2985049049f12b0aa3366ca244d387820385b9e8
Author: Peter Bergner
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106763
--- Comment #9 from George Pee ---
Thank you for following up even after I closed the ticket.
Unfortunately, I'm unable to switch to a 64-bit kernel at the moment.
Using this works around the issue by treating it via a neon path and enabling
t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106746
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
This simple change:
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-modes.def b/gcc/config/i386/i386-modes.def
index e2e1e18d24d..b49daaef253 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-modes.def
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-modes.def
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106774
--- Comment #6 from Frank Heckenbach ---
> --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> > that's more coding style though?
>
> Yeah I personally prefer the more explicit way of writing it with both
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106736
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #10)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #9)
> > When MMA is not enabled,
> ...
> > the __vector_{quad,pair} types should not exist,
>
> Unfortunate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106794
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106789
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106792
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106795
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106795
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2dbe2801df3010c5549a3ca958194aa77737122d
commit r13-2320-g2dbe2801df3010c5549a3ca958194aa77737122d
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106736
--- Comment #10 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #9)
> When MMA is not enabled,
...
> the __vector_{quad,pair} types should not exist,
Unfortunately, target type initialization only occurs once at the very
be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106797
--- Comment #2 from Pavel M ---
Observation: if "static" is removed, then GCC generates:
: In function 'f2':
:10:18: error: conflicting types for 'x'; have 'int (*)[5]'
10 | extern int (*x)[5];
| ^
:5:18: note: prev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106797
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21343
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pavel.morozkin at gmail dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106797
Bug ID: 106797
Summary: Improvement: diagnose undefined behavior: not all
declarations that refer to the same object or function
have compatible type
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106795
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106736
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
When MMA is not enabled, the movxo and movoo patterns should never be reached
at all; the __vector_{quad,pair} types should not exist, and the
{XO,OO}mode-using
code should then never be created. So ho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106796
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106679
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 106796 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106796
Bug ID: 106796
Summary: [13 regression] gcc.dg/tree-prof/cmpsf-1.c fails after
r13-2098-g5adfb6540db95d
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106794
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
Reduced code seems to be:
template struct Vector3 {
Vector3();
Vector3(T, T, T);
T length() const;
T x, y, z;
};
template
Vector3::Vector3(T _x, T _y, T _z) : x(_x), y(_y), z(_z) {}
Vector3 cros
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106795
Bug ID: 106795
Summary: [13 regression] g++.dg/tree-ssa/empty-loop.C fails
with excess errors after r13-2303-gb911ca4231a366
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106782
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Tamar, any thoughts on that?
Apologies, didn't notice that earlier.
That should be "Target does not support vector type for %G\n"
with STMT_VINFO_STMT (SLP_T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106763
--- Comment #8 from Richard Earnshaw ---
I spoke to our kernel experts about this and they think my hypothesis is quite
likely to be correct. They also noted that kernel version 4.9.118 is about 200
releases out of date on the 4.9 LTS series.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106794
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106782
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106794
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Git hash range seems to be 4fbe3e6aa74dae5c..3de9fb3235998a05, a distance of 28
commits.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106782
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106794
Bug ID: 106794
Summary: ice in vect_transform_slp_perm_load_1
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106786
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-08-31
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106786
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
--- Comment #1 from A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106793
Bug ID: 106793
Summary: std::barrier missing default template argument?
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106792
Bug ID: 106792
Summary: range-op-float.cc:240:1: warning: unused function
'default_frelop_fold_range'
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Well, __builtin_nan ("") == xxx is always false even with
-fno-finite-math-only,
including NaN == NaN, that is how floating point equality comparisons are
defined.
But, e.g. with -ffinite-math-only, we fold
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106780
--- Comment #3 from Vincent ---
Yes it seems safe to consider it a dupe.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102631
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
We run into
MAX_CHAIN_LEN exceeded: 6
and when I up that also into
cycle detected
and then
param_uninit_control_dep_attempts exceeded: 1001
so we get a pruned predicate for the DEF.
The testcase is t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106784
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106155
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=93432
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Keywords|ea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106784
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106781
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
GCC discovers that 'bar' is noreturn, tries to remove its LHS but unfortunately
cgraph.cc:cgraph_edge::redirect_call_stmt_to_callee wants to emit an assignment
of SSA default-def to the LHS. fixup_noretu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106627
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
I think the patch is correct, please send it to gcc-patches mailing list.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 90994, which changed state.
Bug 90994 Summary: Bogus Wmaybe-uninitialized with fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90994
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90994
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
And how about __builtin_nan ("") == xxx ??
