https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107355
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-24
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107371
Bug ID: 107371
Summary: __adaptor::_RangeAdaptor rejects the explicit move
constructor case
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107366
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107366
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Happens for the following location:
(gdb) p /x loc
$7 = 0x8008
when I expand it:
(gdb) p x
$8 = {
file = 0x0,
line = 0,
column = 0,
data = 0x77769480,
sysp = false
}
it likely correspond
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107366
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Potential fix:
diff --git a/gcc/diagnostic-format-sarif.cc b/gcc/diagnostic-format-sarif.cc
index fc28d160c38..7110db4edd6 100644
--- a/gcc/diagnostic-format-sarif.cc
+++ b/gcc/diagnostic-format-sarif.cc
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107372
Bug ID: 107372
Summary: Loop distribution create memcpy between structs with
different storage order
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107372
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Created attachment 53764
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53764&action=edit
Experimental Fix
Looks like the error while analyzing the data ref is not propagated to the
upper layers to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107364
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107368
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107369
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107327
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
Can't reproduce the ICE with any GCC release I have:
gcc-bisect.py 'g++ -O3 -pedantic -std=c++2a -g -Wall -Wextra
-Wno-unused-parameter -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-address -Wno-init-list-lifetime
pr107327.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107315
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
As Andrew says, we cannot alter the type of "long double" since the ABI
specifies it is the same as double ... but .. we can (and have) add 16byte
float support.
--
The development branch for aarch64-dar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107176
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, and interestingly this fix causes PR66375 to regress again:
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr66375.c -O2 execution test
...
OK, so that's because my suggested fix is exactly an (incomplete) reversal
of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107373
Bug ID: 107373
Summary: Unexpected result with loop optimisation
Product: gcc
Version: 8.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107315
--- Comment #4 from hengxu010 ---
Hi Iain , thank you very much! I'm very happy to hear that you have'd already
implement the support for 16 bite float type in the development version of gcc,
I can try that later. Hope the official version can b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107120
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105725
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bd0c76a2329e7fe6d6612c2259647bbb67f5866a
commit r11-10332-gbd0c76a2329e7fe6d6612c2259647bbb67f5866a
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107369
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105725
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.4.0, 11.3.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107368
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=107374
Bug ID: 107374
Summary: Please expand the size of flag_sanitize to uint64_t
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107048
--- Comment #1 from ashimida ---
(In reply to peterz from comment #0)
> Please implement -fsanitize=kcfi to match llvm/clang:
>
>
> https://github.com/samitolvanen/llvm-project/commit/
> f7bf6a87c4fd945800115a17b8b61390541fabd0
>
> The Linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107374
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We don't do such things just for case, rather changes like that are done as
part of a patch that adds the first thing that needs it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107374
--- Comment #2 from ashimida ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> We don't do such things just for case, rather changes like that are done as
> part of a patch that adds the first thing that needs it.
Ok, got it, thanks a lot :)
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107371
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107371
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-24
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107176
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> final value replacement:
> b_lsm.8_26 = PHI
> with expr: 1
> final stmt:
> b_lsm.8_26 = 1;
>
> where
>
> (get_scalar_evolution
> (scalar = b_lsm.8_1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107365
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1e9d9ed095df3d064cf9d91d46f3e5426c2a05a7
commit r13-3453-g1e9d9ed095df3d064cf9d91d46f3e5426c2a05a7
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107365
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107355
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 53768
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53768&action=edit
untested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107375
Bug ID: 107375
Summary: CFI_cdesc_t incorrectly reports non-interoperable C
structure as such
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71850
Costas Argyris changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||costas.argyris at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107373
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-24
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107373
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107373
--- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist ---
63ee540430c3 might be related wrt fixing it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107376
Bug ID: 107376
Summary: regex executor requires allocator to be default
constructible
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102516
--- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon ---
Indeed it works again on trunk, I bisected and it started with one of our
commits: r12-3958-g4c7731081647c22cbd249dc0faa20c3df9ed6411
Author: Richard Biener
Date: Wed Sep 29 11:18:23 2021 +0200
Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107353
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107355
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107358
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107364
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Capricelli ---
Sure, easy
chopin /tmp # ./cpuid
__get_cpuid(0): eax=1, ebx=1953391939, ecx=193648, edx=1215460705
__get_cpuid(1): eax=1683, ebx=0, ecx=0, edx=58765629
I't not better in hexa ? :
__get_cpuid(0): e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107373
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #3)
> 63ee540430c3 might be related wrt fixing it?
r8-4424-g63ee540430c32a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107368
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107369
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107236
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:178ac530fe67e4f2fc439cc4ce89bc19d571ca31
commit r13-3455-g178ac530fe67e4f2fc439cc4ce89bc19d571ca31
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107372
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #1)
> Created attachment 53764 [details]
> Experimental Fix
>
> Looks like the error while analyzing the data ref is not propagated to the
> upper layers to actual
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107373
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.4.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107236
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107176
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107355
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5bcd92d0d4029f3d1d2eacc0e2bff1685545b74f
commit r13-3456-g5bcd92d0d4029f3d1d2eacc0e2bff1685545b74f
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107355
--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez ---
fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107355
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107364
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 53769
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53769&action=edit
Tentative patch
Have a patch for the ICE. Can you please output what you see with -march=native
now? Ideally if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107377
Bug ID: 107377
Summary: Warn about duplicate enum values?
