https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96734
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96752
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96597
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:adc646b10c7168c3c95373ee9321e3760fc4c5f1
commit r11-2816-gadc646b10c7168c3c95373ee9321e3760fc4c5f1
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96597
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96759
Bug ID: 96759
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2294
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96744
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
Created attachment 49107
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49107&action=edit
Enable spill to mask only under m_core_AVX512
this patch will fail
cat test.c
#include
void
_mm512_2interse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96729
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|hang on x86_64-linux-gnu|[11 Regression] hang on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96730
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96732
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> Started with r11-2748
Can you please CC author of the revision that caused that? Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96755
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
Sorry for TYPO
---
(define_split
[(set (match_operand:DI 0 "mask_reg_operand")
(zero_extend:DI
- (not:DI (match_operand:SI 1 "mask_reg_operand"]
+ (not:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94938
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andysem at mail dot ru
--- Comment #9 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96741
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96758
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-24
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96748
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96750
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-24
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96748
--- Comment #5 from Manuel Lauss ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> I don't see the failure for any of recent GCC releases:
>
> Releases
> 8.1.0 (406c2abec3f998e9)(02 May 2018 10:13): [took: 4.858s] result: OK
> 8.2.0 (ddeb81e7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96759
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96760
Bug ID: 96760
Summary: Faulty optimization in nested loops with -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96698
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538
--- Comment #20 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:259d072067997ab8f55afcf735c91b6740fd0425
commit r11-2818-g259d072067997ab8f55afcf735c91b6740fd0425
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96750
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> after:
> 1794240.0
>
> before:
> 1802710.0
That's less than 1% of difference (with "after" better than "before"), not the
10% regression claimed, maybe there is an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96761
Bug ID: 96761
Summary: "error: call of overloaded ‘func(size_t)’ is
ambiguous" when argument is size_t(0) and func(int)
and func(const char *) are visible
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96762
Bug ID: 96762
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2294 (error:
unrecognizable insn)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96739
--- Comment #2 from Dr. David Alan Gilbert ---
Created attachment 49108
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49108&action=edit
less boiled down test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96758
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
Priority|P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96750
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #2)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> > after:
> > 1794240.0
> >
> > before:
> > 1802710.0
>
> That's less than 1% of difference (with "after" better than "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96739
--- Comment #3 from Dr. David Alan Gilbert ---
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the response.
I've added a slightly less boiled down test that I think is still valid.
I agree with that you say in the case of the call from help_all->help_oneline
because c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96763
Bug ID: 96763
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in get_subregion_within_ctor, at
analyzer/store.cc:379
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96760
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96730
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96760
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96734
--- Comment #3 from Ariadne Conill ---
When that method.ii is compiled against g++ 9.3.0 with the provided options, it
compiles successfully.
When built using a cross-compiled g++ 10.2.0, it crashes. So, the issue is
specific to 10.2.0 it seems
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96758
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49109
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49109&action=edit
gcc11-pr96758.patch
Untested fix. cmpsiz has been computed incorrectly and while the code had the
intent to ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96734
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Ariadne Conill from comment #3)
> When that method.ii is compiled against g++ 9.3.0 with the provided options,
> it compiles successfully.
>
> When built using a cross-compiled g++ 10.2.0, it cra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96486
--- Comment #29 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:de09e7ebc9d653745a103eef2b20c7f1dd76
commit r11-2819-gde09e7ebc9d653745a103eef2b20c7f1dd76
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201
Stas Sergeev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stsp at users dot
sourceforge.net
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96734
--- Comment #5 from Ariadne Conill ---
I should clarify.
I cross-compiled g++ 10.2.0 to run on mips64 *host*. That part worked fine.
Afterwards, the *host* mips64 g++ cannot compile itself.
The *host* mips64 g++ (which was cross-compiled from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96734
--- Comment #6 from Ariadne Conill ---
(In reply to Ariadne Conill from comment #5)
> I should clarify.
>
> I cross-compiled g++ 10.2.0 to run on mips64 *host*. That part worked fine.
>
> Afterwards, the *host* mips64 g++ cannot compile itself
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96721
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49110
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49110&action=edit
gcc11-pr96721.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49111
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49111&action=edit
gcc11-pr96722.patch
If *0 ={v} {CLOBBER}; is supposed to be a fancy nop, then we should ignore it
during path i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96690
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |debug
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96486
--- Comment #30 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5effbd0733f9a4d42ddae965e4c28701be7811ac
commit r10-8658-g5effbd0733f9a4d42ddae965e4c28701be7811ac
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96764
Bug ID: 96764
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in
fold_convert_const_int_from_real, at fold-const.c:2038
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96765
Bug ID: 96765
Summary: Base class constructor cast to derived should cause a
warning
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96763
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] ICE in |[11 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96690
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Forcing the mangling via generating garbage RTL early doesn't work since
the
/* ??? The C++ FE emits debug information for using decls, so
putting gcc_unreachable here falls over. See PR31899. For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96764
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96690
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Without LTO, gen_remaining_tmpl_value_param_die_attribute will try to get it,
and will mangle the foo decl, but shortly after will throw it away due to
const_ok_for_output failing on it.
Your patch makes sens
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96744
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 49112
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49112&action=edit
Retune mask <-> general moves cost
It looks to me that mask <-> general cost is too low, so the compiler now
pref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 24 Aug 2020, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722
>
> --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 49111
> --> https://gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96760
--- Comment #3 from Yu Zhige ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #1)
> The loop
>
> for (a = 20; a; a++) {
>
> increases a, which is a char, beyond its value range, and then tests
> against zero.
>
> This is undefined behavior.
>
> N4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96690
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-24
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96766
Bug ID: 96766
Summary: std::swap(std::variant, std::variant) triggers
undefined behavior sanitizer
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96766
--- Comment #1 from Karthik Nishanth ---
Reproducer
https://www.godbolt.org/z/Whz6ab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96766
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is clang's stupid "unsigned overflow" sanitizer, which complains about
correct code. The conversion here is intended, and does exactly the right
thing, converting numeric_limits::max() to numeric_limit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96766
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Eve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
On the CDDCE side, I'm afraid I have no idea what can be done.
The pass works by not considering clobber stmts necessary, and when about to
remove (all) clobbers as unnecessary, it instead attempts to keep th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96765
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-24
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96758
--- Comment #3 from R. Evans ---
Thanks for the quick patch! Applied to head (87c753ac) and confirmed that it
passes the test case and fixes the problem with smartmontools-7.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96767
Bug ID: 96767
Summary: -mpure-code produces indirect loads for thumb-1
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96768
Bug ID: 96768
Summary: -mpure-code produces switch tables for thumb-1
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96769
Bug ID: 96769
Summary: -mpure-code produces suboptimal code for immediate
generation for thumb-1
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96770
Bug ID: 96770
Summary: -mpure-code produces suboptimal code for relocations
with small offset for thumb-1
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538
--- Comment #21 from Christophe Lyon ---
I filed PR96767, PR96768, PR96769, PR96770 to track the enhancements discussed
here.
The ICE is now fixed in trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96722
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
I don't have a good idea either but eventually something along the following -
if we remove any control stmt in a clobbers control dependence chain
force-remove the clobber. Obviously as written it's highly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96486
--- Comment #31 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bbe17767c602f1ff08a1520a1d989c6b86b536fd
commit r9-8829-gbbe17767c602f1ff08a1520a1d989c6b86b536fd
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96486
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96744
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 49114
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49114&action=edit
Double-reg mask moves
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96744
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> Need to add define_insn for movp2qi/movp2hi?
Yes, this is needed to cover some corner cases. Please see attachment 49114.
However, the patch assumes that avx512vp2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96715
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-24
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96744
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #5)
> However, the patch assumes that avx512vp2intersect implies mavx512dq,
> otherwise there is no direct QImode move from mask register to memory
> available.
This is th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96730
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-August/552488.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96766
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:074436cf8cdd2a9ce75cadd36deb8301f00e55b9
commit r11-2822-g074436cf8cdd2a9ce75cadd36deb8301f00e55b9
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96771
Bug ID: 96771
Summary: arm/pr32920-2.c fails since svn r228175 /
f11a7b6d57f6fcba1bf2e5a0403dc49120195320
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96733
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96733
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Shouldn't this help in the library then?
if (__hi < __lo)
__builtin_unreachable();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96733
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> Shouldn't this help in the library then?
>
> if (__hi < __lo)
> __builtin_unreachable();
For integers, I guess it could if Andrew's/Aldy's stuff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96772
Bug ID: 96772
Summary: Power VSX libmvec implementation for OpenMP SIMD
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96772
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88003
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nathan at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88003
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
All part of my grand plan.
Seriously though, you must've grepped an ICE that was XFAILed (the only one,
thus far).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96733
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |libstdc++
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96773
Bug ID: 96773
Summary: ASan: please provide __asan_address_is_shadow() for
complex programs
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96773
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96774
Bug ID: 96774
Summary: UBSan: please provide
__ubsan_set_error_report_callback() to capture error
messages
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96775
Bug ID: 96775
Summary: UBSan: confusing error message load of address with
insufficient space
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96774
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96775
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/google/s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96153
--- Comment #7 from Iain Buclaw ---
Fixing the case for SPARC64 triggers the test case in pr96157 to fail on
x86_64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96775
--- Comment #2 from Diane Meirowitz ---
I have the latest llvm source code and it's the same.
We will back port any fixes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88780
--- Comment #8 from Marietto ---
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-9/+bug/1892475
Il giorno mar 18 ago 2020 alle ore 19:26 msebor at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> ha scritto:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94448
Diane Meirowitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96775
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96776
Bug ID: 96776
Summary: Missing tail call optimization when passing local
variable by reference to yet another function
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96776
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96776
Matheus Izvekov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96709
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-24
Status|UNCONFIRME
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
