https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121003
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
--- Comment #16 from Filip Kastl ---
Ok, I'll try to extract a smaller testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121000
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #1)
> with gcc -O1 -fdump-tree-all t.c, in a-t.c.112t.objsz1, we see the object
> size is generated as _22:
>
> sizetype _26(D);
>
> _12 = &p_18->n;
> _23 = MEM [(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120358
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.1.1
Summary|[15 regressi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118443
Bug 118443 depends on bug 118669, which changed state.
Bug 118669 Summary: Misaligned store after vectorization without using
misaligned type with SVE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118669
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118669
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.2
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 120927, which changed state.
Bug 120927 Summary: [15 Regression] 510.parest_r segfaults built with -Ofast
-march=znver4 --param vect-partial-vector-usage=1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120927
W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120927
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120843
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
--- Comment #11 from Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120358
--- Comment #39 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f1e4dd1f9354ea962113e066152d0a77209f732
commit r15-9944-g0f1e4dd1f9354ea962113e066152d0a77209f732
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120927
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b8599692a336b29851bdc5d8506a51d57521595c
commit r15-9940-gb8599692a336b29851bdc5d8506a51d57521595c
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118669
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c625bc9c7c294ef2851ae42d4a5b6cc899fecb5e
commit r15-9943-gc625bc9c7c294ef2851ae42d4a5b6cc899fecb5e
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120817
--- Comment #22 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:77066fec7ae3b57806c5d8fed9429c7db9ee446b
commit r15-9942-g77066fec7ae3b57806c5d8fed9429c7db9ee446b
Author: Tamar Christi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120817
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ebeed53983dbcefcf7b950895c9d88c85342cf4
commit r15-9941-g0ebeed53983dbcefcf7b950895c9d88c85342cf4
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120944
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c23368ed910a911e72af5decfc39bef11a9efac
commit r15-9939-g2c23368ed910a911e72af5decfc39bef11a9efac
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121008
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||16.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121008
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121010
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103876
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eczbek.void at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120996
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Dhruv Chawla from comment #4)
> Also added https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109154, which is a
> previous case where a similar issue occurred.
With almost exactly the same code even
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121011
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-07-09
Component|target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121012
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120917
--- Comment #27 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #19)
> The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8abc2e66be72a34db8c3cc97e4fbd90b7abae61d
>
> commit r16-2065-g8abc2e66be72a34db8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121012
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Error on lambda with auto |[16 Regression] Error on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121009
--- Comment #2 from John Dong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Glibc was fixed 13 years ago.
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11959
>
> So closing as won't fix.
Thank you, Andrew, for the quick clarification a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121012
Bug ID: 121012
Summary: Error on lambda with auto parameter as template
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120996
Dhruv Chawla changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121011
Bug ID: 121011
Summary: Bad optimizations by GCC 15.0.1 from Fedora
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121010
Bug ID: 121010
Summary: Error on lambda in fold expression in lambda capturing
pack
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121009
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121009
Bug ID: 121009
Summary: [libgomp]fwrite return value ignored in
libgomp/error.c causes build failure with
-Werror=unused-result
Product: gcc
Version: 14.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121008
Bug ID: 121008
Summary: Error on 'this' inside noexcept specifier of lambda
capturing 'this' inside noexcept specifier
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120905
--- Comment #17 from TCH ---
Okay, GCC6 now compiles and the resulting compiler can compile too. So, this is
the right way to do:
untxz gcc-6.5.0.tar.xz
cd gcc-6.5.0
patch -p0 < ../gcc6_solaris10.patch
cd ..
mkdir gcc6
cd gcc6
export LD_LIBRARY
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120983
--- Comment #7 from Xi Ruoyao ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-July/689000.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121007
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121007
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|16.0|15.2
Summary|[Regression 15]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121007
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121007
Bug ID: 121007
Summary: [Regression 15] compiler hangs when building ffpmeg
with -mcpu=power9 on ppc64le
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120957
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #3)
> I've bisected this on Zen2. It is possible that this is actually two
> different slowdowns and only the Zen2 slowdown is caused by r16-1647. I'll
> bisect on Zen3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120993
--- Comment #3 from Paul Eggert ---
Thanks for following up. I understand the backward-compatibility argument for
leaving things alone in this messy area, even if the resulting macros don't
conform to C23.
Should this conformance issue be docum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117468
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Matt Parks from comment #1)
> gcc-patches e-mail with changelog/test case/patch posted here but no
> replies: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-June/687629.html
Just reply to it with "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117468
--- Comment #1 from Matt Parks ---
gcc-patches e-mail with changelog/test case/patch posted here but no replies:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-June/687629.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117366
--- Comment #6 from Matt Parks ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #5)
> (In reply to Matt Parks from comment #4)
> > gcc-patches e-mail:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-June/686685.html
>
> See https://gcc.gnu.org/contri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118681
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eb412029f5cec52275d14956fe01473015a9ce0e
commit r16-2115-geb412029f5cec52275d14956fe01473015a9ce0e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121004
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #3)
> > > I think comment #0's f could be optimised even more to just r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121006
Bug ID: 121006
Summary: if (float_var == CST || float_var== -CST) is known to
be true, __builtin_copysignf(CST, float_var) can be
optimized to just float_var
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121004
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #3)
> > I think comment #0's f could be optimised even more to just return a;
>
> True.
But that is also a missing co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120941
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121005
Bug ID: 121005
Summary: TREE_LANG_FLAG_* does not have a check for
!INTEGER_CST and !VECTOR_CST
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: intern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121004
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #3)
> I think comment #0's f could be optimised even more to just return a;
True.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121004
--- Comment #3 from Harald van Dijk ---
I think comment #0's f could be optimised even more to just return a;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121004
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I am not 100% sure if this happens in PR 120996 but there is a possibility.
It does seem like it is happening there for LLVM code generation but I have not
look
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121004
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Actually LLVM transforms a*0.0f into copysign if it knows that a is finite.
That is:
```
float f0(float a)
{
if (__builtin_isnan(a) || __builtin_isinf(a))
__builtin_unreachable();
float t = a*0.f;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121004
Bug ID: 121004
Summary: float_var*0.0f if we know a is either -0.0 or 0.0 can
be just done as copysign(0.0, a)
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121003
Bug ID: 121003
Summary: Sometimes __builtin_unreachable is still there before
the vectorizer
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118681
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ac2fb60a67d6d1de6446c25c5623b8a1389f4770
commit r16-2112-gac2fb60a67d6d1de6446c25c5623b8a1389f4770
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83469
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93809
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93809
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d11ae1dd95a0296eeb5c14bfe3a5d4ec8873e3b
commit r16-2111-g7d11ae1dd95a0296eeb5c14bfe3a5d4ec8873e3b
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83469
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d11ae1dd95a0296eeb5c14bfe3a5d4ec8873e3b
commit r16-2111-g7d11ae1dd95a0296eeb5c14bfe3a5d4ec8873e3b
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121002
Bug ID: 121002
Summary: d: -Wno-error=deprecated does not overwrite a previous
-Werror
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316
Bug 85316 depends on bug 121001, which changed state.
Bug 121001 Summary: frange on float_var*0.f includes NaN even if float_var does
not include NaN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121001
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121001
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121001
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121000
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121000
--- Comment #1 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
with gcc -O1 -fdump-tree-all t.c, in a-t.c.112t.objsz1, we see the object size
is generated as _22:
sizetype _26(D);
_12 = &p_18->n;
_23 = MEM [(void *)_12];
_24 = MAX_EXPR <_23, 0>;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121001
Bug ID: 121001
Summary: frange on float_var*0.f includes NaN even if float_var
does not include NaN
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120843
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120996
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
So one thing I noticed is we simplify float_var*1.f into float_var . That seems
to mess up things slightly.
While float_var * 0.f is not.
I didn't fully look but is suspect this code does not have any nans
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119838
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117784
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As the commit message says, so far partially implemented. One can declare
structured bindings constexpr as long as the C++23-ish constant expression
handling allows that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117784
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c81447d969f27a8653ebb1a450372f0d25a2e628
commit r16-2108-gc81447d969f27a8653ebb1a450372f0d25a2e628
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120996
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
```
if (distbb_185 < elcdst_261)
goto ; [15.25%]
else
goto ; [84.75%]
[local count: 47574280]:
_584 = chrg_init_176 * iftmp.5_190;
goto ; [100.00%]
[local count: 264301551]:
_582 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120843
--- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #6)
> The master branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15413e05eb9cde976b8890cd9b597d0a41a8eb27
>
> commit r16-1967-g1541
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120996
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61820
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61820&action=edit
source from the git repo
Just attaching it just in case the git repo goes away later on.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120776
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #61817|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120772
--- Comment #4 from Simon Sobisch ---
While I agree with Sam that this commit was much too big, consisting of too
different things that would better have been split... this issue can be closed
now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119861
--- Comment #4 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
Fixed in v16.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119861
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:70bd97e89ddf8fcb8c14e84a8fd580404536eeb1
commit r16-2107-g70bd97e89ddf8fcb8c14e84a8fd580404536eeb1
Author: Tomasz KamiÅski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120997
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks for submitting the issue! I'll add the link here once it gets created.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120914
--- Comment #5 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
The constant wrapper contains a changes to the concept used here, so we should
consider applying them:
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2025/p2781r8.html.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120914
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
--- Comment #4 from Tomasz Kamiń
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120914
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c600a7e6cc588d2ee79d764cbf69ad677b1bac5
commit r16-2106-g9c600a7e6cc588d2ee79d764cbf69ad677b1bac5
Author: Luc Grosheintz
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119740
Nathan Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119739
Nathan Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ncm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mileston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120992
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120992
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
/* At this point both operands should have the same type,
because they are already converted to RESULT_TYPE.
Use TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT since typedefs can confuse us. */
tree top0 = TYPE_MAIN_VARIA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120992
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121000
Bug ID: 121000
Summary: __builtin_dynamic_object_size should work for FAM with
VLA element when annotated with counted_by
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120930
Robin Dapp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120980
--- Comment #10 from Tamar Christina ---
Could we perhaps emit additional annotation into gimple to describe what the
vectorizer thinks is safe? And the tool verifies the claims?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120980
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 8 Jul 2025, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120980
>
> --- Comment #10 from Tamar Christina ---
> Could we perhaps emit additional ann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120916
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 61818
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61818&action=edit
create_gcov path
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120916
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Patching create_gcov to account all of debug statements associated with a given
address instead of just the last one gets me:
test total:4350509 head:8642
1: 4484 // {
2: 4484 // for (
3: 4484
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120461
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dab5951af891c58aa4dd60755edb49df882b680a
commit r16-2102-gdab5951af891c58aa4dd60755edb49df882b680a
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Tue Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120980
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 8 Jul 2025, kristerw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120980
>
> --- Comment #8 from Krister Walfridsson ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120999
Bug ID: 120999
Summary: Assembler warning about MOVPRFX generation for NBSL
instructions
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: aarch64-sve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106749
Bug 106749 depends on bug 107761, which changed state.
Bug 107761 Summary: Implement C++23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107761
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110352
Bug 110352 depends on bug 107761, which changed state.
Bug 107761 Summary: Implement C++23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107761
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119128
Bug 119128 depends on bug 107761, which changed state.
Bug 107761 Summary: Implement C++23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107761
What|Removed |Added
--
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
