https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
cprop hardreg change
(insn 457 499 460 33 (set (reg:SI 39 r11 [orig:86 _11 ] [86])
(reg:SI 37 r9 [orig:86 _11 ] [86])) "test.c":29:36 75 {*movsi_internal}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 37 r9 [orig:8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98685
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98690
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98690
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10/11 Regression]
|une
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98696
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE when build |[11 Regression] ICE when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98692
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98692
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98549
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
There's a reproducer without a warning if you want:
$ cat pr98549-2.C
extern "C" void *memcpy(void *, const void *, unsigned long);
inline void copy_mem(unsigned char *out, unsigned char *in, long n) {
memc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97969
--- Comment #20 from Przemyslaw Wirkus ---
Just a heads-up:
I would like to suggest backport for this patch to GCC 9 and 10. Quoting
Vladimir:
> The bug is actually severe and should be classified as P1
Currently patch applies cleanly for both
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98685
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2ea6f4a377e51ed4d55cd8277f8c201ad66685f6
commit r11-6706-g2ea6f4a377e51ed4d55cd8277f8c201ad66685f6
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98685
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98549
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98697
Bug ID: 98697
Summary: shl not vectorized for v16qi and v8hi with MVE
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98559
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ab192e494fe27ee73eb3e5271f951a0e9ee02b9c
commit r10-5885-gab192e494fe27ee73eb3e5271f951a0e9ee02b9c
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96696
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I'd say doing sth at RTL expansion. For GIMPLE we should consider the cases
int g1, g2;
int f(int x, int y)
{
g1 = x / y;
return x - (x % y);
}
int g(int x, int y)
{
g2 = x % y;
return (x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98697
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
it looks like unpack from short int to int is not supported? That is,
the usual issue is that a[i] << b[i] is a shift of int << ... because
of C integral promotion rules.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70454
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0411ae7f08e0f5a8b02ff313d26d27a0f6d1bb34
commit r11-6709-g0411ae7f08e0f5a8b02ff313d26d27a0f6d1bb34
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96098
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
The testcase morphed in a way no longer testing what it was originally supposed
to do and slightly altering it shows the original issue isn't fixed (anymore).
The limit as set as result of PR91403 (and dups)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96098
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cb60334b7162ec5ae560be482cd7a33402470bb4
commit r11-6710-gcb60334b7162ec5ae560be482cd7a33402470bb4
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96098
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71233
--- Comment #74 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a6306420090409cb397e2e042256eb1905f415f
commit r11-6711-g1a6306420090409cb397e2e042256eb1905f415f
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96147
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d03f14c354a348cc1043f637cae1ac6470034f71
commit r11-6712-gd03f14c354a348cc1043f637cae1ac6470034f71
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96147
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1bd80fb7064869e8d03ddb59e583f4cc9020770
commit r11-6713-ge1bd80fb7064869e8d03ddb59e583f4cc9020770
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96147
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aa4ee5798fefd8eedd51287695120bf5219a9858
commit r11-6714-gaa4ee5798fefd8eedd51287695120bf5219a9858
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96147
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b36c9cd09472c8efb8405726b7cc94fa4ae7059f
commit r11-6715-gb36c9cd09472c8efb8405726b7cc94fa4ae7059f
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96147
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96681
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=98688
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nathan at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96671
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98667
--- Comment #11 from Matthew Whitehead ---
A patch has been proposed to remove the -fcf-protection=full from the ebuild
script:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/765442
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95276
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96671
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49973
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49973&action=edit
gcc11-pr96671.patch
Seems we handle all those cases, so I think we just should add a testcase and
close.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96599
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98696
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-15
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96376
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:446703ccc2ce09e9710964f781a21030bf3c2d54
commit r11-6717-g446703ccc2ce09e9710964f781a21030bf3c2d54
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96376
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71233
--- Comment #75 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:63999d751df9bcde4ab9107edb4c635d274b248d
commit r11-6719-g63999d751df9bcde4ab9107edb4c635d274b248d
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96271
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=19987
Bug 19987 depends on bug 96094, which changed state.
Bug 96094 Summary: Failure to optimize bool division
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96094
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96094
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95253
--- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 49975
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49975&action=edit
test patch
I think it's as simpleas the attached patch. Are you able to try it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98698
Bug ID: 98698
Summary: atomic load to FPU registers
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98346
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96443
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drozdov_xf2g3gb3 at mail dot ru
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95253
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Starke ---
That is what I did as workaround for me, but I am not sure how this affacts
other targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Extended test:
template using A = int[1];
template> struct X { };
template
void
f (const A)
{
const A a;
}
template
struct Y {
const A a;
};
I see what's going on, originally this object-size text <= 20 test was
gated with target 'arm_thumb2'.
My patch to exclude LOB targets replaced that with
'arm_thumb2_ok_no_arm_v8_1_lob', unfortunatelly this is relying on
'arm_thumb2_ok' that has a different semantic compared to the original
'arm_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96372
--- Comment #2 from Andrea Corallo ---
I see what's going on, originally this object-size text <= 20 test was
gated with target 'arm_thumb2'.
My patch to exclude LOB targets replaced that with
'arm_thumb2_ok_no_arm_v8_1_lob', unfortunatelly this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96372
akrl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96669
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96599
--- Comment #4 from Gabriel Ravier ---
That makes sense, I had forgotten it was UB and Clang didn't seem to diagnose
this in any way, and I must have forgotten to check with GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96372
akrl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98699
Bug ID: 98699
Summary: Reset OMP_NESTED to true if OMP_MAX_ACTIVE_LEVELS is >
1.
