https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
Bug ID: 88055
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2305 on ppc64le
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||ppc64le-linux-gnu
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88004
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88033
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88015
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Apparently i?86 glibc has two fopen entrypoints:
192: 000657d035 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT 13 fopen@@GLIBC_2.1
193: 0011ec90 144 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT 13 fopen@GLIBC_2.0
and libsanitizer interce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81397
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> > As we're staying with Awk, for now I'm planning to work on that.
>
> Missing the word "not" in there?
Yes, I was w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87706
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at ucw dot cz
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88056
Bug ID: 88056
Summary: gcc/config/i386/host-mingw32.c:170: use of out of
scope pointer ?
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
The problem looks very similar to:
3537 #if SANITIZER_INTERCEPT_REALPATH
3538 INTERCEPTOR(char *, realpath, const char *path, char *resolved_path) {
3539void *ctx;
3540COMMON_INTERCEPTOR_ENT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88056
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dannysmith at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The comment is bogus, that is the symbol versioning design, the only way how to
stay ABI compatible even with the binaries that were written before the new
symbol version has been introduced. For symbols wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88044
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It does not fail for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82335
--- Comment #1 from pskocik at gmail dot com ---
This problem still persists in gcc 7.3.0. It appears pasting a macro containing
`_Pragma`s into
another macro is what's causing the displacement of the generated `#pragma`s.
I've cleaned up the exa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88056
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
$ ppc64le-linux-gnu-gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/marxin/BIG/bin/ppc64le/dev/shm/buildbot/install/gcc/bin/ppc64le-linux-gnu-gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/marxin/BIG/bin/ppc64le/dev/shm/buildbo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 16 09:27:36 2018
New Revision: 266202
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266202&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-16 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/88053
* g++.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88050
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88057
Bug ID: 88057
Summary: libdecnumber/decCommon.c:479: use of out of scope
variable
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Thanks for the testcase!
--- a/test.go.115t.dom2 2018-11-16 10:45:27.663896672 +0100
+++ b/test.go.115t.dom2 2018-11-16 10:46:47.945357195 +0100
@@ -13937,7 +13937,7 @@
LKUP STMT _27 = aWord_58 trunc_div_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438
Andrew Stubbs changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ams at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88058
Bug ID: 88058
Summary: gcc fails to detect use of out of scope variable ?
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86487
--- Comment #5 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I can confirm the ICE no longer occurs, but I am not entirely convinced the
issue was "fixed" by this. I fear the underlying fault is still there, it is
simply hidden now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87039
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45006|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84044
Arnaud Giersch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arnaud.giersch at free dot fr
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88058
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88050
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Your example doesn't even compile, the destructor is private.
GCC now has -Wdeprecated-copy which warns for this fixed example:
struct Type
{
~Type()
{}
};
int main()
{
Type t;
Type tt = t;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87521
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, on IRC Bruno already pointed out the problem with the comment 3 example.
That doesn't change my mind, I still think it would be madness for an
defaulted-on-first-declaration trivial destructor to chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88046
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87521
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> Yes, on IRC Bruno already pointed out the problem with the comment 3
> example. That doesn't change my mind, I still think it would be madness for
> an defaul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87025
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87989
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Nov 16 11:51:51 2018
New Revision: 266204
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266204&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86246] ICE tsubst explicit operator call
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86246
--- Comment #10 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Nov 16 11:51:51 2018
New Revision: 266204
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266204&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86246] ICE tsubst explicit operator call
https://gcc.gnu.org/m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86246
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87025
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think the note in question is from:
if (dump_enabled_p ())
dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
"-->vectorizing phi: %G", phi);
and the failed ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87918
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 16 12:20:05 2018
New Revision: 266205
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266205&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-16 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/88011
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 16 12:22:48 2018
New Revision: 266206
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266206&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-16 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/88053
* g++.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88050
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson ---
It is not the same and doesn't cover important cases: for example, the opposite
one, there is a nontrivial copy ctor implementation but there is no nontrivial
dtor. Or even between the special ctors, or there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha ---
There must be something wrong w/ the way I configure gcc, then. It takes
indefinite time compiling the testcase only at -O2 or -Os and finishes
instantly at any other optimization level. But it also finishes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88004
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Nov 16 12:49:32 2018
New Revision: 266207
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266207&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix ICE in lto_symtab_merge_symbols_1 (PR lto/88004).
