https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116792
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a2c62212bd912f5c8130e992ce282b542599f98
commit r16-487-g1a2c62212bd912f5c8130e992ce282b542599f98
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117635
pietro changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pietro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120182
--- Comment #5 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Created attachment 61376
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61376&action=edit
gimple before store-merging
Simplified gimple before the store-merging pass. If you want it to be optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97786
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(Erm,tdc *is* 3.0, but setbc is 3.1, I can never ever get this right it seems!
But
setb is 3.0).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97786
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Surya Kumari Jangala from comment #7)
> Hi Segher,
>
> Thanks for the pointers!
> We can optimize the code further and remove the branch completely.
>
> For P10:
>
> xststdcdp 0,1,48
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120182
--- Comment #4 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
By comparing S2 = 256 and S2 = 255, the brokenness and the major difference is
first outputted by the store-merging pass.
[local count: 39764240]:
MEM[(struct S *)2654208B].next = 256B;
MEM[(ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113939
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #7)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #6)
> > I suggest we switch m68k to LRA, so we can close this bug report. Plus file
> > bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120183
Bug ID: 120183
Summary: Incomplete type error in module import
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120179
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6ce73ad4370c143a7d1e6a13b1d353db5884213f
commit r16-480-g6ce73ad4370c143a7d1e6a13b1d353db5884213f
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120179
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.2
Assignee|unas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #9 from camm at debian dot org ---
Let me double check that everything is properly linked. Thanks for suggesting
binutils.
If I don't see any obvious linker failure I'll try to isolate a small
reproducer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120182
--- Comment #3 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
MEM [(void *)2654208B] = 256;
MEM[(char *)2654209B] = 0;
MEM[(char *)2654210B] = 0;
MEM[(char *)2654211B] = 0;
MEM[(char *)2654212B] = 0;
MEM[(char *)2654213B] = 0;
MEM[(char *)2654214B]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120179
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99599
--- Comment #29 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abab79397ef97acf7c689c43e27d58d8d7d5c599
commit r16-479-gabab79397ef97acf7c689c43e27d58d8d7d5c599
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119692
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(I've not yet been able to work on this.)
I've observed (but not any further analyzed) that, if running for GCN
'-march=gfx90a' with 'HSA_XNACK=1', the applicable execution test cases,
instead of running
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
This also could be a binutils issue ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118260
--- Comment #13 from Simon Marchi ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> I think it would be better to silence it. Do you know how to do that?
Since this is execute using gdb.execute in Python, you can probably pass
to_string=True
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118260
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> I think it would be better to silence it. Do you know how to do that?
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15814#c3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120051
--- Comment #8 from Christoph Reiter ---
Crasher with the latest patch:
// gcc -O1 -gcodeview -c test.c
void a(float *);
enum { b } c(long d) {
float e[d];
a(e);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #8 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> This also could be a binutils issue ...
OK, good to know.
I am happy to help tracking this down if Camm provides a simple reproducer to
me which tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120176
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-08
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118260
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think it would be better to silence it. Do you know how to do that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> >The gcc used is the standard 14.2.0 currently in Debian unstable.
>
> That still didn't answer the question because there are a few different
> alp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
>The gcc used is the standard 14.2.0 currently in Debian unstable.
That still didn't answer the question because there are a few different alpha
cpus. ones with byte loads and ones without. Plus Debian turn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to camm from comment #2)
> The gcc used is the standard 14.2.0 currently in Debian unstable. The gcc
> command line flags are displayed in the qemu file. Adding -fno-jump-tables
> res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
-c -g -Werror=implicit-function-declaration
-ffile-prefix-map=/mnt/sda4/debian/gclmc/gcl=. -Wformat -Werror=format-security
-fsigned-char -pipe -fcommon -fno-builtin-malloc -fno-builtin-free -fno-PIE
-fno-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
--- Comment #2 from camm at debian dot org ---
The gcc used is the standard 14.2.0 currently in Debian unstable. The gcc
command line flags are displayed in the qemu file. Adding -fno-jump-tables
results in a successful compile.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120170
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120168
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120168
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d8dac49707e71844b4d1c21348d92addb19a0969
commit r16-477-gd8dac49707e71844b4d1c21348d92addb19a0969
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107308
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61374
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61374&action=edit
Verifier in testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120182
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcccs at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120182
--- Comment #2 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Unsurprisingly the following also fails, but if you change always_inline to
noipa it works
__attribute__((always_inline)) inline char * x() {
return (char *)0x288000ull;
}
int main (void) {
int s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120179
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61373
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61373&action=edit
Patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120179
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119954
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
--- Comment #4 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120182
Bug ID: 120182
Summary: Incorrect code with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156
--- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Brrr due to aggressive reduction t.ii became kind of invalid/incomplete which
means the reduced test case errors out early for release branches 12 and 13.
However, running the original tests
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120160
m.cencora at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m.cencora at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156
--- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Created attachment 61371
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61371&action=edit
reduced test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120165
--- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 61372
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61372&action=edit
Preprocessed source for ICE reported in PR-120165
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120168
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-May/683008.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118260
Simon Marchi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon.marchi at polymtl dot ca
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156
--- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Sorry for taking so long. I accidentally switched to a checking=release build.
With checking=yes it is reproducible and I get a proper ICE. Now, even
earlier tests fail. With the appended
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120180
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcccs at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
Bug ID: 120181
Summary: Bug in alpha jump tables
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120181
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117818
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
We still support powerpc64-* just fine. And powerpc-linux (the 32-bit target)
is
tested just fine as well, and the community does support it. No one cares
_too_
much about it anymore, but why let it d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120174
--- Comment #2 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Actually this is most likely an original bug because unlike other bugs that
started with the same commit, this one segfaults without printing any
stacktrace.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117965
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120169
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
The csa pass ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120172
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There might be a dup of this ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120177
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Yes `: "=fr" (result)` is not valid.
It just happens to work because now r is selected as f is always invalid for
the output register constraint.
```
Output operands must specifically indicate which regist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120177
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.5
Keywords|ice-on-valid-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119954
--- Comment #3 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Bisection found r9-3807-g5d9a0e3b99e31a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120169
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #4 from A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120178
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.5
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120169
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab ---
Workaround: -fno-combine-stack-adjustments
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120180
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 61369
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61369&action=edit
C/C++ test case, compile with '-fopenmp'
It is a bit UNCLEAR to me whether the attached TESTCASE is VALID OR N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119741
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120180
Bug ID: 120180
Summary: [OpenMP] C/C
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120179
Bug ID: 120179
Summary: Failure with do concurrent and semicolon
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120086
--- Comment #16 from John David Anglin ---
Your patch works for me:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2025-May/846366.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120177
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120178
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120178
Bug ID: 120178
Summary: ICE in fold_build2_loc during profile_estimate when
casting free to volatile size_t and adding to malloc
pointer in version 13.3
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120174
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcccs at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120177
Bug ID: 120177
Summary: ICE in lra_constraints, "maximum number of generated
reload insns" with inline assembly using x87
instructions (finitq, fldq, fst) — 13.3
Product: g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
--- Comment #6 from Nathaniel Shead ---
Created attachment 61367
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61367&action=edit
clone-4_b.s
This is the testcase I've been using:
$ cat ~/t/modules/clone-4_a.C
// PR c++/120125
// { dg-ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120176
Bug ID: 120176
Summary: Missed reduction chain vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120169
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab ---
Inconsistent CFI state!
SHOULD have:
.cfi_def_cfa 15, 16
.cfi_offset 2, -16
.cfi_offset 10, -12
.cfi_offset 11, -8
.cfi_offset 24, -4
DO have:
.cfi_def_cfa 15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108900
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8cbe033a8a88fe6437cc5d343ae0ddf8dd3455c8
commit r14-11749-g8cbe033a8a88fe6437cc5d343ae0ddf8dd3455c8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119610
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a9d390ab17d9395ce20e899ef0180052ed79d332
commit r14-11751-ga9d390ab17d9395ce20e899ef0180052ed79d332
Author: Richard Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120086
--- Comment #15 from Jørgen Kvalsvik ---
I don't know why it's only defined for rtems, but I would imagine it's either
an oversight, or that it's the only target with libatomic support without
hardware atomics. Is there a libatomic for hppa, or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120043
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93586e5d51188bf71f4f8fae4ee94ff631740f24
commit r16-472-g93586e5d51188bf71f4f8fae4ee94ff631740f24
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118388
--- Comment #4 from Simon Martin ---
We ended up doing a different fix for #118319 and the case I mentionned in the
initial comment does not ICE, but the underlying problem still exists.
I ran the c++ testsuite with the use of -fpermissive for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120175
newbie-02 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120043
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||15.1.0
Summary|[15/16 Regre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116352
--- Comment #22 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1e8bd720b1a618a39e2a41eec05e935c32d295f3
commit r16-473-g1e8bd720b1a618a39e2a41eec05e935c32d295f3
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:351ac78e48fa897080cf8bbb71618df9c428ad30
commit r13-9643-g351ac78e48fa897080cf8bbb71618df9c428ad30
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120175
Bug ID: 120175
Summary: Performance: compiling a program with using a library
slows other code.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The WIP patch looks reasonable to me.
On which testcase you see something weird? On the #c1 I don't see anything
wrong.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120174
Bug ID: 120174
Summary: ICE (Segfault) in GCC when passing array of class to
generic lambda taking decltype of lambda with
-std=c++20
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120173
Bug ID: 120173
Summary: [OpenACC][gcn-offload] wrong 'firstprivate' with 'acc
parallel async' [modified
libgomp.oacc-fortran/lib-13.f90]
Product: gcc
Version: 16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119327
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] -Os |[12/13 Regression] -Os
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97786
--- Comment #7 from Surya Kumari Jangala ---
Hi Segher,
Thanks for the pointers!
We can optimize the code further and remove the branch completely.
For P10:
xststdcdp 0,1,48
setnbc 9,32
setbc 3,34
isel 3,9,3,2
blr
Fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119327
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cdf689a1f12e887c22c9989e6728ffac981f71ce
commit r14-11750-gcdf689a1f12e887c22c9989e6728ffac981f71ce
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120172
Bug ID: 120172
Summary: Preprocessor error leads to cascading failures in
standard header instantiations
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120164
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 8 May 2025, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120164
>
> --- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> Richi, do you plan to backport this to gcc-13 and maybe gcc-12? Or should we
> close it?
I have been patching our gcc13 for this for quite some time so let m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120170
Bug 120170 depends on bug 112351, which changed state.
Bug 112351 Summary: libstdc++ locale init doesn't handle __gthread_once failure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120148
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
-> https://sourceforge.net/p/valgrind/mailman/message/59181622/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52389
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||120170
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119012
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
See Als
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Richi, do you plan to backport this to gcc-13 and maybe gcc-12? Or should we
close it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120061
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117965
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Andrew, are you still planning to address this? Otherwise I'll give it a stab.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116047
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8cbe033a8a88fe6437cc5d343ae0ddf8dd3455c8
commit r14-11749-g8cbe033a8a88fe6437cc5d343ae0ddf8dd3455c8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
