https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103586
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103492
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Even simpler test-case:
struct A
{
unsigned int val: 1;
};
int foo(struct A *a)
{
switch (a->val)
{
case 0:
return 123;
case 1:
return 456;
}
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #4)
> (In reply to Hongyu Wang from comment #3)
>
> > So we may need to support V8HFmode in VALID_SSE2_REG_MODE if we don't want
> > to modify those function_args and fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95208
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103597
Bug ID: 103597
Summary: False -Wimplicit-fallthrough= involving macro
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103587
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] ICE |[10/11/12 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29756
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Good:
[local count: 1073741824]:
_1 = *m_12(D);
_14 = VEC_PERM_EXPR ;
_2 = _1 * _14;
_3 = MEM[(__v4sf *)m_12(D) + 16B];
_15 = VEC_PERM_EXPR ;
_4 = _3 * _15;
_5 = _2 + _4;
_6 = MEM[(__v4s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103592
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103596
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103597
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #8)
> > but the x86 backend chooses to not let the vectorizer compare costs with
> > different vector sizes but instead asks it to pick the first working
> > solution f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103584
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I think we should avoid placing incorrect gimple_call_{use,clobber}_sets on the
builtin function calls then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103587
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103587
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.0|10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103598
Bug ID: 103598
Summary: [12 regression] __PRETTY_FUNCTION_ lost namespaces in
types
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103598
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-07
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103598
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Confirmed, started with r12-5783-gf78eaffd1538efb4.
Hmm, actually it makes sense to some extend since llvm::getTypeName is in the
llvm namespace printing llvm::
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103585
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
Doing some basic perfing shows that perdida seems to account for about 36% of
runtime of the benchmark and has interesting property that most of time it will
return without looping (and that probbly explains P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93809
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 51939
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51939&action=edit
untested patch
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: d
Assignee: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org
Reporter: sch...@linux-m68k.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: powerpc64-*-linux*
/daten/gcc/gcc-20211207/Build/./gcc/gdc -B/daten/gcc/gcc-20211207/Build/./gcc/
-B/usr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103600
Bug ID: 103600
Summary: Cannot use typeid result in constant expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103592
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
23.13% 44783 a.out.vecta.out.vect[.]
__perdida_m_MOD_generalized_hookes_law.constprop.0.isra.0#
2.40% 4641 a.out.vecta.out.vect[.]
__perdida_m_MOD_gen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83469
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Created attachment 51938 [details]
> untested fix
>
> This is the patch which fixes this one and PR 98417. I had originally was
> going to do it was 2 seperate p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83469
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 51938
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51938&action=edit
untested fix
This is the patch which fixes this one and PR 98417. I had originally was going
to do it was 2 sep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103593
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103594
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103599
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103558
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sch...@linux-m68k.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103596
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103585
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103600
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||102551
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
--- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu ---
Got it, thanks for your detail explanation, so there're 2 issues in this case,
first x86 target didn't choose vector size w/ smallest cost, second BB
vectorization with gaps at the end of a load is not suppor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103600
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Or at least the
constexpr bool b = &typeid(int) == &typeid(long);
example.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103558
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-07
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103560
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103560
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to brocolis from comment #1)
> make[2]: Entering directory
> '/build/mingw/build-gcc-git/x86_64-w64-mingw32/libgfortran'
> /bin/sh ../../../gcc-git/libgfortran/mk-kinds-h.sh '1 2 4 8 16' '4 8 10 16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103560
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
> f951.exe: Error: Nonexistent include directory './'
Hmm, that seems wrong. the directory ./ definitely exists as it is the current
working directory.
Are you building on a mounted drive or a local disk?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103600
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-07
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103560
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libfortran |fortran
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103585
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 51940
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51940&action=edit
gcov report. perdida does have some loops in it but it seems we optimize them
out/make htem relatively cheap.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103596
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
So the issue is that we value number
_3(ab) = -1;
switch (_3(ab))
{
}
in a way to determine the known executable edge but later do not force
propagation into the switch and may_propagate_copy disall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103585
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
Quick counting from gcov data. It is 585898984 calls and from the disassmebly
the call is 101 instructions, so it account 58589898400
The perf reports shows 69059173576 difference so at least instruction coun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103585
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #4)
> Created attachment 51940 [details]
> gcov report. perdida does have some loops in it but it seems we optimize
> them out/make htem relatively cheap.
HTML colored
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 7 Dec 2021, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
>
> --- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu ---
> Got it, thanks for your detail explanation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba6bb287f03d42ab6c4f39ce99dcf94ec5113655
commit r12-5819-gba6bb287f03d42ab6c4f39ce99dcf94ec5113655
Author: Tamar Christina
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103553
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #5)
> There're several places in i386-expand.c which assume TARGET_AVX512FP16 for
> case V8HF/V16HF/V32HF, if we want to put V8HF/V16HF/V32HF in
> VALID_SSE2/AVX256/AVX51
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59914
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 51941
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51941&action=edit
Proposed patch
The patch moves put V2HF+V4HF+V8HF/V16HF/V32HF TO
VALID_SSE2/AVX256/AVX512F_REG_MODE.