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88836
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5a783f42d77b2f00a1ed171c119b020e8df8e521
commit r11-6723-g5a783f42d77b2f00a1ed171c119b020e8df8e521
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98696
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 49976
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49976&action=edit
Patch to fix the failing selftest
Does the attached patch fix the build on Windows hosts?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #1)
> cprop hardreg change
>
> (insn 457 499 460 33 (set (reg:SI 39 r11 [orig:86 _11 ] [86])
> (reg:SI 37 r9 [orig:86 _11 ] [86])) "test.c":29:36 75
> {*movsi_inte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98591
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:492b90f33dfb37576dc7ae424d67b2be8b959bf2
commit r11-6724-g492b90f33dfb37576dc7ae424d67b2be8b959bf2
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95253
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ba71fabb78b18884e9f479f45a257bab50e8959
commit r11-6725-g1ba71fabb78b18884e9f479f45a257bab50e8959
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
> It seems to be be handled here.
>
> cut from copy_value in regcprop.c:
>
> /* If SRC had been assigned a mode narrower than the copy, we can't
> link DEST into the chain, because not all of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95253
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98591
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88836
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
and rewritten pattern
(define_insn "*vec_dupv4hi"
[(set (match_operand:V4HI 0 "register_operand" "=y,xYw")
(vec_duplicate:V4HI
(truncate:HI
(match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98694
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #5)
> and rewritten pattern
> (define_insn "*vec_dupv4hi"
> [(set (match_operand:V4HI 0 "register_operand" "=y,xYw")
> (vec_duplicate:V4HI
> (truncate:H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98682
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is a dup of bug 772.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98688
--- Comment #3 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yeah it's pretty clear that something needs to be output, as with that code I
get an error like this:
In module imported at mma-module-2.C:1:1:
mma_foo0: In function ‘int bar(__vector_quad*, vec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98696
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Created attachment 49976 [details]
> Patch to fix the failing selftest
>
> Does the attached patch fix the build on Windows hosts?
Thank you it is working now. You c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98597
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:adb520606ce3e1e1f8aa8c5d0c59a5f3196fc545
commit r11-6729-gadb520606ce3e1e1f8aa8c5d0c59a5f3196fc545
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98696
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3128bf01289a243a9e0ebb4e34c23bcb04cb938
commit r11-6730-ga3128bf01289a243a9e0ebb4e34c23bcb04cb938
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Fr
(C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
and
g++ (GCC) 11.0.0 20210115 (experimental)
Copyright © 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96671
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aaec739250b1b148f7db5aa86719fe76645efc06
commit r11-6731-gaaec739250b1b148f7db5aa86719fe76645efc06
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98696
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96671
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987
Bug 19987 depends on bug 96671, which changed state.
Bug 96671 Summary: Failure to optimize a 3 xor+and pattern to xor+andnot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96671
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97847
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I've reproduced the bug too. The fix will be on the next week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63707
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cd09079cfd50d289cbb05eadb728a0713f6bae8a
commit r11-6733-gcd09079cfd50d289cbb05eadb728a0713f6bae8a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d75199f782348bfc401f925b60f33ffc9822b7cc
commit r11-6736-gd75199f782348bfc401f925b60f33ffc9822b7cc
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63707
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.0
Known to fail|11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 49977
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49977&action=edit
possible patch to elide more copies
This implements a suggestion I made in
https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98228
--- Comment #13 from Marius Hillenbrand ---
gnat applies different choices for the calling convention on x86 and s390 for
Get_Next_Interp. though, by massaging gcc/ada/sem_type.ads, I got them to
produce the same GIMPLE. while compiling sem_type.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98624
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Oops, I hadn't noticed that this PR has an assignee, since it's still in NEW.
Anyway, this was my patch:
--- a/gcc/cp/tree.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/tree.c
@@ -1341,7 +1341,9 @@ cp_build_qualified_type_real (tree type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98062
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96681
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5c046034e3ea61dd68965154a398f8f813daf8f2
commit r11-6738-g5c046034e3ea61dd68965154a398f8f813daf8f2
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96669
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0425f4c1b63107bf3bc4778d1fe53c91ace7838d
commit r11-6739-g0425f4c1b63107bf3bc4778d1fe53c91ace7838d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96681
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987
Bug 19987 depends on bug 96681, which changed state.
Bug 96681 Summary: Failure to optimize xor of comparisons with specific
constants to comparison of xor-ed of compared variables
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96681
Wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18487
Federico Kircheis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||federico.kircheis at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Nathan Sid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95253
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1efa6af61ab54faf0d8d091328e0c6a1141050c
commit r11-6740-ge1efa6af61ab54faf0d8d091328e0c6a1141050c
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9beb6d88effdab4209beb8bc5e4b8773317f1d33
commit r11-6741-g9beb6d88effdab4209beb8bc5e4b8773317f1d33
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98701
Bug ID: 98701
Summary: I compiled a program with gfortran on Mac (Big Sur,
version 11.1) and g77 on Windows 10. I get two very
different results for identical input files with the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98699
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran |libgomp
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98661
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86656
Bug 86656 depends on bug 98661, which changed state.
Bug 98661 Summary: Valgrind errors during error recovery of invalid derived
type declarations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98661
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89891
Bug 89891 depends on bug 98661, which changed state.
Bug 98661 Summary: Valgrind errors during error recovery of invalid derived
type declarations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98661
What|Removed
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
