https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117280
Bug ID: 117280
Summary: Accessing a reference member of a volatile-qualified
class glvalue is misinterpreted as volatile read
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117278
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 regression]|[12/13/14/15 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55791
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117279
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59427
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59427&action=edit
reduced testcase
The problem is once we assign p.ptr to p.local_buf, GCC thinks the whole of p
escapes except
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117226
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8df549fc2c0297970cb3bcadba7929088af96522
commit r15-4587-g8df549fc2c0297970cb3bcadba7929088af96522
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Wed Oc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117278
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.5
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117279
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116488
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8df549fc2c0297970cb3bcadba7929088af96522
commit r15-4587-g8df549fc2c0297970cb3bcadba7929088af96522
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Wed O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117279
Bug ID: 117279
Summary: std::string bounds check from -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
not optimised out
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117278
Bug ID: 117278
Summary: [12/13/14/15 regression] Code at -Os is larger on
trunk than GCC 11.4.0
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117277
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
+FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/store_lane_spill_1.c scan-assembler-not
tstrtz[0-9]
Is most likely the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117277
Bug ID: 117277
Summary: [15 Regression]
gcc.target/aarch64/store_lane_spill_1.c fails
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimizat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117277
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117092
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||113857
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117201
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59425|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117240
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117240
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ab84a8a4b78990942e006e9f060dc2705f2c6d8f
commit r12-10784-gab84a8a4b78990942e006e9f060dc2705f2c6d8f
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117201
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #10)
> Created attachment 59425 [details]
> test_qrencode.c
$ gcc-15 -flto -o test_qrencode test_qrencode.c && ./test_qrencode
Aborted(core dumped) ./tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117201
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59424|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117201
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59385|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117180
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 59423
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59423&action=edit
reduced.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117260
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117260
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:36e3e68250bf54909218298d1141138579803631
commit r15-4583-g36e3e68250bf54909218298d1141138579803631
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117272
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404
Bug 94404 depends on bug 117272, which changed state.
Bug 117272 Summary: CWG2518 static_assert(false) when returning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117272
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117272
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2023/p2593r1.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117180
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 59422
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59422&action=edit
reduced.i
First cut, will run it more.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117269
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-10-23
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117179
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
I think your patch here isn't really getting it wrong, it's just that the
structure of the if() across multiple lines doesn't make it obvious?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117179
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59420|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116613
--- Comment #26 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #18)
> (In reply to Kamil Dudka from comment #16)
> > (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #15)
> > > (In reply to Kamil Dudka from comment #14)
>
> [...snip...]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117179
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 59420
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59420&action=edit
reduced.i
Reduced it a bit, it could be cleaned up more but I think it should be good
enough.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117222
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amacleod at redhat dot
com
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117264
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||13.3.0
--- Comment #9 from a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116556
Siddhesh Poyarekar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117222
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:774ad67fba458dd1beaa0f2d3e389aac46ca18b5
commit r15-4578-g774ad67fba458dd1beaa0f2d3e389aac46ca18b5
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117275
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Should be fixed on trunk for gcc 15 by the above patch.
Keeping open to track backporting to the active release branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117179
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117180
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115274
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117275
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:779c0390e3b57d1eebd41bbfe43d1f329c91de6c
commit r15-4580-g779c0390e3b57d1eebd41bbfe43d1f329c91de6c
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117190
--- Comment #18 from Frank Scheiner ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #17)
> It's not really actionable without some self-contained testcase like that,
> unless Jakub has some other idea.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't urge anybody to do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117190
--- Comment #17 from Sam James ---
It's not really actionable without some self-contained testcase like that,
unless Jakub has some other idea.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117190
--- Comment #16 from Frank Scheiner ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #15)
> I meant identify a single file which takes longer, possibly by using
> -time=/tmp/kernel to record how long each file takes on a good+bad build,
> then diffing th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114064
Bug 114064 depends on bug 113860, which changed state.
Bug 113860 Summary: SVE popcount can be used for 16bit, 32bit and 64bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113860
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113860
Pengxuan Zheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pzheng at gcc dot gnu.org
Reso
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117276
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Ev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117190
--- Comment #14 from Frank Scheiner ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #13)
> I would file a new bug with preprocessed sources if you can identify a
> testcase which is slower.
Preprocessed sources for a whole kernel build?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117271
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Global Exported: _40 = [irange] int [-2, 2]
Global Exported: _71 = [irange] int [0, 1] MASK 0x1 VALUE 0x0
Global Exported: iftmp.0_53 = [irange] int [2, 3] MASK 0x1 VALUE 0x2
Global Exported: n_52 = [irange]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113860
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pengxuan Zheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ffcf1f193b477f417a4c1960cd32696a23b99b4
commit r15-4579-g9ffcf1f193b477f417a4c1960cd32696a23b99b4
Author: Pengxuan Zheng
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117190
--- Comment #15 from Sam James ---
I meant identify a single file which takes longer, possibly by using
-time=/tmp/kernel to record how long each file takes on a good+bad build, then
diffing the two.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117276
--- Comment #1 from Oliver Schönrock ---
Created attachment 59419
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59419&action=edit
patch which solves the problem
this patch applies cleanly to libstdc++ 13.2 and 14.2 and also to head I
bel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117276
Oliver Schönrock changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://github.com/oneapi-s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117251
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Is it possible to define a fused and/xor+xor alternative that's split after
> RA, slightly pessimized to prefer the altivec alternative, to allow the XXL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117276
Bug ID: 117276
Summary: std::sort(par_unseq ,...) leaks memory when called
repeatedly
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117249
--- Comment #12 from Alexander Monakov ---
On IRC Jakub mentioned gcc_assert (token() == TYPEDEF) in gengtype and Richi
further noted
tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.cc:gcc_assert (use->op_p = gimple_call_arg_ptr (call, 0));
cgraph.cc: gcc_assert (++edge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115274
--- Comment #13 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
>when adding -fno-tree-sink, the warning disappeared.
Before tree-sinking optimization, the IR is: (c.151t.pre)
[local count: 1073741824]:
c.0_1 = c;
_2 = c.0_1 + 1;
_5 = strlen (_2);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117275
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117273
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117275
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
The particular assertion was added in r14-5930-gf31a019d1161ec aka
f31a019d1161ec78846473da743aedf49cca8c27, so the test failures presumably
affect gcc 14 and trunk. There may be other dormant issues on old
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117275
Bug ID: 117275
Summary: test-functions.c.exe and test-tls.c.exe FAIL on
ppc64le with an assertion failure
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117190
--- Comment #13 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Frank Scheiner from comment #11)
I would file a new bug with preprocessed sources if you can identify a testcase
which is slower.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117274
Bug ID: 117274
Summary: New test case g++.dg/cpp2a/decomp10.C from
r14-10826-g7de78f7353f125 fails
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117273
Bug ID: 117273
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault at
extend_ref_init_temps(tree_node*, tree_node*,
vec**, tree_node**)
Product: gcc
Version: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105916
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116613
Bug 116613 depends on bug 105916, which changed state.
Bug 105916 Summary: gfortran -fdiagnostics-format=json/sarif* output contains
buffered errors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105916
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117179
--- Comment #4 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looks like that my RFC patch currently has bugs that cannot locate the event
accurately.
need more study here to see how to locate the conditional event accurately.
I need to reduce this test ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117180
--- Comment #3 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looks like that my RFC patch currently has bugs that cannot locate the event
accurately.
need more study here to see how to locate the conditional event accurately.
I need to reduce this test ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105916
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f565063a0602ad3b48ac687f575dea7a90cd4105
commit r15-4575-gf565063a0602ad3b48ac687f575dea7a90cd4105
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117222
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod ---
pointer_diff depends on range_operator::fold_range to do the generic fold,
which invokes wi_fold on subranges. It also in turn invokes
op1_op2_relation_effect.
This worked fine when pointers were implemen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112980
--- Comment #20 from Giuliano Belinassi
---
Any updates on this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116588
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Andrew, do you plan to backport this?
Wasn't planning to. Although the fast VRP pass exists in GCC 14, there is no
way to call it or test it. There were also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116733
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c5fa2108ce0f3030cb28f47a18bc974c4224b66d
commit r15-4573-gc5fa2108ce0f3030cb28f47a18bc974c4224b66d
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93607
Fedor Chelnokov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fchelnokov at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117145
Martin Uecker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||muecker at gwdg dot de
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117272
Bug ID: 117272
Summary: CWG2518 static_assert(false) when returning
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117030
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117240
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2452387468423882c0732e0fad3a83e887574ccc
commit r13-9145-g2452387468423882c0732e0fad3a83e887574ccc
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117240
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b718f6ec1674c0db30f26c65b7a9215e9388dd6c
commit r14-10831-gb718f6ec1674c0db30f26c65b7a9215e9388dd6c
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117240
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:403e361d5aa620e77c9832578b2409a0fdd79d96
commit r15-4566-g403e361d5aa620e77c9832578b2409a0fdd79d96
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Oct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117145
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316
Bug 85316 depends on bug 114678, which changed state.
Bug 114678 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/range-sincos.c scan-tree-dump-not
evrp "link_error" on s390
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117209
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117267
--- Comment #17 from Stas Sergeev ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> A warning
> would be OK.
Sure!
Add an UB warning and rephrase the initial
error.
Replace this error:
'setjmp' can never be copied because it receives a non-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117267
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
If the program never executes the code with UB, then the program is correct,
and refusing to compile it with an error would be non-conforming. A warning
would be OK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70498
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This was fixed for 4.9.4, 5.4.0, 6.2.0 and later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70481
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
For the record, this was fixed for 4.9.4, 5.4.0, 6.1.0 and later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117271
--- Comment #1 from Davide Italiano ---
https://godbolt.org/z/eExfPsjzs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117271
Bug ID: 117271
Summary: [13/14/15 regression] GCC trunk emits larger code at
-Os than 12.4.0
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117142
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:29d8f1f0b7ad3c69b3bdb130325300d5f73aa784
commit r15-4564-g29d8f1f0b7ad3c69b3bdb130325300d5f73aa784
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116588
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Andrew, do you plan to backport this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115860
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117267
--- Comment #15 from Stas Sergeev ---
So in this case is this really good
to disallow the always_inline attribute?
- It just throws the meaningless error.
Its meaningless because clang has no
such problem, so stating "can never be copied"
is pl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117249
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 59416
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59416&action=edit
gcc15-pr117249-2.patch
Untested patch to change the gcc_assert definition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117265
--- Comment #6 from H. Peter Anvin ---
No idea what you mean with #asmoptions.
Using hacks in the Makefile is equivalent to having to do dependencies by hand
(keep in mind that these statements will generally be part of header files.) In
other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117267
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117249
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
--- Comment #69 from Julian Waters ---
I apologize for vanishing suddenly and not giving progress reports, I am
currently busy with some JDK work. The only thing left missing is the configure
check. I will return to finishing TLS support once and
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
