https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Simplified testcase:
struct words
{
#define V(n) short word_##n;
#define W(n) V(n)
#define X(n) W(n##0) W(n##1) W(n##2) W(n##3) W(n##4) W(n##5) W(n##6) W(n##7)
W(n##8) W(n##9)
#define Y X(0) X(1) X(2) X(3) X(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85205
Bug ID: 85205
Summary: Optimalisation fails when using a union to allocate
space on stack
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85206
Bug ID: 85206
Summary: [GCOV] a return statement in the body of for(;0;) loop
is wrongly marked as executed in gcov
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually, find_base_value is probably ok, it doesn't handle VALUEs and for
PLUS/MINUS it just guesses one operand on which to recurse, rather than both.
Another possibility is to add some counter and count h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83402
--- Comment #6 from Paul Clarke ---
(In reply to Steven Munroe from comment #5)
> You need to look at the generated asm code. And see what the compiler is
> doing.
>
> Basically it should be generating a vspltisw vr,si for vec_splat_s32.
>
> Bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85206
--- Comment #1 from Yibiao Yang ---
The code of this bug is with different code structure of bug 85188, such that I
reported these two bugs respectively.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Wed Apr 4 15:35:03 2018
New Revision: 259085
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259085&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/84878
* ddg.c (add_cross_iterat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.4.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85198
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85198
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And the bug is obvious, rs6000_handle_altivec_attribute only cares about mode
of the type and returns precomputed vector types like unsigned_V2DI_type_node
etc. based on the mode, rather than different types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65923
--- Comment #7 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ville
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:05:11 2018
New Revision: 259087
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259087&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65923
gcc/cp
PR c++/65923
* decl.c (grokfndecl): Handle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84757
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||deferred
Target Milestone|7.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84149
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65923
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83402
--- Comment #7 from Steven Munroe ---
Ok it could be that compiler behavior changed.
You where testing gcc-trunk?
Please try the same test with AT11 gcc7. I know I hit this!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85148
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:42:33 2018
New Revision: 259088
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259088&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85148 - ICE with 'this' in array NSDMI.
* tree.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85141
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:42:39 2018
New Revision: 259089
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259089&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85141 - ICE with compound assignment and static member fn.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85135
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:42:55 2018
New Revision: 259092
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259092&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85135 - ICE with omitted template arguments.
* dec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85133
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:42:50 2018
New Revision: 259091
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259091&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85133 - ICE with missing concept initializer.
* de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85118
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:42:44 2018
New Revision: 259090
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259090&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85118 - wrong error with generic lambda and std::bind.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
--- Comment #34 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #33)
> Probably impossible to fix without breaking the ABI again, but there should
> have been two __throw_ios_failure entries (and callers be "versioned" as
> well
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85148
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:45:53 2018
New Revision: 259093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85148 - ICE with 'this' in array NSDMI.
* tree.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85118
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 16:46:00 2018
New Revision: 259094
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259094&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85118 - wrong error with generic lambda and std::bind.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85148
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85141
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Another testcase running into this.
char *bar (void);
__INTPTR_TYPE__ baz (void);
void
foo (__INTPTR_TYPE__ *q)
{
char *p = bar ();
__INTPTR_TYPE__ a = baz ();
__INTPTR_TYPE__ b = baz ();
int i = 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85205
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Mijzelf from comment #0)
> args.data[ i ].var1 = i;
This is undefined behaviour when i>0 because the array only has one element.
It's irrelevant that the union has additional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85200
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84762
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yeah, but it is too late to make GCC 8. Do you want to do the patch for GCC 9?
Ideally it goes into binutils, first.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85161
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 4 17:18:14 2018
New Revision: 259096
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259096&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR other/85161
* elf.c (elf_zlib_fetch): Fix up predefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83402
--- Comment #8 from Paul Clarke ---
(In reply to Steven Munroe from comment #7)
> Please try the same test with AT11 gcc7. I know I hit this!
voila!
$ /opt/at11.0/bin/gcc -o 83402 83402.c -DNO_WARN_X86_INTRINSICS -Wall
-mcpu=power8 -O3
In file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85203
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Wed Apr 4 17:31:46 2018
New Revision: 259097
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259097&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix PR85203: cmse_nonsecure_caller returns wrong result
__b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84221
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85161
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82989
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.4 |6.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81647
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85207
Bug ID: 85207
Summary: Documentation says that -Qn is the default but looks
like -Qy is the default
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85205
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67632
Matt Godbolt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matt at godbolt dot org
--- Comment #11 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85200
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85006
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85208
Bug ID: 85208
Summary: ICE with #pragma weak and structured binding
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #5)
> ICEs on GCC 7 but not with GCC 6.