Is that undefined for !HONOR_NANS? Can I continue treating it as false?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90994
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:88f29a8aa82f2788baf2f9865940d4c83012c580
commit r13-2310-g88f29a8aa82f2788baf2f9865940d4c83012c580
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106791
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106791
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is not a valid testcase for a GCC bug report. As requested when creating
the bug, please read https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs and provide the missing info next
time.
The example can be reduced to:
namespac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106791
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> If !MODE_HAS_NANS, then NANs can't appear ever, that is the VAX case.
> Some floating point formats simply have no representation for those.
> If MODE_HAS_NANS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106791
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] Operator|[12/13 Regression] Operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106791
Bug ID: 106791
Summary: [12 Regression] Operator Lookup with using namespace
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106788
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jason Liam from comment #0)
> The following valid program is rejected by gcc 9.3 but accepted by gcc 9.4
> and onwards. Demo link: https://godbolt.org/z/KT3GWP677
The oldest supported release
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106790
Bug ID: 106790
Summary: Weird SIGSEV using polymorphic routine with "select
type" and optimization (-O3)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If !MODE_HAS_NANS, then NANs can't appear ever, that is the VAX case.
Some floating point formats simply have no representation for those.
If MODE_HAS_NANS && !HONOR_NANS, it is user promising NaNs won't app
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106789
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106789
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:217ba2ce7841a68482cb428b9bc093b0842faf3d
commit r13-2308-g217ba2ce7841a68482cb428b9bc093b0842faf3d
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106789
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106789
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63707
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jlame646 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #25
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106788
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106789
Bug ID: 106789
Summary: gcc/range-op-float.cc:240:1: warning: unused function
'default_frelop_fold_range' [-Wunused-function]
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106781
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106782
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106783
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106787
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106788
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106788
Bug ID: 106788
Summary: GCC rejects valid program involving initialization of
array in member initializer list
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90994
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106327
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106787
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-08-31
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106787
Bug ID: 106787
Summary: ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at
tree-vect-slp.cc:8648
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 53523
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53523&action=edit
untested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-08-31
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #0)
> Fails for the following cross compilers:
> pdp11-aout rx-elf vax-linux-gnu vax-netbsdelf
>
> $ ./xgcc -v
> Using built-in specs.
> COLLECT_GCC=./xgcc
> Targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106786
Bug ID: 106786
Summary: Regression in cmp+sbb
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73550
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-03-31 00:00:00 |2022-8-31
--- Comment #13 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78394
Bug 78394 depends on bug 65244, which changed state.
Bug 65244 Summary: Bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with posix_memalign()
and -Og
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65244
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 65244, which changed state.
Bug 65244 Summary: Bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with posix_memalign()
and -Og
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65244
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82738
Bug 82738 depends on bug 65244, which changed state.
Bug 65244 Summary: Bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with posix_memalign()
and -Og
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65244
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65244
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73550
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cf736575286f841f6144bd58b981c269652b82e
commit r13-2304-g0cf736575286f841f6144bd58b981c269652b82e
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65244
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:40f347881ade08fe9c0f8b527f8b54bd53aed195
commit r13-2305-g40f347881ade08fe9c0f8b527f8b54bd53aed195
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106785
Bug ID: 106785
Summary: ICE in fail, at selftest.cc:47 since
r13-2266-g8bb1df032cc080
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106750
--- Comment #3 from federico ---
Thank you for checking this.
So if I make the temporary array explicit, the leak goes away.
In the case of the example i.e. 1) fixed-size and 2) very few elements are
passed to the routine, it seems it would j
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106784
Bug ID: 106784
Summary: Add __is_convertible built-in
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106780
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Dup of PR 105562?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106774
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106778
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 106778, which changed state.
Bug 106778 Summary: libcpp/makeuname2c.cc:454: sanity check in wrong place ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106778
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91213
--- Comment #9 from rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The regressions are unrelated and due to another patch that I still had on the
same branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91213
--- Comment #8 from rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hacked something together, inspired by the other cases that try two different
sequences. Does this go into the right direction? Works for me on s390. I see
some regressions related to predictive c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65244
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
OK, so the "optimization" is needed on the DEF side as
extern void __attribute__((noreturn)) abort (void);
int foo (int flag, int val)
{
int tem;
if (flag)
{
if (val == 0)
abort ();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106783
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever conf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106781
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> > Also ICEs in ipa-modref when 'noclone' added to 'noinline', a 12/13
> > regression (different cause, needs a separate PR).
>
> Can't reproduce Alexander, p
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