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107364
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
> there's also this command available:
What command does produce that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105774
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:da8c362c4c18cff2f2dfd5c4706bdda7576899a4
commit r13-3458-gda8c362c4c18cff2f2dfd5c4706bdda7576899a4
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106583
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a096036589d82175a0f729c2dab73c9a527d075d
commit r13-3459-ga096036589d82175a0f729c2dab73c9a527d075d
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95048
Ulf Lorenz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ulf.lorenz at ptvgroup dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107366
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from David Malc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107370
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I get the following output from ubuntu 1804's gcc and the trunk of gcc from
20220808:
ubuntu@ubuntu:~/src/upstream-gcc\# ~/upstream-gcc/bin/gcc t54.c -O2
ubuntu@ubuntu:~/src/upstream-gcc\# ./a.out
1.4142135
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107007
Costas Argyris changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||costas.argyris at gmail dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107377
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107377
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16186
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
td::__detail::__variant::_Variant_storage{std::__detail::__variant::_Variadic_union{std::__detail::__variant::_Uninitialized{0}}, 0.()'
:2:60: in 'constexpr' expansion of 'std::get_if<0, int*>((& v))'
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20221024/include/c++/13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107358
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:65e3274e363cb2c6bfe6b5e648916eb7696f7e2f
commit r13-3461-g65e3274e363cb2c6bfe6b5e648916eb7696f7e2f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107358
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Should be fixed now on the trunk.
I'll backport the C part later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107378
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |c++
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85043
--- Comment #18 from Marek Polacek ---
The casts that are still warned about should really be useless so I don't plan
to add another warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107378
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107363
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-24
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107379
Bug ID: 107379
Summary: [13 regression] g++.dg/modules/adl-3_c.C and adl-4_b.C
break as of r13-2887-gb04208895fed34
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107379
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107349
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107378
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase without any headers:
```
struct g
{
char a;
};
constexpr bool f(const char *a) { return a != nullptr; }
static_assert([v = g{}] { return f(&v.a); }());
```
This works with clang.
But MSVC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105778
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105777
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107380
Bug ID: 107380
Summary: ICE in coarray_check, at fortran/check.cc:694
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107381
Bug ID: 107381
Summary: ICE in scan_omp_target, at omp-low.cc:3126
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107382
Bug ID: 107382
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in cp_common_type, at
cp/typeck.cc:436
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107383
Bug ID: 107383
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in cp_build_binary_op, at
cp/typeck.cc:6181
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107384
Bug ID: 107384
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE tree check: expected
non_lvalue_expr or static_cast_expr, have error_mark
in set_implicit_rvalue_p, at cp/cp-tree.h:8689
Product
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107383
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107382
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107382
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107276
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7d8ccfda2d5c90dac97b1a3ede8b10391a3cc40
commit r13-3462-gf7d8ccfda2d5c90dac97b1a3ede8b10391a3cc40
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107384
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107276
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107364
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f751bf4c5d1aaa1aacfcbdec62881c5ea1175dfb
commit r13-3463-gf751bf4c5d1aaa1aacfcbdec62881c5ea1175dfb
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107364
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12/13 Regression]|[10/11/12 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107370
--- Comment #3 from jacob navia ---
1 trunk gcc:
2 .LC1:
3.word 325511829 # 0x1366EA95 <<<--- SHOULD BE 325508205
4.word -922176773 # 0xC908B2FB OK
5.word -429395012 # 0xE667F3BC OK
6.word 107
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107381
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in scan_omp_target, at |ICE in scan_omp_target, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16186
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
FWIW, Clang implements this warning:
$ xclang++ -c -xc j.c -Wduplicate-enum
j.c:1:33: warning: element 'foo' has been implicitly assigned 0 which another
element has been assigned [-Wduplicate-enum]
enum sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107385
Bug ID: 107385
Summary: [asm goto] "=r" vs "+r" for outputs along indirect
edges
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107382
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107370
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16186
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3)
> FWIW, Clang implements this warning:
Oh, I was unable to find the option (only tried -Werror and -Wextra).
@Marek: please add it!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16186
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87832
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Monakov ---
Suggested partial fix for the integer-pipe side of the blowup:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/4549f27b-238a-7d77-f72b-cc77df8ae...@ispras.ru/
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