Also, intr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #11 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #10)
> Thanks for looking into this. I was planning to try to contact Vladimir
> about the IRA behaviour here, but there was always something else to work
> with highe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 51942
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51942&action=edit
0001-PATCH-1-2-GCC-reload-Weigh-available-callee-saves-ba.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #13 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 51943
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51943&action=edit
0002-PATCH-2-2-GCC-reload-Don-t-move-if-the-next-BB-has-m.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103597
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Testcase without the >s
#define E(c, e) if (c) e
int
foo (int n)
{
switch (n)
{
case 0:
E (1, return 0);
case 1:
return 1;
}
return 2;
}
In C we actually warn about this sin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103601
Bug ID: 103601
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in insert_kill, at
ipa-modref-tree.c:84
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59383
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103601
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Backtrace:
during GIMPLE pass: modref
besttry.c: In function ‘rpc_init_task’:
besttry.c:34:1: internal compiler error: in insert_kill, at
ipa-modref-tree.c:845
34 | }
| ^
0x6c5067 modref_access_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87097
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> MSVC has the same bug :).
Well MSVC rejects it even for array size of 1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87097
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2018-08-24 00:00:00 |2021-12-7
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86049
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection, wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103597
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
For the C++ front-end, we have IF_STMT.
Which is handled in cxx_block_may_fallthru:
case IF_STMT:
if (block_may_fallthru (THEN_CLAUSE (stmt)))
return true;
return block_may_fallthru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103597
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79241
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103601
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103602
Bug ID: 103602
Summary: [11 regression] Analyzer takes inadequate amount of
memory and time linking GNU grep with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101370
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|miscompile of |miscompile of constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86049
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101370
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is a simple compile time testcase:
struct Elem {
Elem* next_ = this;
};
constexpr Elem rs[1];
static_assert (rs[0].next_ == rs);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101370
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64989
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard-gccbugzilla@metafoo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 101370, which changed state.
Bug 101370 Summary: miscompile of constexpr array with initializers to self
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101370
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103602
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||memory-hog
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86049
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Has there been a core issue created for the above?
None that I can find.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96761
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52145
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||darktemplar at basealt dot ru
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103364
--- Comment #23 from Sarah Julia Kriesch ---
I had problems yesterday with uploading the dump.
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #22)
> I did run these commands on a z15 Lpar with Fedora33 installed.
Thank you for this hint!
One questi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59914
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46283
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103594
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103594
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3)
> Why can't I reproduce it?
>
> $ ./xgcc -B./ -S -O
> /export/gnu/import/git/gitlab/x86-gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/
> pr37433.c
> $
-fPIE/-fPIC is needed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103596
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6e8a31275fda445fb3e8d98e53f5e1541f4727af
commit r12-5821-g6e8a31275fda445fb3e8d98e53f5e1541f4727af
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603
Bug ID: 103603
Summary: [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge
program, but OK for legacy
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103600
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103604
Bug ID: 103604
Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 20210506 fails to build in
libphobos on mips64el-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103594
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7ef68c37b3a46e69ed4a5ff6b2b368e2c9a8023f
commit r12-5822-g7ef68c37b3a46e69ed4a5ff6b2b368e2c9a8023f
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue Dec 7 05:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103594
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95009
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3a2257e6b3fa288d6c50831987949b9ff7dfb865
commit r12-5823-g3a2257e6b3fa288d6c50831987949b9ff7dfb865
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103604
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.3|---
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103601
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103438
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e836af61b7027c0819da62c12a8d18b7c46f3fc
commit r12-5824-g8e836af61b7027c0819da62c12a8d18b7c46f3fc
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103438
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-07
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103604
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103600
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The new definition of operator== will be something like:
#if __GXX_TYPEINFO_EQUALITY_INLINE || __cplusplus > 202002L
_GLIBCXX23_CONSTEXPR inline bool
type_info::operator==(const type_info& __arg) cons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99531
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Thank you for reporting this. It is true my patch caused this.
I've reproduced the bug on master too. I will be working on this PR. I
think a fix will be ready on the next week the best as the fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95009
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression]
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103593
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603
--- Comment #2 from Kito Cheng ---
Oh, apologize for misleading, it should fixed via pr103231 rather than
pr103254.
it work after g:5deacf6058d1bc7261a75c9fd1f116c4442e9e60, no new file, but it's
not trivial backport-able.
1 - 100 of 194 matches
Mail list logo
