https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82658
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82691
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82672
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 24 07:02:48 2017
New Revision: 254036
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254036&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-23 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/82672
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82569
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Oct 24 07:26:52 2017
New Revision: 254037
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254037&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/82569
* tree-outof-ssa.h (always_initia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82569
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82687
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
Bug ID: 82694
Summary: [8 regression] Linux kernel miscompiled since r250765
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82689
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry for the breakage.
As I mentioned when committing the patch, it's kind of an experiment and we can
always revert it. I can revert it now, but a test case for further
investigation would be hig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
I would not revert without a testcase. Give me a few hours...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #2)
> I would not revert without a testcase. Give me a few hours...
Thanks very much for helping!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 42456
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42456&action=edit
unreduced testcase
The unreduced testcase is attached.
% /home/trippels/gcc_bad/usr/local/bin/gcc -fno-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 42457
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42457&action=edit
assembly bad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 42458
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42458&action=edit
assembly good
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82696
Bug ID: 82696
Summary: "File not found"-Message if source exists, but doesnt
have .c extension
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82695
Bug ID: 82695
Summary: gnu gcc (4.8 - 7.1) cannot parse some system headers
in macOS (10.12)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82543
--- Comment #2 from Antony Polukhin ---
The error is within `fileline_initialize` function in `libbacktrace/fileline.c`
If the `backtrace_state*` constructed using the `backtrace_create_state` call
with first parameter set to 0, then filename is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82695
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82696
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82696
slohm...@uni-wuppertal.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21823
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82680
--- Comment #2 from Peter Cordes ---
gcc's sequence is *probably* good, as long as it uses xor / comisd / setcc and
not comisd / setcc / movzx (which gcc often likes to do for integer setcc).
(u)comisd and cmpeqsd both run on the FP add unit. A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32184
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43445
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
xtra -O3 test.c && ./a.out
0
--
gcc version: gcc (GCC) 8.0.0 20171024 (experimental)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71233
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82694
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I didn't go through all the differences, but below is an example of using
wrapping behavior for pointers:
int vsnprintf(char *buf, size_t size, const char *fmt, va_list args)
{
unsigned long long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82628
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Oct 24 10:44:56 2017
New Revision: 254039
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254039&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/82628
* config/i386/i386.md (addcarry, subborro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82696
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82697
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82659
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Oct 24 10:52:50 2017
New Revision: 254040
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254040&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Don't insert ENDBR at function entrance when called directly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82698
Bug ID: 82698
Summary: Spurious warning __builtin_memset at O3
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82697
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82697
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 42460
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42460&action=edit
untested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82659
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652
Bug 81652 depends on bug 82659, which changed state.
Bug 82659 Summary: Unnecessary ENDBR in static/local functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82659
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The combine output you showed is _not_ succeeding though? "matched"
just means the rtx was recog()'ed; not that it was actually replaced.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81769
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82696
--- Comment #4 from slohm...@uni-wuppertal.de ---
Ok, have confirmed that it works fine with GCC 5/6/7, so it has obviously been
fixed. Didn't find a bugreport so i assumed it would be still there in newer
versions too...by bad.
Keep up the good
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82696
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Pavel I. Kryukov from comment #3)
> It seems that Clang-Tidy simply checks whether `noexcept` is specified, is
> it a Clang-Tidy problem then?
I would say so, yes. Not every function without n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 24 11:28:40 2017
New Revision: 254041
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254041&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82685 add 'noexcept' to string_view literals
PR lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685
Pavel I. Kryukov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82657
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I'm pretty sure this is a dup of another bug I confirmed recently.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
At the start of combine you have
insn_cost 4 for18: r91:DI=r83:DI<<0x2
REG_DEAD r83:DI
Is that death note not correct?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ah. So we start with
insn_cost 4 for18: r91:DI=r83:DI<<0x2
REG_DEAD r83:DI
insn_cost 4 for19: r78:DI=r76:DI+r91:DI
REG_DEAD r91:DI
REG_DEAD r76:DI
insn_cost 20 for20: r82:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #4 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #3)
> Ah. So we start with
>
> insn_cost 4 for18: r91:DI=r83:DI<<0x2
> REG_DEAD r83:DI
> insn_cost 4 for19: r78:DI=r76:DI+r91:DI
> REG_DEAD r91:DI
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575
--- Comment #10 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Oct 24 12:45:01 2017
New Revision: 254042
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254042&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR82687, g++.dg/asan/default-options-1.C fails with PR82575 fix
The proble
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82687
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Oct 24 12:45:01 2017
New Revision: 254042
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254042&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR82687, g++.dg/asan/default-options-1.C fails with PR82575 fix
The problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Oh, it does show the intermediate results:
Trying 18 -> 19:
Successfully matched this instruction:
(set (reg/f:DI 78 [ _7 ])
(plus:DI (ashift:DI (reg:DI 83 [ _26 ])
(const_int 2 [0x2]))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82687
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575
Bug 82575 depends on bug 82687, which changed state.
Bug 82687 Summary: [8 regression] g++.dg/asan/default-options-1.C fails
starting with r253914
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82687
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #6 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> Oh, it does show the intermediate results:
>
> Trying 18 -> 19:
> Successfully matched this instruction:
> (set (reg/f:DI 78 [ _7 ])
> (plus:DI (ashift:DI (reg:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yes, it requires to look back a bit (the info always is in this dump
file though!)
The alternative would be to dump even more info, grow the log files
by a factor two or so.
jmp bar
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.size foo, .-foo
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 8.0.0 20171024 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
.section.note.gnu.property,"a"
.align 8
.long1f -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #8 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> Yes, it requires to look back a bit (the info always is in this dump
> file though!)
>
> The alternative would be to dump even more info, grow the log files
> by a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82639
Victor Porton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82674
--- Comment #1 from Peter Bergner ---
That offset is too large to fit in the stdu immed field, so it really shouldn't
have been accepted by the rs6000_legitim*_ functions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #3)
> The combine output you showed is _not_ succeeding though? "matched"
> just means the rtx was recog()'ed; not that it was actually replaced.
FAOD, this is the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82307
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 24 13:49:13 2017
New Revision: 254046
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254046&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2017-10-24 Mukesh Kapoor
Paolo Carlini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82697
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Summary|[6/7/8 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82697
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 24 13:51:45 2017
New Revision: 254047
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254047&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-24 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/82697
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82307
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The "failed to match" messages are hugely important (in fact, I want it
to print more: _why_ did combination fail, in all the cases where it is
not because of recog).
The "deferring deletion" messages a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82651
Nicolai Josuttis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nico at josuttis dot de
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #10 from Qing Zhao ---
>> From the data, we can see the inlined version of strcmp (by glibc) is much
>> slower than the direct call to strcmp. (this is for size 2)
>> I am using GCC farm machine gcc116:
>
> This result doesn't make
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82700
Bug ID: 82700
Summary: ICE in printf-return-value with
-fexec-charset=EBCDIC-US: converting to execution
character set: Invalid or incomplete multibyte or wide
char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #11 from Qing Zhao ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #9)
> str(n)cmp with a constant string can be changed into memcmp if the string has
> a
> known alignment or is an array of known size. We should check the common cases
> are im
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82674
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Right, but it's the expander to allocate dynamic space that's creating the
bogus RTL. It's a trivial fix that I just need to run through some testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82641
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw ---
ARMv8-a is the only architecture variant where the CRC extension is optional.
In later variants it is enabled by default; in earlier versions of the
architecture it doesn't exist.
Your report lacks a tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686
--- Comment #4 from Dennis Clarke ---
So this is not at all clear about how to continue. I did install the
new requirement or at least the "undocumented" dependency from the
Debian pkg tree :
nix:~# apt-get install libgc-dev
Reading package lis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82641
--- Comment #3 from Yichao Yu ---
> ARMv8-a is the only architecture variant where the CRC extension is optional
Not really. There's also armv8-r and armv8-m. Also, I believe code compiled for
armv7-a can run on armv8-a hardware and can also opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #12 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to Qing Zhao from comment #7)
> on the other hand, memcmp will NOT early stop, it will compare exactly N
> bytes of both buffers. As a result, the compiler can compare multiple bytes
> at one ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82698
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80641
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paulg at chiark dot
greenend.org.u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82677
infinity0 at pwned dot gg changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #42439|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82569
--- Comment #14 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I tried the original full 177.mesa benchmark and it works fine after your
patch. Thanks!
ut
0
$ gcc -std=c11 -pedantic -Wall -Wextra -O3 test.c && ./a.out
1
--
gcc version: gcc (GCC) 8.0.0 20171024 (experimental)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> --enable-objc-gc requires you to provide boehm-gc yourself now. Quoting the
> installation instructions:
>
> @item --enable-objc-gc
> Specify that an additio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82677
--- Comment #9 from infinity0 at pwned dot gg ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7)
> [..]
>
> You still have to mark stmts with side-effects as volatile.
>
> Conditional side-effects are tricky to get correct of course.
I think w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82701
Bug ID: 82701
Summary: RFE: x86: double word operands in inline assembly
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78497
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #13 from Qing Zhao ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment 12)
> That's not entirely correct. Notionally memcmp needs to return a value
> representing the relative difference of the first different byte in the
> compared areas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82701
--- Comment #1 from H. Peter Anvin ---
I just stumbled onto this technique somewhat by accident:
union dw {
uint64_t q;
uint32_t l[2];
};
union dw aa, bb;
aa.q = a;
bb.q = b;
asm("add %2,%0; adc %3,%1"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82702
Bug ID: 82702
Summary: gcov intermediate format is creating multiple 'gcov'
files, it was creating a single file up to GCC 6
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82701
--- Comment #2 from H. Peter Anvin ---
(continued)
: "+rm,r" (aa.l[0]), "+rm,r" (aa.l[1])
: "ri,m" (bb.l[0]), "ri,m" (bb.l));
a = aa.q;
b = bb.q;
If this is something that works by intent and not by accident I'm perfectly
happy with this solut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78497
--- Comment #7 from Mark Wielaard ---
The workaround is to use gcc -C --save-temps ... to pass-through all comments
to the temp files. Maybe -C should be the default with --save-temps?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The combination 8 -> 9 (where the GE is introduced) does not call
SELECT_CC_MODE at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614
--- Comment #8 from Marco Castelluccio ---
Created attachment 42462
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42462&action=edit
Archive with GCNO and GCDA file generated with GCC 6
This is an archive containing the GCNO and GCDA files
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
