https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96856
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96834
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to z.zhanghaij...@huawei.com from comment #4)
> The case like:
> test.c:
> int f31() { }
> void f30() { printf("30\n"); f31(); }
> void f29() { printf("29\
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96810
--- Comment #4 from Wei Wentao ---
>>--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>>Actually sorry, the diagnostics clang emits is not about the bug mentioned in
>>the testcase, but about something different.
>>And while the bug described in the commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0106300f6c3f7bae5eb1c46dbd45aa07c94e1b15
commit r11-2944-g0106300f6c3f7bae5eb1c46dbd45aa07c94e1b15
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96806
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Feng Xue :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e11c4b7f837bc6b4c22b1f5bf41a9d0608d256be
commit r11-2945-ge11c4b7f837bc6b4c22b1f5bf41a9d0608d256be
Author: Feng Xue
Date: Mon Aug 31 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96860
Bug ID: 96860
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in apply_ctor_to_region, at
analyzer/store.cc:445
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31892
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96791
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha ---
There's also a seemingly related case where gcc ICES in branch
if (GET_MODE_CLASS (to_mode) == MODE_PARTIAL_INT)
instead.
The following testcase is reduced from
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96125.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44612
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
For what it is worth, still occurs with on mainline (GCC 11).
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> Confirmed.
>
> DSE doesn't remove memset or memcpy calls.
>
> We also do not have a flag to mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96861
Bug ID: 96861
Summary: Integer min/max optimization failed under
-march=skylake-avx512
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
Bug ID: 96862
Summary: -frounding-math -std=c++2a error: '(1.29e+2 *
6.9314718055994529e-1)' is not a constant expression
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96551
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1aa71af09350b9ff4d2fad88a440b682545682ec
commit r11-2947-g1aa71af09350b9ff4d2fad88a440b682545682ec
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Aug 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96551
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2cbd82044b21679fa533445f373374576f638da1
commit r10-8692-g2cbd82044b21679fa533445f373374576f638da1
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96551
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96859
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-31
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Bug ID: 96863
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE: in
output_constructor_regular_field, at varasm.c:5223
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
--- Comment #4 from Michael_S ---
Pay attention that it's not just AVX.
'-mavx2 -mfma -Ofast' generates different code, but at the end gives the same
wrong result.
Unfortunately, I have no AVX512 hardware to test, but wouldn't be surprised if
it'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96864
Bug ID: 96864
Summary: loop not vectorized due to cost model
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96856
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Can you please paste git commits in a pretty format:
>
> $ git gcc-descr --full e740f3d73144abbca1ad98a04825c6bd63314a0b
> r11-571-ge740f3d73144abbca1ad98a04825c6bd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96857
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
r11-1301-54cdb2f5a5b01a482d7cbce30e7b738558eecf59
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96855
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
r11-571-ge740f3d73144abbca1ad98a04825c6bd63314a0b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96865
Bug ID: 96865
Summary: ICE in hash_rtx_cb, at cse.c:2548
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69031
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this is a compiler bug. The arithmetic must be valid in constexpr. It
does not have to give the same result as it would during runtime evaluation, so
I think constexpr evaluation should not be disab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
OK so the issue is that SLP_TREE_TWO_OPERATORS as it used to be cannot be used
to drive live operation vectorization (it does it twice but with only the
intermediate vector results). The easiest is to not t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Michael_S from comment #4)
> Pay attention that it's not just AVX.
> '-mavx2 -mfma -Ofast' generates different code, but at the end gives the
> same wrong result.
> Unfortunately, I have no AVX5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
On trunk we fail the SLP reduction vectorization because a VEC_PERM SLP
reduction
operation is not supported by epilogue generation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9f980cdba9e2fc0cc3f50c2c790f53b4dcd9dbe5
commit r10-8693-g9f980cdba9e2fc0cc3f50c2c790f53b4dcd9dbe5
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f089569851ca9c8a81400dd8a159f86636ed20ec
commit r11-2949-gf089569851ca9c8a81400dd8a159f86636ed20ec
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96866
Bug ID: 96866
Summary: ICE in print_operand_address, at
config/rs6000/rs6000.c:13560
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96867
Bug ID: 96867
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected parm_decl, have var_decl in
handle_omp_array_sections_1, at cp/semantics.c:5086
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96868
Bug ID: 96868
Summary: C++20 designated initializer erroneous warnings
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96867
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96867
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96864
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|loop not vectori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.0|---
Component|libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96861
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
--- Comment #4 from Laurent Rineau
---
At the compiler level, I do not think the bug is related to `-std=c++2a`. That
flags was there only to trigger the bug from the recent versions of libstdc++
since:
commit e6c76f0d3327bf00c96f5a63961c1d5ab7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96867
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49159
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49159&action=edit
gcc11-pr96867.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
"[Note: This document does not require an implementation to support the
FENV_ACCESS pragma; it is implementation-defined (15.8) whether the pragma
is supported. As a consequence, it is implementation-defined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96847
--- Comment #2 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Ok thanks, just wanted also to clarify that the size increase was not actually
due to changing array sizes, but it was difference between GCC-9.2 and GCC-10.2
for the _same_ array lengths. So GCC-10.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Also C++ [expr.const] p12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96860
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49160
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49160&action=edit
gcc11-pr96862.patch
Untested patch. e and f initializers are still evaluated at runtime and will
depend on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96791
--- Comment #7 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I wonder if this other case works properly when compiled with -m64. Trying to
generate a stxvp with a 32-bit address seems odd.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse ---
Should we handle flag_trapping_math at the same time?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I don't know.
fold-const.c has:
#define START_FOLD_INIT \
int saved_signaling_nans = flag_signaling_nans;\
int saved_trapping_math = flag_trapping_math;\
int saved_rounding_math = flag_rounding_math;\
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96818
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d503cd98713a41aad34ade2b9b0d9973efb21e11
commit r11-2951-gd503cd98713a41aad34ade2b9b0d9973efb21e11
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96869
Bug ID: 96869
Summary: __vectors unsupported in hardware should be rejected
at compile-time
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96869
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmmm, so you dont want to allow generic vector types? This is unlike GNU c/C++.
l class name is not very helpful for the
average user:
Error: Type mismatch in argument ‘p’ at (1); passed CLASS(__class_main_p_T0_p)
to CLASS(__class_main_p_T1_t)
Seen on:
GNU Fortran (GCC) 9.3.1 20200831
GNU Fortran (GCC) 10.2.1 20200831
GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.0.0 20200831 (experimental)
Thank y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96870
--- Comment #1 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-August/054955.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96871
Bug ID: 96871
Summary: Fails to parse templated constructor in template class
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96872
Bug ID: 96872
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96859
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96873
Bug ID: 96873
Summary: Internal compiler error in alias_ctad_tweaks
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96874
Bug ID: 96874
Summary: Internal Compiler Error: Segmentation fault on class
NTTP
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96873
--- Comment #1 from Mateusz Pusz ---
Similar error but in a different line happens for:
```
#include
template
struct basic_fixed_string {
CharT data_[N + 1] = {};
constexpr basic_fixed_string(CharT ch) noexcept { data_[0] = ch; }
const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96875
Bug ID: 96875
Summary: Aliased pointers to union members result in different
output with optimisation level.
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96875
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64-linux-gnu,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96875
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is a defect report against the C standard about this case and a much
older gcc bugzilla filed too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14319
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96875
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14319
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96764
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ecdb93224c56189a129e97c556fe6b78e1b15a63
commit r11-2952-gecdb93224c56189a129e97c556fe6b78e1b15a63
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96763
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0d1b4edc5fff834e8f924b20dd021ded7a21d2d2
commit r11-2953-g0d1b4edc5fff834e8f924b20dd021ded7a21d2d2
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93529
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:73a2b8dd17dbc02c0c7e6286e90f17833aa50906
commit r11-2954-g73a2b8dd17dbc02c0c7e6286e90f17833aa50906
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93529
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96764
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323
Bug 88323 depends on bug 93529, which changed state.
Bug 93529 Summary: Implement P1009R2, Array size deduction in new-expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93529
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96763
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96869
--- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Hmmm, so you dont want to allow generic vector types? This is unlike GNU
> c/C++.
Correct, the D spec has had the following entry added.
> Implementation Defined:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96876
Bug ID: 96876
Summary: missing check for destructibility of base classes in
aggregate initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96871
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Fails to parse templated|[11 Regression] Fails to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96872
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96805
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at marehr dot
dialup.fu-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96873
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96874
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95291
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mateusz.pusz at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95291
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
When fixing, let's make sure that bug 96874 is fixed too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96876
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96860
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:18056e45db1c75aa209fa9a756395ddceb867a88
commit r11-2955-g18056e45db1c75aa209fa9a756395ddceb867a88
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96798
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ee7bfbe5eb70a23bbf3a2cedfdcbd2ea1a20c3f2
commit r11-2956-gee7bfbe5eb70a23bbf3a2cedfdcbd2ea1a20c3f2
Author: David Malcolm
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96798
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bc62bfb0f43eeada02cb924e3cb5457a399b01c0
commit r11-2957-gbc62bfb0f43eeada02cb924e3cb5457a399b01c0
Author: David Malcolm
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96860
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96798
--- Comment #12 from David Malcolm ---
Does r11-2957-gbc62bfb0f43eeada02cb924e3cb5457a399b01c0 fix the failing tests
seen on Darwin?
In any case, I should probably also fix:
> (a) looks like region_model::on_call_pre is erroneously treating a bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85830
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Carl Love :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1da918e153b60ef81686dc5cd110d8608d962c79
commit r11-2958-g1da918e153b60ef81686dc5cd110d8608d962c79
Author: Carl Love
Date: Thu Aug 27
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96871
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.0|9.4
Summary|[11 Regression] I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96868
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
