https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103262
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e69b7c5779863469479698f863ab25e0d9b4586e
commit r12-5292-ge69b7c5779863469479698f863ab25e0d9b4586e
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Tue N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-16
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103254
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.2.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103270
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103262
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103255
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] |[11/12 Regression]
|op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103258
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
jan@localhost:~> gcc t.c
t.c:2:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
2 | infinite (int p)
| ^~~~
t.c:16:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
16 | tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
--- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Started with r12-5129-g8ed62c929c7c4462.
On godbolt it ICEs even w/ 20211029 snapshot.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103259
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markeggleston at gcc dot
gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103260
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103261
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-16
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103263
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103264
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Ah, ok, so no ICE, but wrong code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Still, I can't reproduce with the current master.
Apparently, the code snippet from #c0 produces only 2 warnings:
$ gcc pr103267.c -c -O2 && ./a.out
pr103267.c:17:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103192
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
iftmp.2373_1515 is defined earlier as:
iftmp.2373_1515 = code_1387(D) != 181 ? ctx_1386 : outer_ctx_1389;
so the transformation by dom3? from
if (outer_ctx_1389 != 0B)
to
if (iftmp.2373_1515 != 0B)
is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
Works for me even with the 3 warnings.
hubicka@lomikamen:/aux/hubicka/trunk/build-lto2/gcc$ cat >tt.c
__attribute__ ((noinline,const))
infinite (int p)
{
if (p)
while (1);
return p;
}
__attribute__ ((noinline))
static void
test(int p, int *a)
{
int v = infinite (p);
if (*a && v)
__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
Works for me even with the 3 warnings.
hubicka@lomikamen:/aux/hubicka/trunk/build-lto2/gcc$ cat >tt.c
__attribute__ ((noinline,const))
infinite (int p)
{
if (p)
while (1);
return p;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103230
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Still reproduces with the current master:
g:e69b7c5779863469479698f863ab25e0d9b4586e.
Aha, but here is better example (reproduces same way).
In the former one I forgot const attribute which makes it invalid.
The testcase tests that ipa-sra is missing ECF_LOOPING_CONST_OR_PURE
check
static int
__attribute__ ((noinline))
infinite (int p)
{
if (p)
while (1);
return p;
}
__attr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #6 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
Aha, but here is better example (reproduces same way).
In the former one I forgot const attribute which makes it invalid.
The testcase tests that ipa-sra is missing ECF_LOOPING_CONST_OR_PURE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Now, I can reproduce it, the original code snippet was different:
diff -u pr103267-o.c pr103267.c
--- pr103267-o.c2021-11-16 09:47:41.463349286 +0100
+++ pr103267.c 2021-11-16 09:47:11.811550854 +01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to hubicka from comment #6)
> Aha, but here is better example (reproduces same way).
> In the former one I forgot const attribute which makes it invalid.
> The testcase tests that ipa-sra is missing
> @@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
> -static int
> __attribute__ ((noinline,const))
> infinite (int p)
> {
Just for a record, it crahes with or without static int here for me :)
I run across it because the code tracking must access in ipa-sra is IMO
conceptually wrong. I noticed that because ipa-modref solves
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103267
--- Comment #9 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> @@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
> -static int
> __attribute__ ((noinline,const))
> infinite (int p)
> {
Just for a record, it crahes with or without static int here for me :)
I run across it because th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103271
Bug ID: 103271
Summary: ICE in assign_stack_temp_for_type, at function.c:798
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103271
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina ---
Looks like the RPO pass is causing match.pd to simply
vect_iftmp.10_41 = vect__1.9_38 * vect_cst__40;
vect_iftmp.10_42 = vect__1.9_39 * vect_cst__40;
iftmp.0_8 = _1 * 2.0e+0;
mask_patt_19.11_44 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102009
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eacdfaf7ca07367ede1a0c50aa997953958dabae
commit r12-5294-geacdfaf7ca07367ede1a0c50aa997953958dabae
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103208
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:47de0b56ee455ec82ec7d61a20988f11b67aa4e9
commit r12-5295-g47de0b56ee455ec82ec7d61a20988f11b67aa4e9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103250
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103251
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |12.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103252
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> can you also attach fixed_point_compound.c please?
Sorry, it's from LLVM, reduced test-case:
$ cat fixed_point_compound.c
_Accum sa;
int c;
void div_csa() { c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103255
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103238
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There is no reason to think this would be a DR for C++.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103257
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103258
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103259
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103264
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103271
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.0|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
> .COND_MUL might raise an exception and DCE removes unused LHS of calls.
> Looks like FMA analysis doesn't like internal fns w/o a LHS?
That makes sense, it looks like it needs the LHS to find the uses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103251
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It makes results not reproducable. It is a bug in the test. It is good to
have the pid in the testcase output somewhere of course, just not in the
summary.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 16 Nov 2021, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
>
> --- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
> > .COND_MUL might raise an exception
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103208
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103255
Felix Fietkau changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nbd at nbd dot name
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103266
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> I think 'X' means simply not dereferenced or escaping since this was all
> PTA based. 'S' would still eventually allow escaping. But yes, PTA
> simply takes '1' literally. So the patch b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101941
--- Comment #19 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> > * special case function splitting such that a BB that contains a function
> > call which has either warning or error attribute on it; not to split out to
> > a different function.
>
> S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103272
Bug ID: 103272
Summary: failure to use vld20/vld21 to vectorize for ARM MVE
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103254
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
--- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina ---
> We might want to eventually special-case some of the internal fns
> in internal_fn_flags? Or have a special ECF_FP_TRAP which
> we'd rewrite in internal_fn_flags based on flag_trapping_math
> (but we'd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103266
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 16 Nov 2021, hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103266
>
> --- Comment #5 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> > I think 'X' means
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101941
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #14)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> > Actually, lookng at the kernel, I don't see how this can happen.
> Inlining is not always the issue here.
Ah,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 16 Nov 2021, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103253
>
> --- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina ---
> > We might want to eventually specia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102880
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f98f373dd822b35c52356b753d528924e9f89678
commit r12-5300-gf98f373dd822b35c52356b753d528924e9f89678
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102880
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:045206450386bcd774db3bde0c696828402361c6
commit r12-5301-g045206450386bcd774db3bde0c696828402361c6
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102880
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101941
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka ---
Jakub: I see it is about error attributed call in the split out part of
function. Then we really want to prevent the split. Keeping track of those
should be possible in the recursive walk (where we keep track
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102009
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102838
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 51807
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51807&action=edit
gcc12-pr102838-2.patch
Does this patch fix it?
Sorry for the delay...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103233
--- Comment #8 from alx.manpages at gmail dot com ---
Hi Andrew,
On 11/16/21 00:52, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103233
>
> --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
> (In reply to Alejandro Colo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102675
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103169
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103252
--- Comment #7 from Jason A. Donenfeld ---
The strange thing in this case is that the non-avx512 codegen _doesn't_ spill
to memory. It just uses the gprs that are around. So it seems like that,
somehow, the mere existence of the mask registers c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102772
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103252
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Definitely not lazier. When the mask registers are available for use, RA
considers them and when spilling to those is cheaper than to memory, it spills
to them and not memory. Where cheaper is determined b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103252
--- Comment #9 from Jason A. Donenfeld ---
> When the mask registers are available for use, RA considers them and when
> spilling to those is cheaper than to memory, it spills to them and not memory.
Yes, this is the thing I don't get. When y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103192
--- Comment #18 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #17)
> iftmp.2373_1515 is defined earlier as:
> iftmp.2373_1515 = code_1387(D) != 181 ? ctx_1386 : outer_ctx_1389;
> so the transformation by dom3? from
> if (ou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103115
Jürgen Reuter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||juergen.reuter at desy dot de
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103273
Bug ID: 103273
Summary: [12 Regression] internal compiler error: in
cp_parser_type_id_1, at cp/parser.c:24010
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103273
Steinar H. Gunderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103273
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103273
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Summary|ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103273
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] internal |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102952
--- Comment #25 from peterz at infradead dot org ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #24)
> Should I submit the current patches?
Yes, I'd say so. Once merged I'll send a kernel patch to use
-mindirect-branch-cs-prefix for all RETPOLINE builds.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33925
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69549
--- Comment #8 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 51808
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51808&action=edit
basic implementation
Tentative patch.
Produces working code but could use some (many) checks to d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Summary|[4.9.0 Regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79224
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83665
Bug 83665 depends on bug 79224, which changed state.
Bug 79224 Summary: [7 Regression] Large C-Ray slowdown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79224
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91433
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103115
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #3)
> Thomas, are you sure? I cannot see an ICE, neither with the master from
> September 21 nor with the master from yesterday.
I see the ICE with
gcc version 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99183
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |11.1.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101917
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103145
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103195
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103274
Bug ID: 103274
Summary: Remaining -freorder-blocks-and-partition/ glitch with
Windows SEH
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103192
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This looks like a lim2 bug to me.
Before that we have:
[local count: 44372324]:
[/usr/src/gcc/gcc/gimplify.c:10068:24] if (code_1387(D) == 181)
goto ; [51.12%]
else
goto ; [48.88%]
[local
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103192
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 51810
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51810&action=edit
gcc12-pr103192.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103275
Bug ID: 103275
Summary: don't generate kmov with IE model relocations
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
1 - 100 of 264 matches
Mail list logo
