https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109539
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109539
Bug ID: 109539
Summary: [13/14 Regression] Compile-time hog in
gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc since
r13-6706-gadb70c2d1060b3
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109504
--- Comment #7 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> > Yeah. Enable all the time and have say the
> > targetm.invalid_conversion, targetm.invalid_unary_op,
> > targetm.inv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109534
--- Comment #7 from Boris Kolpackov ---
BTW, my understanding of the rationale for the original patch (the one that
forces -fno-directives-only) is to paper over some underlying issue with
-fdirectives-only when used on .S files, potentially the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109534
--- Comment #6 from Boris Kolpackov ---
> The documentation says specifically-fdirectives-only is ignored if
> -fpreprocessed is supplied.
Hm, that's not how it works, IME. Specifically, just "-fpreprocessed" means the
source code is fully pre
The attached code says "int a = 100;", but it should normally be
initialized with an "undefined value", but in the case of gcc-10, it is
initialized with "0". Isn't this a bug in gcc-10?
#include
int main(void)
{
int n;
for (n = 1;n <= 5;n++) {
switch (n)
{ int a = 100;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
--- Comment #16 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15)
> (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #14)
> > Even though GCC decides to add a newline to the logical file, so that the
> > missing diagnostic can be regar
What is next step here? How do I post this in Bugzilla and get support.
Regards
Puneet
From: Jonathan Wakely
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 1:06 PM
To: Puneet Kumar Yatnal (QUIC)
Cc: Andrew Pinski ; gcc-help ;
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Y2038: GCC gthr-posix.h weakref symbol invoking func
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109442
--- Comment #16 from Richard Smith
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15)
> I was specifically looking at C++20 7.6.2.7/10 to /14 (but maybe also
> others and of course the relevant parts of the delete expression). In
> particular t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
--- Comment #9 from JuzheZhong ---
Confirm it is VSETVL pass bug in RISC-V port backend.
Fix patch here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-April/615882.html
Hopefully, it will be merged soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105267
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102146
--- Comment #23 from Kewen Lin ---
*** Bug 105267 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108165
Sam Varshavchik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mr...@courier-mta.com
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109538
Sam Varshavchik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108589
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Philipp Tomsich
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:28fc1297adde1be51f25a13e110d38dd9e804320
commit r10-11299-g28fc1297adde1be51f25a13e110d38dd9e804320
Author: Philipp Toms
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108589
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Philipp Tomsich
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b54061569221e678e99e9e49dc0ac79228d9c407
commit r11-10634-gb54061569221e678e99e9e49dc0ac79228d9c407
Author: Philipp Toms
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108589
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Philipp Tomsich
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f7ca8a3f50b0c34183a92a1b6c15ff5aacbf449
commit r12-9418-g0f7ca8a3f50b0c34183a92a1b6c15ff5aacbf449
Author: Philipp Tomsi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109538
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect this will be closed as a dup of bug 108165 really. Because the
warning is doing it is expected of it and it is hard to figure out without the
full code available at the time (which the warning does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109538
Bug ID: 109538
Summary: Spurious -Werror=dangling-reference false positive
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100131
Bug 100131 depends on bug 109531, which changed state.
Bug 109531 Summary: [13/14 Regression] Checking ICE with hash table checking
failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values with a different hash
value since r13-3292-gc2565a31c1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c895eb11c8c95aa5714fa4043194b1001336567e
commit r13-7208-gc895eb11c8c95aa5714fa4043194b1001336567e
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2245459c85a3f4cde3d33bf3e4edaff08f3b2404
commit r14-11-g2245459c85a3f4cde3d33bf3e4edaff08f3b2404
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #43 from Luke ---
@Richard Biener
Polite ping. Are you still working on this regression?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109536
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
r12-5187-g1ae8edf5f73ca5c3 even.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109536
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109500
--- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Leandro Lupori from comment #10)
> Wouldn't it be better to turn this into a warning?
