https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106039
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Leffler ---
Thank you for looking at this.
In the second and subsequent errors, the line number of the macro is used
in all three lines of the error report, whereas in the first, the second
line of the messages is t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105965
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105955
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97822
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikulas at artax dot
karlin.mff.cu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99719
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97822
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||unlvsur at live dot com
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99719
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the issue is [[gnu::sysv_abi]] really. It is a known issue with
x86_64-mingw and cygwin64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97822
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105941
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105864
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
A testcase where not doing the storing would might give wrong code:
using nullptr_t = decltype(nullptr);
[[gnu::noipa]]
void test(nullptr_t* p)
{
*p = nullptr;
}
int main(void)
{
nullptr_t t, t1 = n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105740
--- Comment #2 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Run if_to_switch and convert_switch again after copyprop2 could remove the
redundant statement and expose opportunity for if-to-switch again, is this
reasonable or just move if-to-switch/switch-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106039
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Leffler ---
I got an email from pinskia — thank you. I responded from an iPhone and got a
message back about 'HTML attachments are not allowed'. I'm not sure if that
got through. Anyway, what I said (tried to say)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105921
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.1.0, 6.1.0, 9.1.0
Keywords
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105910
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #3 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105918
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Spurious Warray-bounds in |[12/13 Regression] Spurious
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106041
Bug ID: 106041
Summary: Long/infinite compile time for Arm SIMD -O1 or -O2 but
not -O0
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106041
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #1 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106041
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Long/infinite compile time |infinite loop in fast_dce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106041
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-reduction
--- Comment #3 from And
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105875
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang/LLVM produces the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106042
Bug ID: 106042
Summary: std::__once_call abi umatch for clang and gcc on
windows targets
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106042
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
https://godbolt.org/z/bfeq935b6
https://godbolt.org/z/MjKsTPPfP
clang has exactly the same behavior for x86_64-windows-gnu and
x86_64-windows-msvc (only name mangling is different.) However
x86_64-windows-gnu i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106022
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #6)
> Created attachment 53169 [details]
> A patch
>
> This patch multiplies the vector store cost by the number of scalar elements
> in
> a word to properly compare scala
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106042
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Build|x86_64-linu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106019
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #2)
> Created attachment 53172 [details]
> Candidate patch
>
> Huh, yeah, surprising this has been present so long.
>
> Running aff_combination_expand on off
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106033
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105965
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 21 Jun 2022, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105965
>
> Andrew Pinski changed:
>
>What|Removed |Add
101 - 127 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
