https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69381
Bug ID: 69381
Summary: Maximum long loop completes immediately
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69187
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37403
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37403&action=edit
gcc6-pr69187.patch
Nothing happened since then. I'm willing to commit this as obvious, just want
to double che
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
Roger Orr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rogero at howzatt dot
demon.co.uk
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69187
--- Comment #10 from Stefan Sørensen
---
Sorry, I got caught up in trying to do a bootstrap on my arm board and then got
distracted by other stuff. I am fine with you committing it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69345
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 20 08:36:32 2016
New Revision: 232603
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232603&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-20 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/69345
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69345
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69117
Bug 69117 depends on bug 69345, which changed state.
Bug 69345 Summary: [6 Regression] 459.GemsFDTD regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69345
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69382
Bug ID: 69382
Summary: noinit()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69382
svabiramiece at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||svabiramiece at gmail dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68973
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69379
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
--- Comment #13 from Tony Kelman ---
Should this change be for ming-but-not-cyg then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69187
--- Comment #11 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Created attachment 37403 [details]
> gcc6-pr69187.patch
>
> Nothing happened since then. I'm willing to commit this as obvious, just
> want to dou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69379
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with:
commit 3c77e6e51f3def12b1ad416dac4b907f2245b047
Author: jason
Date: Tue Nov 17 21:49:23 2015 +
PR bootstrap/68346
* typeck.c (build_static_cast_1): Force a NOP when con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69359
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69381
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arc
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69380
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|rguenther at suse dot de |alan.lawrence at arm
dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69380
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69379
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69378
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69377
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|wrong code at -O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69376
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69374
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69369
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69360
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69378
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Sadly no, it didn't.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69376
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69383
Bug ID: 69383
Summary: [6 Regression] r232586 breaks Firefox build
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69381
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Gantman ---
We also had checked it on x86 and it was ok.The problem is only on ARC.
more over it works fine with Arc Compiler. Only GCC generates wrong assembly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69383
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69377
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69378
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, difference is in PRE:
--- a/pr61034.C.123t.pre2016-01-20 10:27:14.052404275 +0100
+++ b/pr61034.C.123t.pre2016-01-20 10:26:24.331842158 +0100
@@ -778,289 +778,344 @@
Value numbering sto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69383
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Firefox could use
#define _GLIBCXX_INCLUDE_NEXT_C_HEADERS
#include_next
#undef _GLIBCXX_INCLUDE_NEXT_C_HEADERS
instead of just
#include_next
to get the old behavior I guess.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69383
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69384
Bug ID: 69384
Summary: defaulted default constructor not defined as deleted
for class with a const data member which does not have
a user-provided default constructor
Produc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69383
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 37404
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37404&action=edit
unreduced testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69379
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69383
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69383
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Firefox could use
> #define _GLIBCXX_INCLUDE_NEXT_C_HEADERS
> #include_next
> #undef _GLIBCXX_INCLUDE_NEXT_C_HEADERS
> instead of just
> #include_next
> to ge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69385
Bug ID: 69385
Summary: [6 regression] ICE on valid with -fcheck=all
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
Bug ID: 69386
Summary: [6 regression] r232586 breaks mingw-w64 bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69387
Bug ID: 69387
Summary: undefined reference to constant in template
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69378
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69378
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 37406
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37406&action=edit
patch for testing
Patch I am testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69387
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69385
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69385
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69378
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
This patch works for me on this testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69366
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Suppose you mean tests related to i386.exp which misses mpx_init call. But
probably runtime tests should be simply moved into mpx subdir.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69363
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The bug is that cp_parser_cilk_simd_all_clauses and
c_parser_cilk_simd_all_clauses calls c_finish_cilk_clauses rather than the
OpenMP clauses finalization routines in each of the FEs, perhaps with some
argume
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69362
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69363
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Hmm, those functions should not be extern "C". Could you please re-run that
compile command for eh_arm.cc with -save-temps and send me the preprocessed
source?
I'll start looking through the mingw-w64 head
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
OK I see the problem, this is a MinGW-w64 bug, but I can solve it in libstdc++.
windows.h includes windef.h which includes minwindef.h which does:
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" {
#endif
...
#include
and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68513
--- Comment #15 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jan 20 11:24:51 2016
New Revision: 232605
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232605&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/68513
* match.pd ((x & ~m) | (y & m)): Only perfo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68513
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69369
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 37407
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37407&action=edit
Set language linkage for C++ headers
Does this fix it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
--- Comment #4 from İsmail Dönmez ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> Created attachment 37407 [details]
> Set language linkage for C++ headers
>
> Does this fix it?
Yes it does. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka ---
OK, I would say it is bug in gas, too, but I do have patch for "optimizing"
weakrefs into transparent aliases queued for next stage 1. I will break it out
and re-test. The only not 100% trivial part is copyi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69387
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Do you mean that is invalid?
class StatusCode
{
public:
static const int TEST_VALUE = 0x2;
};
I thought it is like defining
const int XXX = 123; which is actually only
a #define not a linker symbol.
I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69310
--- Comment #11 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #10)
> It is unclear if the changes in r232454, to avoid the explicit linkage on
> libitm, can ever be made darwin-friendly. On darwin, every single executa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66223
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
There is still a big difference between gcc-5 and trunk for this testcase:
gcc-5:
...
TOTAL : 27.97 1.2129.21
213855 kB
gcc-6:
...
tree VRP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69239
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Works for me now. I believe it was fixed by:
2016-01-13 Jan Hubicka
PR ipa/66487
* ipa-pol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Component|middle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69359
--- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> I'd find warning about p <= weird, warning about p < a makes sense, as well
> as e.g.
> int g (void)
> {
> int a[3], b;
> int *p = f (a, &b);
> return (p <
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69347
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||memory-hog
--- Comment #10 from Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69355
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase:
template struct A;
template <> struct A<1> {};
template struct B
{
template struct C
{
typedef T *iterator;
C (iterator p1) : m_iter (p1) {}
void operator, (T p1) { *m_i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40374
Nathan Weeks changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69388
Bug ID: 69388
Summary: Allow functexcept.cc definitions to be replaced
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69388
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It would also offer a better way for Firefox to do:
https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/memory/mozalloc/throw_gcc.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jan 20 12:34:25 2016
New Revision: 232607
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232607&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Ensure C++ language linkage in cmath and cstdlib
PR libstdc++/69
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69386
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69328
--- Comment #7 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Wed Jan 20 12:37:01 2016
New Revision: 232608
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232608&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR tree-optimization/69328
* tree-vect-stmts.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69355
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69387
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Oh, now I see, you mean:
C++ Standard, Sec. 9.4.2 paragraph 4 says:
If a static data member is of const integral or const enumeration type, its
declaration in the class definition can specify a constant-ini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69371
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Lots of other files use that function and don't have those directives either,
e.g. testsuite/special_functions/18_riemann_zeta/compile.cc
Is that also failing?
Could you attach or send me preprocessed sou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69387
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes. This is a FAQ:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/VerboseDiagnostics#missing_static_const_definition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69355
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> --- gcc/tree-dfa.c.jj 2016-01-04 14:55:50.0 +0100
> +++ gcc/tree-dfa.c2016-01-20 11:06:15.226682927 +0100
> @@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ get_ref_base_and_ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69389
Bug ID: 69389
Summary: bit field incompatible with OpenMP atomic update
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69384
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69384
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. if you just do "B b;" you get an error, but "B b{};" explicitly
zero-initializes the entire object, so nothing is left uninitialized.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69355
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, without the tree-dfa.c change current trunk in esra transforms:
G, J>, Sz> div(U&, double) [with int Sz = 3] (struct U & p1,
double p2)
{
+ const double * SR.27;
+ const double * SR.26;
+ const doub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69355
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note the above dumps are with -O1 -g0 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables
-fno-exceptions (what I've been using in the testsuite reduction).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69385
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69369
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Jan 20 13:48:49 2016
New Revision: 232612
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232612&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Require non-x32 target for compile-time MPX tests
Compile-time MPX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69366
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Jan 20 13:51:42 2016
New Revision: 232613
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232613&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Require non-x32 target for compile-time MPX tests
Compile-time MPX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69390
Bug ID: 69390
Summary: dynamic_cast on rvalue fails
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69052
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Igor Zamyatin from comment #3)
> (In reply to amker from comment #2)
> > It's my change, I will look into it.
>
> Any plans on this?
Sorry for late response, I will try to get to this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68674
chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68895
chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69371
--- Comment #2 from Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net> ---
On 01/19/2016 10:19 PM, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69371
>
> Bug ID: 69371
> Summary: UNRESOLVED:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69366
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66612
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Target Milestone|6.0
1 - 100 of 216 matches
Mail list logo