Backport to GCC 7 bootstraps and regtests with no regressions. Waiting for
approval to commit it to the GCC 7 branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85200
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:10:38 2018
New Revision: 259099
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259099&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85200 - ICE with constexpr if in generic lambda.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84221
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:10:32 2018
New Revision: 259098
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259098&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84221 - bogus -Wunused with attribute and template.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85208
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85006
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:19:34 2018
New Revision: 259100
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259100&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85006 - -fconcepts ICE with A return type
* pt.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85209
Bug ID: 85209
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE with lambda and structured binding
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85200
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85210
Bug ID: 85210
Summary: ICE with broken structured binding in template
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85146
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:34:18 2018
New Revision: 259101
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259101&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85146
* cp-tree.h (calculate_bases, calculate_direc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85211
Bug ID: 85211
Summary: -isystem automatically adds extern "C" to includes
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67632
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It seems to have been fixed in 6.3.0
tmp$ ~/gcc/6.2.0/bin/g++ -E t.cc -o t.ii
tmp$ ~/gcc/6.2.0/bin/g++ -E x.cc -o x.ii
tmp$ ~/gcc/6.2.0/bin/g++ t.ii x.ii
/tmp/ccdXPlNS.o: In function `copy(std::unordered_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85146
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85211
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This behaviour is target-dependent. If the target defines NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C
then it doesn't happen.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878
--- Comment #7 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:51:32 2018
New Revision: 259103
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259103&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2018-04-04 Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85172
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:55:56 2018
New Revision: 259104
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259104&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR inline-asm/85172
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_builtin_functi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85172
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80026
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:57:33 2018
New Revision: 259105
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259105&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-04-04 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/80026
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80026
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|paolo.carlin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84221
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 4 19:59:20 2018
New Revision: 259106
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259106&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84221
* g++.dg/warn/Wunused-var-32.C: Test explicit specialization.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85185
Andrew Waterman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew at sifive dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81575
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|8.0 |7.3.0
--- Comment #7 from Volker Reich
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85212
Bug ID: 85212
Summary: Parallelizable loop isn't unrolled [regression bug?]
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85213
Bug ID: 85213
Summary: -fsanitize=undefined internal compiler error: in
fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2402
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85213
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84938
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57728
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jlink at drw dot com
--- Comment #14 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67632
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57728
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Jens, see the discussion in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22763
Jason, should this be closed as FIXED for 6.3 and up? I believe what Jens
observes is the intended behaviour of GCC and Clang now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85214
Bug ID: 85214
Summary: ICE on valid C++17 code on x86_64-linux-gnu: in
tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:14562
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83402
--- Comment #9 from Steven Munroe ---
I suggested fixing the emmintrin.h source for both eventually ...
If you only fix AT11 then sometime later some will discover the difference and
try fix it. And likely break it again.
So fix AT immediately
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85215
Bug ID: 85215
Summary: "gcc_assert (!force_elide);" failure
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85215
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Started somewhere between r258751 (unaffected) and r258755 (affected)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85215
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85215
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
I don't think this is just an ICE on invalid: we can trivially fix the snippet
as:
template struct remove_reference {};
template struct remove_reference<_Tp &> {
typedef _Tp type;
};
template
constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47815
Adam Warner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84936
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84936
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 5 00:09:05 2018
New Revision: 259107
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259107&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84936 - ICE with unexpanded pack in mem-initializer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84938
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 5 00:09:10 2018
New Revision: 259108
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259108&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84938 - ICE with division by ~-1.
* call.c (set_up
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
Bug ID: 85216
Summary: Performance issue with PHP on ppc64 systems
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84792
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85215
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
--- Comment #2 from Timothy Pearson ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #1)
> What two additional instructions? x86 is a CISC architecture and Power is a
> RISC architecture. x86 has an instruction that directly performs an
> indirect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Last reconfirmed|2018-04-05 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
--- Comment #4 from Timothy Pearson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> This is 100% the equivalent code.
>
> jmp *(%r15) # opline.199_67->handler
> Does two things:
> loads a pointer from %r15 and then jumps to that pointer.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85215
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
--- Comment #6 from Timothy Pearson ---
Understood. I'll update this report if we find a way to get the predictor
working optimally in this scenario.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85209
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
--- Comment #7 from David Edelsohn ---
One possibility is bad luck and the branch happens to fall on an address that
conflicts with another branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71283
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52571
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47316
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71218
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81776
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36610
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
101 - 200 of 217 matches
Mail list logo