>
> Although using the result of a function as an allocatable argument doesn't
> conform with F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106999
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #3)
> "\.data" is the same as ".data", you want either "\\.data" or {\.data}. But
> it still doesn't lower the probability to match a filename by much.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106602
--- Comment #28 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Palmer Dabbelt :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c010f6fe5ebe80d2e054b31e04ae0e9f12ae368
commit r14-5-g8c010f6fe5ebe80d2e054b31e04ae0e9f12ae368
Author: Palmer Dabbelt
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107041
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think this is less important as it normally should trigger only with -Wall
-Wsystem-headers.
Anyway, one fix could be e.g.
--- gcc/omp-builtins.def.jj 2023-04-17 19:11:55.065865863 +0200
+++ gcc/omp-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109506
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109537
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105545
--- Comment #10 from John Buddery ---
I can confirm this works on the gcc-13 branch, for both c++17 and c++20 - feel
free to close this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #14)
> Even though GCC decides to add a newline to the logical file, so that the
> missing diagnostic can be regarded as correct, I think that an optional
> warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106293
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
My understanding of comment #2 and #3 is that we end up with what are very
likely bogus BB counts that we should check and perhaps attempt to fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107041
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If this is really just because it is a builtin, I think another possibility
would be
make it BT_FN_INT_VAR instead of BT_FN_INT_INT and verify it has just one
argument which
is either int or the particularly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102027
--- Comment #10 from Ben Woodard ---
Currently Libabigail is not able to detect this kind of ABI break. We would be
able to detect this if https://dwarfstd.org/issues/221105.1.html were
implemented. As mentioned in the DWARF issue, this would al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|13.0|13.2
--- Comment #38 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
--- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Can you quote a dump of the new insn pattern? Or just:
dump(change);
in function_info::finalize_new_accesses should do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106293
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106227
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
--- Comment #7 from JuzheZhong ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #2)
> The assert in question fires if the pass creates an instruction
> whose pattern uses a register or memory and if the pass doesn't
> provide associated use in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-04-17
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109534
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Boris Kolpackov from comment #4)
> Thanks for the link to the patch submission though I find the
> "-fdirectives-only option is incompatible with assembly" statement puzzling.
>
> > So from wha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105440
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107769
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] -flto |[12 Regression] -flto with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109318
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12 Regression] csmith:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
Li Pan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pan2.li at intel dot com
--- Comment #6 from L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108910
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108910
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66700dde0dfb2c2b07d771f90df1fe16d1d61ce9
commit r12-9416-g66700dde0dfb2c2b07d771f90df1fe16d1d61ce9
Author: Richard Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109537
--- Comment #1 from Li Jia He ---
Update gcc's assembly as gcc did not turn on auto vectorization during O2,
The compilation command for gcc is 'cc1 unroll.c -O3 -funroll-loops',
The compilation command for clang is 'clang unroll.c -O3 -S'
'''
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109104
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109537
Bug ID: 109537
Summary: Improve code generation for dynamic loop unrolling
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104515
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Confirmed. The issue is that store motion of v_7(D)->end cannot be
> performed on
>
>[local count: 955630225]:
> # i_13 = PHI
> _1 = v_7(D)->end;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106594
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka ---
I suppose we're just neglecting to canonicalize a bound ttp's substituted args
before determining its canonical type. Adding a call to coerce_template_parms
or canonicalize_type_argument seems to fix it:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109536
Bug ID: 109536
Summary: Failure to compile constexpr std::vector with
-D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109500
--- Comment #10 from Leandro Lupori ---
Wouldn't it be better to turn this into a warning?
Although using the result of a function as an allocatable argument doesn't
conform with Fortran standards, it has been supported by gfortran for quite
so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106594
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This is just missed optimization and likely to be resolved only for GCC 14 and
perhaps later backported. Downgrading to P2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
--- Comment #14 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> GCC removed the pedwarning on purpose (between GCC 4.1 and 4.4), see PR
> 14331 and PR 68994.
No, PR 14331 was just asking to remove the warning by default,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109154
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
--- Comment #53 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107769
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e08c7886eed5824bebd0e011526ec302d622844
commit r13-7206-g8e08c7886eed5824bebd0e011526ec302d622844
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109318
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e08c7886eed5824bebd0e011526ec302d622844
commit r13-7206-g8e08c7886eed5824bebd0e011526ec302d622844
Author: Martin Jambor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109520
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68994
Vincent Lefèvre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Better don't reuse U for two different parameters:
template
using A = int *;
template class U>
struct B { typedef U type; };
struct C { typedef int *type; };
template
struct D {
D foo () { return D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109137
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
--- Comment #27 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106740
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Note this is P1 on the GCC 11 branch only.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 109434, which changed state.
Bug 109434 Summary: [12 Regression] std::optional weird -Wmaybe-uninitialized
and behaviour with -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109434
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109491
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104450
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.3.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105484
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:caf0a30b17a639ee19ff4c138d3be0325d0be745
commit r11-10632-gcaf0a30b17a639ee19ff4c138d3be0325d0be745
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105484
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104464
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cfd4a86221bc647eaa1c418eb777499250804df6
commit r11-10631-gcfd4a86221bc647eaa1c418eb777499250804df6
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109434
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3d2210dafd872e8470e2a6ae5eea74d2669bc055
commit r12-9415-g3d2210dafd872e8470e2a6ae5eea74d2669bc055
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104450
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9dcc5d68cd935c9ff0ef023fe8b3bd7ab67d0687
commit r11-10630-g9dcc5d68cd935c9ff0ef023fe8b3bd7ab67d0687
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109491
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bb400f9916beab1a650d59c73672ef48aaf71b11
commit r11-10629-gbb400f9916beab1a650d59c73672ef48aaf71b11
Author: Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
--- Comment #5 from Kito Cheng ---
Confirmed the the output is text file, it's just suffixed with .out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Slightly cleaned up:
template
using A = int *;
template class U>
struct B { typedef U type; };
struct C { typedef int *type; };
template
struct D {
D foo () { return D (); }
template class U>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
--- Comment #4 from JuzheZhong ---
(In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #1)
> Created attachment 54874 [details]
> preprocessed source
>
> % gcc-13 --version
> gcc-13 (Debian 13-20230411-1) 13.0.1 20230411 (experimental) [master
> r13-71
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109502
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.3|11.4
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109531
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109535
--- Comment #3 from JuzheZhong ---
Thanks for reporting it. We will take a look at it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109469
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105676
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109219
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109473
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:053668dbf11bb61c63fa7db5b3bccd0fdac9e726
commit r12-9412-g053668dbf11bb61c63fa7db5b3bccd0fdac9e726
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109469
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9cc16b95d5d63b18cbc0aa780ffb6b460c791351
commit r12-9411-g9cc16b95d5d63b18cbc0aa780ffb6b460c791351
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109502
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:08605396d164c57eb3c80051001b86b96da0405c
commit r12-9414-g08605396d164c57eb3c80051001b86b96da0405c
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109263
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:42b3d387f7335a4bc8846e3b7a2a78fb47be68b2
commit r12-9410-g42b3d387f7335a4bc8846e3b7a2a78fb47be68b2
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109491
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba02c6706cc502ee64b9c5d32b08409c44fe967d
commit r12-9413-gba02c6706cc502ee64b9c5d32b08409c44fe967d
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109219
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2ab46f377313da5336748eb4fdc20020c047445
commit r12-9409-gc2ab46f377313da5336748eb4fdc20020c047445
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106124
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:377efe66243a3ec9d44707e3526742aa3d924094
commit r12-9408-g377efe66243a3ec9d44707e3526742aa3d924094
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105676
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:96785885ceed34638d4b58e88cba6e6e8368c0e3
commit r12-9407-g96785885ceed34638d4b58e88cba6e6e8368c0e3
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108807
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108699
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d88e488ec9321e44291fcaf2a3b14333f64aac01
commit r10-11291-gd88e488ec9321e44291fcaf2a3b14333f64aac01
Author: Kewen Lin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108699
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6872f055d7d4fd36b804bdd9b5a8a128b01aacbc
commit r11-10628-g6872f055d7d4fd36b804bdd9b5a8a128b01aacbc
Author: Kewen Lin
Date:
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo