https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120859
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61804
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61804&action=edit
V2 of the patch
ok, so as I originally was going to do before I thought changing EQ_EXPR over
to ORDERED_EXPR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120963
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||3507
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120782
--- Comment #6 from Li Pan ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #5)
> I tried reproducing this with a recent trunk (r16-1965-gc512c9090f52e7) but
> didn't see the exact code sequence. wrf also ran to completion on the Banana
> Pi.
>
> Did y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Created attachment 61800 [details]
> Patch which I am testing
That didn't work because operation_could_trap_helper_p has:
case EQ_EXPR:
case NE_EXPR:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118241
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Vineet Gupta :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f2a3ab7ebf3c40da77f54e8329272fe048ec48a6
commit r16-2032-gf2a3ab7ebf3c40da77f54e8329272fe048ec48a6
Author: Vineet Gupta
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120954
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #0)
> This small code snippet warns with r15-9921 (r15-9866 was still OK):
>
I can't seem to reproduce it at r15-9873, nor r15-9921. Can you double-check
please? (Or, bette
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63370
Henning Meyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hmeyer.eu at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120963
Bug ID: 120963
Summary: Missed optimization of (a > b ? a - b : 0) pattern
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37590
Henning Meyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hmeyer.eu at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120962
--- Comment #2 from Markus ---
I would have tried a newer version if I had had easy access to it. The Alpine
distro does not provide newer packages, yet. What I could try was clang, which
compiled the file without any errors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 61803
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61803&action=edit
A patch
Please try this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120962
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||103524
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120962
Bug ID: 120962
Summary: " XXX references internal linkage entity YYY" when
compiling a module interface
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84009
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=119742
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I've just noticed that the debug mode bitset in needs the new
constructor added.
make check RUNTESTFLAGS="conformance.exp=*bitset*
--target_board=unix/-D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG"
FAIL: 20_util/bitset/cons/string_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120446
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120782
--- Comment #5 from Robin Dapp ---
I tried reproducing this with a recent trunk (r16-1965-gc512c9090f52e7) but
didn't see the exact code sequence. wrf also ran to completion on the Banana
Pi.
Did you use a stock GCC 15.1 or a specific commit?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #5 from kargls at comcast dot net ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #1)
> And indeed the following hack in Fortran FE "fixes" the benchmark (of
> course, this is not meant as a proposed fix, just as a demonstration
> where t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120952
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120960
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Actually both_p being false or true is both ok here.
#undef DEF_GOACC_BUILTIN_COMPILER
#define DEF_GOACC_BUILTIN_COMPILER(ENUM, NAME, TYPE, ATTRS) \
DEF_BUILTIN (ENUM, "__builtin_" NAME, BUILT_IN_NORMAL,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120960
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-07-04
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120961
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61801
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61801&action=edit
testcase compressed using xz
xz is able to compress this below the limit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67268
Henning Meyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hmeyer.eu at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120961
--- Comment #1 from shyeyian ---
The attachment with size 8.7MB (zipped into 1.1MB) exceeds the size limit of
gcc-bugzilla requirements. **attachment** has been uploaded to
[attachment-online](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AnonymousPC/gcc-bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120961
Bug ID: 120961
Summary: ICE on C++20 module when compiling Eigen.
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118891
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[16 Regression] 24-40% |[16 Regression] 24-40%
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> Am 04.07.2025 um 18:18 schrieb jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
> :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
>
> --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
> SRA is "Scalar Replacement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
--- Comment #7 from Filip Kastl ---
>(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #0)
> there was a 40% exec time slowdown (on another machine I measured only 24%)
> of 527.cam4_r SPEC 2017 benchmark when run with -Ofast -march=native -flto
and this s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120960
Bug ID: 120960
Summary: jit: The static initialization of builtin_data uses
flag_openacc and flag_openmp (which have not been set
yet)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61800
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61800&action=edit
Patch which I am testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
SRA is "Scalar Replacement of Aggregates" pass. It is one of our
optimization passes which can split up aggregates into scalar
components and thus allow further optimizations.
To "escape" means that the ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120943
--- Comment #3 from Filip Kastl ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> Please try:
>
> https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/list/?series=48886
Yes, if I apply this patch, the slowdown goes away
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
use_internal_fn has:
```
/* Skip the call if LHS == LHS. If we reach here, EDOM is the only
valid errno value and it is used iff the result is NaN. */
conds.quick_push (gimple_build_co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118681
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120957
--- Comment #1 from Filip Kastl ---
The slowdown is also present on 410.bwaves from 2006 SPEC
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=467.40.0
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=301.40.0
again, both on Zen2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120949
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=120358
--- Comment #27 from Holger Hoffstätte ---
If I add lifetime-extending printfs to QStringTokenizerBase::next() like this:
--- qstringtokenizer.h 2025-07-04 17:56:28.523676630 +0200
+++ qstringtokenizer-printf.h 2025-07-04 17:56:03.998840901
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
kargls at comcast dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargls at comcast dot net
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Better reduced testcase:
> ```
> double f(double r, double i) {
> return__builtin_fmod(r, i);
> }
> ```
```
double f(double r, double i) {
return __builtin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Better reduced testcase:
```
double f(double r, double i) {
return__builtin_fmod(r, i);
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120953
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84009
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120955
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117850
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118948
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118948
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f24015a4c2ca6d6fbbf7090004b3a83081f18f03
commit r16-2026-gf24015a4c2ca6d6fbbf7090004b3a83081f18f03
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120953
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120959
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot
gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120959
Bug ID: 120959
Summary: [16 Regression] 9% slowdown of 549.fotonik3d_r on Zen5
since r16-1645-g309dbcea2cabb3
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
And indeed the following hack in Fortran FE "fixes" the benchmark (of
course, this is not meant as a proposed fix, just as a demonstration
where the problem is):
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-types.cc b/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
Bug ID: 120958
Summary: tree-sra "miscompiles" asynchronous MPI (mpi_irecv) in
Fortran 77 because of wrong fnspec
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120957
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120957
Bug ID: 120957
Summary: [16 Regression] 6-9% slowdown of 503.bwaves_r on
Zen{2,3} since r16-1647-gc06979ff957485
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120575
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:799dfe7c5f638a645d33b47750f797b3fb87329b
commit r15-9927-g799dfe7c5f638a645d33b47750f797b3fb87329b
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120575
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116064
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:799dfe7c5f638a645d33b47750f797b3fb87329b
commit r15-9927-g799dfe7c5f638a645d33b47750f797b3fb87329b
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116064
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:35d6f55f7d6655a8683b45286283d44674fa997e
commit r16-2024-g35d6f55f7d6655a8683b45286283d44674fa997e
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120575
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:35d6f55f7d6655a8683b45286283d44674fa997e
commit r16-2024-g35d6f55f7d6655a8683b45286283d44674fa997e
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120956
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120956
Bug ID: 120956
Summary: [16 Regression] 6% slowdown of 503.bwaves_r since
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120954
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120954
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
15.1: https://godbolt.org/z/3bM5bEY7b
14.3: https://godbolt.org/z/fahjWYEfr
13.4: https://godbolt.org/z/KK3bh5Gz4
12.4: https://godbolt.org/z/fM3c913qh
However, when compiling it as C++, I only see it on trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[16 Regression] 10-40% |[16 Regression] 10-40%
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120955
--- Comment #1 from fiesh at zefix dot tv ---
12de1942a0a is r15-6052-g12de1942a0a673
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120954
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #0)
> This small code snippet warns with r15-9921 (r15-9866 was still OK):
>
r15-9873-g06a26f4d643a5d warns for me.
```
$ git shortlog r15-9866-g8d600e98004b63..r15-9873-g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120954
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #0)
> But this time I'm not very confident about that. Compiling this a C code
> doesn't warn.
It does for me, and it warns before Jakub's change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120955
Bug ID: 120955
Summary: 50 % increase in data segment size on avr-gcc for -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120954
Bug ID: 120954
Summary: [15 Regression] False positive -Warray-bounds=2
warning
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120953
Bug ID: 120953
Summary: Accepts invalid with range for
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120929
--- Comment #21 from Siddhesh Poyarekar ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> so for
>
> _1 = _2;
>
> we merge from _2. For
>
> _1 = *_2;
>
> we _also_ merge from _2. But those are semantically not the same!
Yes, it only "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120944
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120944
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6ed1e2ae1a742d859c2dd74c9e7cebdd3618e8b1
commit r16-2019-g6ed1e2ae1a742d859c2dd74c9e7cebdd3618e8b1
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
--- Comment #3 from A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-07-04
Keywords|needs-bis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119965
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
There is also 3% performance regressions that got lost on transition to ne PR
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=958.387.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119965
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
This is likely ipa-cp heuristics issue which decides to clone now but after all
the benefits are not really visible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120948
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> So you say that we fail to optimize
>
> int foo (unsigned x)
> {
> unsigned tem = 1/x;
> if (x == 0)
> return 5;
> return tem;
> }
>
> because we tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120948
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120948
--- Comment #2 from huyubiao ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> So you say that we fail to optimize
>
> int foo (unsigned x)
> {
> unsigned tem = 1/x;
> if (x == 0)
> return 5;
> return tem;
> }
>
> because we turn 1/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118681
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120952
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
As noted in Bug 118681 comment 8, when we know it's a power of two we can do:
return (bytes + alignment - 1) & ~(alignment - 1);
to get even better codegen.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120952
Bug ID: 120952
Summary: GCC fails to optimize division to shift when divisor
is non-constant power of two
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120916
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
LLVM also gets execution counts wrong, just the different (and less harmful)
way:
test:270773509:9780
1: 9116
2: 51984 for (
4: 51984 iThis Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
.loc0 10 15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #1 from D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120951
Bug ID: 120951
Summary: error: gimple cond condition cannot throw
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120929
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #16)
> (In reply to Siddhesh Poyarekar from comment #12)
> > This is interesting here's the IR dump right after objsz:
> >
> > The key bit is:
> >
> > map2_4 = __built
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120900
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10)
> This makes C similar to C++:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-decl.cc b/gcc/c/c-decl.cc
> index 8bbd6ebc66a..0da6c65fc6a 100644
> --- a/gcc/c/c-decl.cc
> +++ b/gcc/c/c-decl.cc
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120859
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120950
Bug ID: 120950
Summary: Incorrect codegen for ASan when
-mpreferred-stack-boundary < 3
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120867
Bug 120867 depends on bug 104457, which changed state.
Bug 104457 Summary: ipa-cp with autofdo: internal compiler error in
update_specialized_profile, at ipa-cp.c:4422
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104457
What|Remo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104457
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120683
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pheeck at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 120943, which changed state.
Bug 120943 Summary: [16 Regression] 5% slowdown of 527.cam4_r on Zen{4,5} since
r16-1643-gd073bb6cfc219d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120943
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120943
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120949
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120949
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Not sure if missing something but I see a bunch of the changes in that commit
do it right (?) (as mentioned in the commit message), just some don't follow
that pattern.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120949
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 61798
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61798&action=edit
readable.ii.xz
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
