https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67714
--- Comment #20 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Mon Mar 7 08:18:25 2016
New Revision: 234019
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234019&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-07 Christophe Lyon
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65932
--- Comment #34 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Mon Mar 7 08:18:25 2016
New Revision: 234019
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234019&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-07 Christophe Lyon
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70113
Bug ID: 70113
Summary: [AArch64] -mpc-relative-literal-loads conflicts with
fix-cortex-a53-843419
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70113
--- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon ---
Follow-up: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00445.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70114
Bug ID: 70114
Summary: Incompatible implicit function prototype when
parameters match
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70110
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70115
Bug ID: 70115
Summary: gcc ICE at -O2 (seg fault) and above on valid code on
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70083
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The problem is that while the function is compiled with -mavx512dq, there are
no 512-bit vectors in it and thus the dynamic stack realignment code only
ensures the stack is 256-bit aligned.
But, LRA for some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62281
--- Comment #11 from Rainer Orth ---
*** Bug 61949 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62281
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62281
--- Comment #13 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Mon Mar 7 09:51:31 2016
New Revision: 234022
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234022&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Only assume 4-byte stack alignment on 32-bit Solaris/x86 (PR target/62281)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70116
Bug ID: 70116
Summary: tail-merge merges ubsan internal fns with different
location information
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70116
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, patch
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62281
--- Comment #14 from Rainer Orth ---
Fixed for 6.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
Bug ID: 70117
Summary: ppc long double isinf() is wrong?
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70118
Bug ID: 70118
Summary: UBSan claims misaligned access in SSE instrinsics
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70091
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70093
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70115
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70094
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70100
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70102
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70103
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias, missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70105
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |6.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70106
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70118
marc at kdab dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marc at kdab dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70109
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70119
Bug ID: 70119
Summary: AArch64 should take advantage of implicit truncation
of variable shift amount without defining
SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70118
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, wrong-code
Targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70115
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69710
--- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Doug Gilmore from comment #13)
> I think this should be fairly straightforward to fix in the
> autovectorization pass. Hopefully I should be able to post a patch
> in the next few day
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29854
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29842
Bug 29842 depends on bug 29854, which changed state.
Bug 29854 Summary: reload_combine looses track of uses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29854
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70106
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70115
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, so cunroll unrolls
for (; b < c; b++)
a++;
to "nothing" which releases b_2 but that is still used in the followup loops
nb_iterations expression,
b_2 >= c_19 ? (unsigned int) b_2 - (unsign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70013
alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70109
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |testsuite
--- Comment #2 from Richard B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70109
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 7 11:45:49 2016
New Revision: 234024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234024&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-07 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/70109
* gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70061
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Mon Mar 7 11:48:57 2016
New Revision: 234025
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234025&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-opt/70061
* tree-outofssa.c (emit_partition_copy): Flush pendi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70109
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70061
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70119
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70119
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Confirmed. SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED should simply go away.
The same limitation is with x86. Shifts trucate the shift count, but bit-test
(BT) instructions take modu
d model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160307 (experimental) (GCC)
There are two ways to fix the assembly.
1) align the data:
@@ -279,6 +279,7 @@
.align 1
.LC3:
.hword 0
+ .hword 0
.Letext0:
.section.debug_info,"",@progbits
.Ldebug_info0:
2) place th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70119
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Right, I see we have the same issue on aarch64 as on x86.
So what would be the accepted solution here?
I've been playing with a patch to simplify-rtx to move the subreg inside the
AND and transfo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70120
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70121
Bug ID: 70121
Summary: spurious warning and crash when returning a reference
from lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50099
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70119
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #3)
> Right, I see we have the same issue on aarch64 as on x86.
> So what would be the accepted solution here?
> I've been playing with a patch to simplify-rtx to move the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70093
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70013
--- Comment #5 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Prior to SRA, we have
d = *.LC0;
d$0$f0_7 = MEM[(struct S0[2] *)&*.LC0].f0;
e$f0_9 = MEM[(struct S0[2] *)&d + 3B].f0;
_3 = (int) d$0$f0_7;
c = _3;
_5 = (int) e$f0_9;
__builtin_print
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70093
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Even gcc34 ICEs here, so dunno when exactly it started, but it was a long long
time ago in a galaxy far far away.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69916
--- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon Mar 7 13:22:07 2016
New Revision: 234026
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234026&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/69916
* omp-low.c (struct oac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 7 Mar 2016, uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
>
> Ulrich Weigand changed:
>
>What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70048
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70013
--- Comment #6 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ugh, initializing the scalar replacement for the first half of d, with a value
read from the first half of d (should be from the first half of *.LC0).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70083
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70115
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Summary|[5/6 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70115
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 7 14:15:56 2016
New Revision: 234027
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234027&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-07 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/70115
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70121
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70083
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
RA is not my area of expertise, so sure, go ahead (unless Vlad wants to have a
look).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70013
--- Comment #7 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*second* half, sorry. grp_to_be_replaced is here true, but
grp_unscalarized_data is false, so handle_unscalarized_data_in_subtree sets
sad->refreshed=UDH_LEFT and we build the access to the LHS.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69607
--- Comment #24 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #23)
> pinged patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01632.html
ping^2: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00487.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67364
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Mar 7 14:43:14 2016
New Revision: 234028
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234028&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67364
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_store_expression):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70116
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Mar 7 14:50:13 2016
New Revision: 234029
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234029&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Skip ubsan/asan internal fns with different location in tail-mer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69710
--- Comment #15 from Doug Gilmore ---
> I had a patch too, will send it for review in GCC7 if it's still needed.
Sorry I got side track last week and didn't make much progress.
Please go ahead and submit if you have something you feel comfortabl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70122
Bug ID: 70122
Summary: [openacc] Handle acc loop directive
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70013
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
That is what I suspected. Please have at look why
analyze_access_subtree (which has to set the grp_unscalarized_data
flag) acts differently then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70122
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, patch
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70122
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70122
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For now, marking missed-optimization/enhancement. There might also be
correctness failures due to the lack of explicit handling, I'm not sure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70122
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #2)
> For now, marking missed-optimization/enhancement. There might also be
> correctness failures due to the lack of explicit handling, I'm not sure.
Which is why I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70013
--- Comment #9 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In analyze_access_subtree (since r147980, "New implementation of SRA", 2009):
else if (root->grp_write || TREE_CODE (root->base) == PARM_DECL)
root->grp_unscalarized_data = 1; /* not cover
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7652
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #36 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920
--- Comment #16 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Mar 7 15:17:49 2016
New Revision: 234030
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234030&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR 69666 and PR 69920
2016-03-07 Martin Jambor
PR tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Mar 7 15:17:49 2016
New Revision: 234030
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234030&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR 69666 and PR 69920
2016-03-07 Martin Jambor
PR tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69879
Gabriel Ibarra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37848|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70048
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70116
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7652
--- Comment #37 from Matthew Woehlke ---
> Essentially, this warning and the "intentional fallthrough" attribute
exist for both clang and MSVC and will be enabled there; but GCC
still doesn't have this feature.
[[fallthrough]] was approved for C+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63503
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70120
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 37888
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37888&action=edit
another testcase
This testcase does not need -mno-pc-relative-literal-loads.
$ aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
With the reverted patch re-applied, this should be again fixed
everywhere (and the fix should not be causing any new issues).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70120
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.4, 5.3.1
Sum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70123
Bug ID: 70123
Summary: [6 Regression] Miscompilation of
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #3)
> > while with GCC, we get:
> >
> > high double: 7FEF
> > low double: 7C8F FFFE
>
> Right. This is 0x1.f78p+1023
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70123
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69633
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70124
Bug ID: 70124
Summary: alignas error in constexpr function
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69650
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70125
Bug ID: 70125
Summary: attributes diagnostics missing essential context
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70124
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Bug 70125 tracks the problem with the missing context of the diagnostic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69052
--- Comment #17 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Mar 7 16:39:27 2016
New Revision: 234034
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234034&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/69052
* rtlanal.c (commuta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70120
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6 Regression][aarch64] |[6 Regression][aarch64] -g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69740
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Mar 7 17:01:54 2016
New Revision: 234036
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234036&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/69740
* cfghooks.c (remove_edge): Req
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66786
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Mon Mar 7 17:09:53 2016
New Revision: 234038
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234038&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Adjust fix for PR c++/66786
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/66786
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19705
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Mon Mar 7 17:10:12 2016
New Revision: 234039
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234039&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/19705 - -fno-branch-count-reg doesn't prevent decremen
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo
