https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #13 from ygribov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ygribov
Date: Tue May 12 07:02:09 2015
New Revision: 223032
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223032&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-12 Yury Gribov
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59224
li xin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lixin.fnst at cn dot
fujitsu.com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66049
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64*
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Created attachment 35522 [details]
> gcc5-pr66112.patch
>
> Supposedly just using SWI248 instead of SWI48 iterator should fix this,
> though not sure about all the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66110
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias, missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65133
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Confirmed fixed for 5.1.0. I'm adding a testcase and closing the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65133
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue May 12 09:03:04 2015
New Revision: 223047
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223047&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-12 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/65133
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65133
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
--- Comment #3 from Jeremy ---
Related FYI,
Few instructions on ARM set the overflow flag. Two that do are 32-bit add and
subtract. For these two, GCC could just emit "adds" followed by "bvs"
Instead it produces:-
bl atoi@
add r1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66101
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
It's DCE leaving loops broken and not marking them for fixup.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65955
--- Comment #12 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue May 12 09:15:09 2015
New Revision: 223049
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223049&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix PR 65955: Do not take REGNO on non-REG operand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66110
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, it for example breaks bootstrap via (broken...) -Wstrict-aliasing:
In file included from
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/../libdecnumber/bid/decimal128Local.h:1:0,
from /space/rguent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66049
--- Comment #4 from vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #3)
> Venkat, are you planning to submit this patch to gcc-patches?
> Also, does this mean we can remove the patterns that do arith+shift using
> MULT rtxes? (li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65955
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66010
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue May 12 09:46:47 2015
New Revision: 223054
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223054&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Don't take address of ap unless necessary
2015-05-12 Tom de Vr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066
Rohit changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rohitarulraj at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65961
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Hmpf, so we have an operand that is both part of a regular SLP node _and_ is
part
of a SLP node that gets its operand built up from scalars. So obviously
looking at STMT_VINFO_VECTORIZABLE (def-of-op) isn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35522|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 35524
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35524&action=edit
gcc6-pr66112-2.patch
And i386 mulvhi4 and umulvhi4 support. For umulvhi4, I haven't found
corresponding i386.m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66010
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As for ARM, please file a separate enhancement request. The generic code has
the means for backends to provide better patterns, but arm doesn't use them
(only i386.md uses them right now), so arm maintainers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64691
Yuri Rumyantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ysrumyan at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
Bug ID: 66119
Summary: Regression in optimization of avx-code
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64691
--- Comment #2 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Created attachment 35526
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35526&action=edit
tset-case to reproduce and assembly file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66038
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikestump at comcast dot net
Target M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66120
Bug ID: 66120
Summary: __builtin_add/sub_overflow for int32_t emit poor code
on ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
--- Comment #7 from Jeremy ---
Comment on attachment 35522
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35522
gcc5-pr66112.patch
Done, PR66120
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Confirmed. We expand from
:
a$data_13 = MEM[(struct Vec2 *)&a];
a$32$data_14 = MEM[(struct Vec2 *)&a + 32B];
b = b;
v2_15 = MEM[(struct Vec2 *)&b];
v2$32_16 = MEM[(struct Vec2 *)&b + 32B];
_7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, it's parameter b assigned to local decl b.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
And we indeed rely on SRA to copy propagate aggregates.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066
--- Comment #8 from clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Can we consider moving this to -pedantic as suggested by Richard in comment #4?
Full compiler builds are broken because of this.
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66112
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 35524 [details]
> gcc6-pr66112-2.patch
>
> And i386 mulvhi4 and umulvhi4 support. For umulvhi4, I haven't found
> corresponding i386.md instruc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
DEFPARAM (PARAM_SRA_MAX_SCALARIZATION_SIZE_SPEED,
"sra-max-scalarization-size-Ospeed",
"Maximum size, in storage units,
storage units! But the value seems to be in bits? It gets used
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Fixed by
Index: toplev.c
===
--- toplev.c(revision 223044)
+++ toplev.c(working copy)
@@ -1311,6 +1311,9 @@ process_options (void)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
--- Comment #31 from Steffen Hau ---
Just a short update.
With LTO enabled, configure thinks I have a buggy GCC:
checking if gcc has a visibility bug with class-level attributes (GCC bug
26905)... yes
configure: WARNING: Your gcc is not -fvisibi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #14 from Thierry Reding ---
Thanks Yury.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66119
--- Comment #7 from James Greenhalgh ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> DEFPARAM (PARAM_SRA_MAX_SCALARIZATION_SIZE_SPEED,
> "sra-max-scalarization-size-Ospeed",
> "Maximum size, in storage units,
>
> storage
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #15 from Yury Gribov ---
(In reply to Thierry Reding from comment #14)
> Thanks Yury.
Np, you are welcome.
@Harald: could you close the bug if it works for you?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59224
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to li xin from comment #8)
> It will lead to the lsb test caes
> /libstdcxx-t2c/tests/LanguageSupport/LanguageSupport FAIL.
> So I want to know the right return value of std::uncaught_exception()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Geoff Nixon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||geoff at geoff dot codes
--- Comment #16 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66121
Bug ID: 66121
Summary: internal compiler error: in strip_typedefs, at
cp/tree.c:1369
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #17 from Yury Gribov ---
(In reply to Geoff Nixon from comment #16)
> what I should use to patch against the release?
> Or is there a different set of changes
> specific to the 5.1 branch backport?
For 5.1 you'd better use the patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66084
--- Comment #4 from vfdff ---
ok, it is ok based on gcc 4.9.2, thanks.
$GCC492/gcc ticket_1634.c -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37021
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue May 12 11:55:40 2015
New Revision: 223059
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223059&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-12 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/37021
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #18 from Geoff Nixon ---
Ok thanks, for other idiots like myself who can't seem to figure out how to get
viewvc to generate a diff for a specific rev, a -p1 patch is:
svn diff -c 223032 svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5-branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66122
Bug ID: 66122
Summary: Bad uninlining decisions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66122
--- Comment #1 from Denis Vlasenko ---
Created attachment 35528
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35528&action=edit
Preprocessed example exhibiting a bug
This is a preprocessed kernel/locking/mutex.c file from kernel source.
W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66091
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Sutton ---
Confirmed. Fixed in r223061.
When a function declaration started with a non-function declarator, the
requires-clause wasn't being attached to the right declarator object so it
wasn't being added to the decl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66123
Bug ID: 66123
Summary: Array of labels as values + ternary operator + pointer
arithmetic = internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66123
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
$ ./cc1 -quiet x.c -O
x.c: In function ‘test’:
x.c:2:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
test (int foo)
^
0xd7129c crash_signal
/home/marek/src/gcc/gcc/toplev.c:380
0xecc3e3 propagate_rhs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66123
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66123
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Index: tree-ssa-dom.c
===
--- tree-ssa-dom.c (revision 223044)
+++ tree-ssa-dom.c (working copy)
@@ -2914,7 +2914,7 @@ propagate_rhs_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66123
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Or rather
Index: tree-ssa-dom.c
===
--- tree-ssa-dom.c (revision 223044)
+++ tree-ssa-dom.c (working copy)
@@ -2918,6 +2918,8 @@ pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66123
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66122
--- Comment #2 from Denis Vlasenko ---
Tested with gcc-4.9.2. The attached testcase doesn't exhibit the bug, but
compiling the same kernel tree, with the same .config, and then running
nm --size-sort vmlinux | grep -iF ' t ' | uniq -c | grep -v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66120
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm*-*gnueabi |arm
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66000
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66102
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66120
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Not those, but addv4 and subv4 instead (perhaps {,u}mulv4 if
the ISA detects multiplication overflows, also there is negv3).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66122
--- Comment #3 from Denis Vlasenko ---
Created attachment 35530
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35530&action=edit
Preprocessed example exhibiting a bug on gcc -4.9.2
This is a preprocessed kernel/pid.c file from kernel sourc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66081
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65740
Denis Vlasenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vda.linux at googlemail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66110
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66124
Bug ID: 66124
Summary: greg_month.cpp from boost date_time shows internal
compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66122
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66115
carloscastro10 at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66125
Bug ID: 66125
Summary: lto1: code model kernel does not support PIC mode
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66122
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The last time I looked at the kernel build with -Os, all cases
were simply caused by:
ipa-inline.c:
820 /* If call is cold, do not inline when function body would grow. */
821 else if (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66096
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|32 bit |x86_64-w64-mingw32
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66120
--- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw ---
That's what I meant. Still can't find any info on them in md.texi, though!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66101
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue May 12 13:28:33 2015
New Revision: 223065
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223065&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-12 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/66101
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66101
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Summary|[5/6 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66120
--- Comment #4 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Mul doesn't produce useful overflow bits when the flags are set. We could do
negv3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66115
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66125
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66125
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Testcase? The fix makes options from archive members visible to lto-wrapper,
> so you likely have a mismatch between -fPIC / -fno-PIC somehwere.
After re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66125
Dmitry G. Dyachenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66126
Bug ID: 66126
Summary: 2-float SSE vector with vector_size(8) is passed
incorrectly to functions on x86
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66126
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66124
--- Comment #1 from wilkinson.bob at gmail dot com ---
More succinctly my failing compilation can be reduced to :
g++ -v -save-temps -Wall -Wextra -c
-I/home/bob/work/trunk/3rdparty/boost_1_49_0
3rdparty/boost_1_49_0/libs/date_time/src/gregorian/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65908
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 35533
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35533&action=edit
Suggested fix
I've been testing following patch for 5.1.0 branch. I'm wondering if comparison
of just TYPE_ARG_T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> The code in comment 0 does not abort at run time up to revision r222352
> (2015-04-23), but does so at r222398 (2015-04-24), likely r222361.
Yes, probably
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66126
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066
--- Comment #9 from Vidya Praveen ---
glibc's tz code (which causes this error) will get fixed eventually:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18396
However if it's justifiable, it's good to move this error under -pedantic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66127
Bug ID: 66127
Summary: Division by zero gets folded away
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66127
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Ideally the front-end folding of expressions-of-constants might avoid
folding-for-optimization such as this (instead just folding cases where
the evaluated operands are actually constants,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Tue, 12 May 2015, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > Working on this, but it isn't a simple matter of adding "pedantic".
>
> Joseph, would testing global_dc->pedantic_errors be an accep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066
--- Comment #13 from Marek Polacek ---
I expect to have a proper fix (additional folding in c_fully_fold_internal)
today or tomorrow, depends on how many issues I hit along the way (see e.g.
PR66127). The tzdata issue seems to be being worked on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66127
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53553
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61940
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||akim.demaille at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61940
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jan.kratochvil at redhat dot
com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59621
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66128
Bug ID: 66128
Summary: ICE for some intrinsics with zero sized array
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