2018-11-16 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88045
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Known to fail|9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88033
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87706
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88046
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 16 Nov 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88046
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87706
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #5)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> > Assigning to Honza after we discussed that.
>
> So, this is kind of off-topic, but I've been wondering for a while,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88004
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
--- Comment #8 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #7)
> It appears you are building via portage and thus have Gentoo patches applied?
Yes, I build weekly snapshots via Portage for convenience. But I use modified
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87618
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87618
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, I forgot to close it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84044
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
> Thread model: posix
> gcc version 9.0.0 20181110 (experimental) [trunk revision 266003] (Debian
> 20181110-2)
>
> Regards,
> Arnaud Giersch
The warning appeared again on trunk in r265875
Author: hubicka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88057
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83941
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88045
--- Comment #3 from Sergio Losilla ---
I see, thanks. Well then, I guess I'll stick to the workaround. Good to know it
is already fixed in version 9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88045
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Sergio Losilla from comment #3)
> I see, thanks. Well then, I guess I'll stick to the workaround. Good to know
> it is already fixed in version 9.
Thanks. Next GCC 8.3 will have a workaround, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83479
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011
--- Comment #12 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83215
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias, missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88058
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88059
Bug ID: 88059
Summary: Spurious stringop-overflow warning with strlen, malloc
and strncpy
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87855
--- Comment #6 from fiesh at zefix dot tv ---
Again, fixes the issue for me with clang!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87269
--- Comment #8 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Nov 16 15:01:55 2018
New Revision: 266210
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266210&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/87269] Mark string operator overload in template defn.
https://
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87269
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88060
Bug ID: 88060
Summary: ../../../gcc-8.2.0/libgo/go/syscall/libcall_linux_utim
esnano.go:17:18: error: reference to undefined name
‘_AT_FDCWD’
Product: gcc
Version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88052
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88060
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Can you attach the contents of sparc-unknown-linux-gnu/libgo/gen-sysinfo.go
from your build directory?
Does the C header file on your system define AT_FDCWD? (It normally
comes from .) If not, why not?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88015
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88061
Bug ID: 88061
Summary: section attributes of variable templates are ignored
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, I think the bug is in vect_look_through_possible_promotion, which doesn't
do what it claims to do is that what it returns can be cast to unprom->type and
then promoted to final precision and that it is th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86747
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88060
martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mfe at live dot de
--- Comment #2 from martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88062
Bug ID: 88062
Summary: tgmath with fadd vs faddl done wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88060
--- Comment #3 from martin ---
Created attachment 45024
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45024&action=edit
/usr/include/bits/fcntl.h
I found also:
/usr/include/asm-sparc/fcntl.h
/usr/include/asm/fcntl.h
/usr/include/asm-gene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88060
--- Comment #4 from martin ---
Created attachment 45025
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45025&action=edit
/usr/include/linux/fcntl.h
I found the AT_FDCWD in the file /usr/include/linux/fcntl.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45026
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45026&action=edit
gcc9-pr87546.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88063
Bug ID: 88063
Summary: Libbacktrace leak on dwarf read failure
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libbacktrac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88063
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 45027
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45027&action=edit
Detection patch
Output:
...
$ ./btest 2>&1 | sed 's%/.*/%%'
alloc at state.c:66: addr: 0x7f9addf62000, size: 72
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88063
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0)
> However, the allocation and deallocation is done in a loop over units, so if
> find_address_ranges succeeds for the first unit, but fails for the second,
> then onl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87025
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88057
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Interesting, what tool have you used to detect that?
cppcheck, available from sourceforge.
I find compile time warnings are usually preferred to runtime erro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88040
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
I don't suppose this could make use of the existing -fmodule-file= option,
which translates a module name to a different file path?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88064
Bug ID: 88064
Summary: [9 Regression] Incorrect vectorizer over_widening
pattern handling
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88064
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88041
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88065
Bug ID: 88065
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in -Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess on an
invalid strncpy
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88065
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88065
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88032
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 16 16:40:53 2018
New Revision: 266216
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266216&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/88032
* optabs.c (expand_binop): For op0_mod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87854
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 16 16:41:54 2018
New Revision: 266217
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/87854
* c-common.c (fix_string_type): Reject
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88051
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Nov 16 16:42:16 2018
New Revision: 266218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/88051
* config/i386/i386.md (floatunsdid
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
