https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98099
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98100
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-03
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98107
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-03
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98082
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ebotcazou at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96075
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98104
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:381d1d0120e4dfab3a714f44354e868a80dbaa25
commit r11-5698-g381d1d0120e4dfab3a714f44354e868a80dbaa25
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98104
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98108
--- Comment #2 from i.hamsa at gmail dot com ---
The standard streams are not user defined objects. They need to be initialized
before any user code touches them, before `main`, before everything, no matter
what. This is exactly the purpose of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98115
Bug ID: 98115
Summary: [11 Regression] error: partial specialization ‘class
Stringify’ is not more specialized
than [-fpermissive] since r11-5663-g329ae1d7751346ba
Product:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98115
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98113
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 49668
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49668&action=edit
prototype
So like this (some correctness verification is missing as well as more general
matching on the def s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98116
Bug ID: 98116
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in strip_typedefs, at
cp/tree.c:1744 since r11-5663-g329ae1d7751346ba
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98116
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97865
--- Comment #26 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Any news? I did not test the patch you posted in your last comment, but only
the one from your git repo. Under the assumption that this is identical to the
patch here, it works. So apparently libfortran and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97865
--- Comment #27 from Iain Sandoe ---
tomorrow if there are no further comments (the patch needs minor typographical
changes).
I'm also testing back-ports for the open branches, and will publish
Darwin-specific branches at least for gcc-7.5 (and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97757
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96919
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Bhavana Kilambi from comment #10)
> Created attachment 49664 [details]
> Removes the push_back() statement
The suggested patch breaks most of the tests:
$ make check -k RUNTESTFLAGS="gcov.exp"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
¤t_value is passed to do_lookup_x call which does modify it in some
cases, e.g.
result->s = sym;
result->m = (struct link_map *) map;
or passes it to other function, do_lookup_unique, which can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> Do we have a simple reproducer for the miscompiled Glibc library?
All one needs to do is with glibc git trunk
CC=trunk-gcc CXX=trunk-g++ ../configure --disable-sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The crash seems to be:
=> 0x77fdbe20 <_dl_lookup_symbol_x+0>: push %r15
0x77fdbe22 <_dl_lookup_symbol_x+2>: push %r14
0x77fdbe24 <_dl_lookup_symbol_x+4>: push %r13
0x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95694
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00bcb8380bf755c60d5ad605a21818f6d3ed9912
commit r10-9114-g00bcb8380bf755c60d5ad605a21818f6d3ed9912
Author: Richard Sand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Hm, adding -fno-ipa-sra does not help while -O1 does in order to remove the
miscompilation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #8 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> on the mov %fs:0x10,%rax perhaps %fs isn't initialized yet?
Yes, that's why the access is guarded by flags & DL_LOOKUP_GSCOPE_LOCK. During
initial relocation, _
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #9 from Florian Weimer ---
And we should not end up in the add_dependency part, either because l_type
won't be lt_loaded and the DL_LOOKUP_ADD_DEPENDENCY flag hasn't been set,
either.
The inline asm is marked as volatile, and that sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looking at *.optimized dump, mov %%fs:%c1,%0 appears in there only bb 64,
guarded by flags_90(D) & 4 check, so exactly the check that appears in the
source code
- flags & DL_LOOKUP_GSCOPE_LOCK (among various
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, RTL loop_invariant. Perhaps because the inline asm is buggy?
asm ("mov %%fs:%c1,%0" : "=r" (__self) : "i" (__builtin_offsetof (struct
pthread, header.self)));
The only input of the asm is the constant,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #12 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> Ah, RTL loop_invariant. Perhaps because the inline asm is buggy?
> asm ("mov %%fs:%c1,%0" : "=r" (__self) : "i" (__builtin_offsetof (struct
> pthread, header.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93740
--- Comment #3 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Still broken in gcc 10.2 and trunk, also in C++20 mode.
The problem seems to show up only when address of member function (virtual or
not) is passed as template parameter - only then gcc fails du
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And no, the asm isn't marked volatile, that would have prevented it too:
# define THREAD_SELF \
({ struct pthread *__self; \
asm ("mov %%fs:%c1,%0" : "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93259
--- Comment #3 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Still fails on gcc 10.2 and trunk, in all std C++11-20 modes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I guess with GCC 6 and later one can use:
void
foo (int *p)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 64; i++)
{
if (p[i])
{
int *q;
//asm ("mov %%fs:%c1,%0" : "=r" (q) : "i" (16));
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98113
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #49668|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93740
--- Comment #4 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
I have done some more experiments, and it seems the problem applies to all
pointer-to-member (not just pointer to member function, but also for pointer to
data member).
Also it doesn't matter if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96075
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020, clyon at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96075
>
> Christophe Lyon changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97942
--- Comment #1 from David Friberg ---
Somewhat related, we may note that GCC accepts-valid the following program, say
(D):
class A { class B {}; };
template struct S {};
template struct S {};
template struct S {};
int main() {}
which is vali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97770
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
--- Comment #14 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69348
David Friberg changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davveston at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
("%d\n", c);
}
***
gcc version:
$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 11.0.0 20201203 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98117
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> And no, the asm isn't marked volatile, that would have prevented it too:
> # define THREAD_SELF \
> ({ struct pthread *__self;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In the glibc bugzilla or on private IRC I've suggested either:
diff --git a/sysdeps/x86_64/nptl/tls.h b/sysdeps/x86_64/nptl/tls.h
index a08bf972de..ccb5f24d92 100644
--- a/sysdeps/x86_64/nptl/tls.h
+++ b/sys
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91442
paul.luck...@rwth-aachen.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul.luck...@rwth-aachen.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98118
Bug ID: 98118
Summary: [coroutines] ICE with coroutine with parameter with
non-trivial destructor
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98118
--- Comment #1 from xzlsmc ---
Created attachment 49671
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49671&action=edit
ii file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98118
--- Comment #2 from xzlsmc ---
Created attachment 49672
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49672&action=edit
compiler output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98112
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thiago at kde dot org
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98119
Bug ID: 98119
Summary: SVE: Wrong code with -O1 -ftree-vectorize
-msve-vector-bits=512 -mtune=thunderx
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98018
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
--- Comment #17 from Florian Weimer ---
Jakub's glibc test failures were due to --prefix=/usr/local, so that glibc
wouldn't find the installed system libgcc_s in /usr/lib64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98115
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98117
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98116
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=98120
Bug ID: 98120
Summary: Multiple definitions (single TU) of explicit
specialization of member enumeration of a class
template
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98119
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-03
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98105
--- Comment #2 from Peter Foelsche ---
sorry -- adding a definition outside of class for the variable solves the
problem!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98118
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-03
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98100
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98100
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, that is because we don't really copy the decl during cloning, because it
isn't really used in the code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98016
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Ev Drikos from comment #7)
> Created attachment 49659 [details]
> attachment for pr98016-07
>
> (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #6)
> > Created attachment 49645 [details]
> > Fix for the PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98100
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
Bug ID: 98121
Summary: __attribute__ ((used)) should not imply
SHF_RETAIN_SECTION
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96075
--- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon ---
Yes, the test fails on gcc-10 too.
I tried adding xfail vect_load_lanes in gcc-9, and it correctly makes the test
XFAIL.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98110
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98122
Bug ID: 98122
Summary: [regression] Accessing union member through
pointer-to-member is not a constant expression
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98113
--- Comment #6 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
With the patch, vxe/popcount-1.c works on s390 again:
vpopctf:
.LFB2:
.cfi_startproc
vpopctf %v24,%v24
br %r14
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98123
Bug ID: 98123
Summary: if-to-switch tests fail on arm
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
jozefl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jozefl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93121
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:896048cf43d5eb21ab7c16553bb9d13b0f890b81
commit r11-5704-g896048cf43d5eb21ab7c16553bb9d13b0f890b81
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
The issue here is that what should happen when definitions marked with used
attribute and unmarked definitions are put in the same section. It has nothing
to do with .retain.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97078
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5d103763b9bc6a998dd4a453861663b229d7a24a
commit r11-5705-g5d103763b9bc6a998dd4a453861663b229d7a24a
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98082
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5d103763b9bc6a998dd4a453861663b229d7a24a
commit r11-5705-g5d103763b9bc6a998dd4a453861663b229d7a24a
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98099
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:277ff3406d533990e98cf1c2075b9dc9db6fa48a
commit r11-5706-g277ff3406d533990e98cf1c2075b9dc9db6fa48a
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98082
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98099
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-03
Component|target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98123
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98123
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98124
Bug ID: 98124
Summary: Z: Load and test LTDBR instruction gets not used for
comparison against 0.0
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98107
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62fb1b9e0da44a15b0434def20724f989d61e27b
commit r11-5708-g62fb1b9e0da44a15b0434def20724f989d61e27b
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98107
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
Bug ID: 98125
Summary: New test case g++.dg/pr93195a.C in r11-5656 has excess
errors
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96299
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
--- Comment #4 from Jozef Lawrynowicz ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #2)
> The issue here is that what should happen when definitions marked with used
> attribute and unmarked definitions are put in the same section. It has
> nothing
> to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98116
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7254a78cf4c419a9b9361289d8c535130cf1dfd0
commit r11-5712-g7254a78cf4c419a9b9361289d8c535130cf1dfd0
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98115
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7254a78cf4c419a9b9361289d8c535130cf1dfd0
commit r11-5712-g7254a78cf4c419a9b9361289d8c535130cf1dfd0
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98116
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98115
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$ cat x.c
struct dtv_slotinfo_list
{
struct dtv_slotinfo_list *next;
};
extern struct dtv_slotinfo_list *list;
static int __attribute__ ((section ("__libc_freeres_fn")))
free_slotinfo (struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
--- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Jozef Lawrynowicz from comment #4)
> GAS merges the "R" flag state in .section declarations, silently, and with
> logical OR, and GCC should do the same. So if you have:
>
> int __attribute__((
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
#define HAVE_GAS_SECTION_LINK_ORDER 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
--- Comment #7 from Jozef Lawrynowicz ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jozef Lawrynowicz from comment #4)
> > GAS merges the "R" flag state in .section declarations, silently, and with
> > logical OR, and GCC should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98121
--- Comment #8 from Jozef Lawrynowicz ---
(In reply to Jozef Lawrynowicz from comment #7)
> (In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Jozef Lawrynowicz from comment #4)
> > > GAS merges the "R" flag state in .section declarati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98126
Bug ID: 98126
Summary: -Wsequence-point is non-linear for certain cases
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98112
--- Comment #2 from Fangrui Song ---
Note: -fdirect-access-external-data is architecture-independent. For example,
currently Clang on aarch64 can perform the following optimization:
// clang -target aarch64 -fPIE -O3
adrpx8, :got:var
ldr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98122
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98122
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #2)
> #define HAVE_GAS_SECTION_LINK_ORDER 1
Please show the command line options passed to ld, pass --dependency-file=FILE
to ld to list all linker input files and upload all linke
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo
