https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106158
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
it looks like the testcase no longer shows the issue(?) but the code in IPA SRA
didn't really change here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108440
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:05b9868b182bb9ed2013b39a0bc6297354a0db49
commit r13-5254-g05b9868b182bb9ed2013b39a0bc6297354a0db49
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108300
--- Comment #16 from niXman ---
(In reply to nightstrike from comment #15)
> Someone on irc (jakub?) suggested just changing all of the aborts to
> gcc_unreachable. Is that a viable option?
I like that idea, I'm not sure it will be accepted...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108440
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Should be fixed on the trunk. Not sure about backports, the ranger related
stuff might need to be simplified there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101823
--- Comment #5 from bootmgr at 163 dot com ---
(In reply to niXman from comment #4)
> please provide the step-by-step instruction you used.
1. Extract binutils gcc mingw-w64 files to any where
Extract gmp mpfr mpc isl to gcc source directory
not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101823
--- Comment #6 from bootmgr at 163 dot com ---
(In reply to niXman from comment #3)
> what GCC version was used on the host?
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/11/lto-wrapper
OFFLOAD
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101823
--- Comment #7 from bootmgr at 163 dot com ---
(In reply to boot...@163.com from comment #5)
> (In reply to niXman from comment #4)
> > please provide the step-by-step instruction you used.
> 1. Extract binutils gcc mingw-w64 files to any where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101823
--- Comment #8 from niXman ---
(In reply to boot...@163.com from comment #7)
> After a lg compile, I get the same error on my Ubuntu WSL. but I think
> it might be a problem with the WSL VM.
there is nothing unusual in your instruction exc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94360
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Well, if the current behavior is a good one (I have not looked at how
size/performance trade-off works out) then I am also fine declaring this bug
invalid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> This one started with r13-1933-g24012539ae3410174.
> I think the problem is in:
>
> Folding statement: _3 = cmp1_10 & cmp2_11;
> Not folded
> Folding statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> I see fold_using_range::relation_fold_and_or
> which sees relation1 VREL_LE and relation2 VREL_GE and !is_and, and because
> of
> relation_union (relation1, rel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #9)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> > I see fold_using_range::relation_fold_and_or
> > which sees relation1 VREL_LE and relation2 VREL_GE and !is_and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Hmmm, I wonder if we could do this all in validate_relation like Andrew had
planned.
If NAN is a possibility in either x or y, then we could disallow any relation
recording right off the bat, and avoid an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108144
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|gaius at g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108144
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Also honoring --with-gcc-major-version-only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As a workaround in stage4, perhaps, but long term the relations make a lot of
sense even for floating point with NANs. If you know <= relation between 2
vars and know the range of one of them, the other ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108459
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Slightly simplified:
void
foo (int x)
{
#pragma omp for collapse(2)
for (int i = 1; i <= 16; i++)
for (int j = i * x; j <= 16; j++)
;
}
Started with my r11-2537-g29e0ad452cdf001bcc commit, wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108462
Bug ID: 108462
Summary: duplicate install of static libraries
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: modula2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
>
> --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> As a workaround in stage4, perhaps, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106746
--- Comment #21 from Segher Boessenkool ---
As far as we (me, you; everybody) can tell it is fixed now. If one day we get
a testcase showing it has in fact not been fixed, the problem is still there,
we can reopen or link the testcases or etc.?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108459
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/omp-expand.cc.jj2023-01-02 09:32:49.399894958 +0100
+++ gcc/omp-expand.cc 2023-01-19 12:01:05.103410564 +0100
@@ -2003,8 +2003,8 @@ expand_omp_for_init_counts (struct omp_f
t =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108459
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> --- gcc/omp-expand.cc.jj 2023-01-02 09:32:49.399894958 +0100
> +++ gcc/omp-expand.cc 2023-01-19 12:01:05.103410564 +0100
> - t = fold_unary (NEGATE_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108459
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think that ought to be fine.
There is
if (single_nonrect == -1
|| (loop->m1 && TREE_CODE (loop->m1) != INTEGER_CST)
|| (loop->m2 && TREE_CODE (loop->m2) !=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108459
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
-prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r13-5254-20230119100051-g05b9868b182-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 13.0.1 20230119 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
> >
> > --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jeline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108463
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108463
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108457
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108457
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108435
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107950
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
I suppose a fix would be to provide a dummy implementation for
range_label_for_type_mismatch::get_text in lto/, but I wonder how
for example the fortran frontend avoids this issue?
f951 has rich_location
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108373
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-01-19
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108464
Bug ID: 108464
Summary: [13 Regression] Broken -fdebug-prefix-map since
r13-3599
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108464
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93444
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.2.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95558
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2020-06-09
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103585
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
Honza, what remains to be done here (if anything)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108464
--- Comment #1 from Richard Purdie
---
I can see why that would change behaviour with the patch :(.
It is a tough dilemma since without the patch, files might have prefixes
removed some of the time but not all the time, depending on whether th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100061
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12/13 Regression]|[10/11 Regression]
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108373
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gaius at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105469
--- Comment #19 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> Martin, is that a real fix for this or it just went latent?
Not a fix, the bug mst be latent. But it is surprising so I'll have a look
what happened too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
--- Comment #31 from Richard Biener ---
The issue is still latent but cannot be reproduced on any maintained branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103100
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> Updated patch submitted:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/589254.html
I think you need to ping your patches more aggressively ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108464
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Dunno about other uses of remap_filename, but for remap_debug_filename what
that commit changed doesn't seem to be ever appropriate. Users pass often pass
what they get from pwd to -fdebug-prefix-map=, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106158
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> it looks like the testcase no longer shows the issue(?) but the code in IPA
> SRA didn't really change here
I have fixed quadratic behavior in ipa-param-manipu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108464
--- Comment #3 from Richard Purdie
---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Dunno about other uses of remap_filename, but for remap_debug_filename what
> that commit changed doesn't seem to be ever appropriate.
I think it depends on y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108464
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Though, even for the other options the change doesn't seem to be a good idea as
is.
I think instead the syntax of those remapping options should be extended, so
that for each of the pair one can choose the b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108144
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1cfaaa42296298ea2d2b22a93d3c8c17104e6cd3
commit r13-5255-g1cfaaa42296298ea2d2b22a93d3c8c17104e6cd3
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108144
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53932
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53932
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|assemble-failure|
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83756
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-12-02 00:00:00 |2023-1-19
--- Comment #17 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97452
--- Comment #12 from David Ledger ---
(In reply to David Ledger from comment #11)
> This did not occur with GCC 10.2, it started in GCC 10.3:
>
> 10.3 (https://godbolt.org/z/jrdv31M17):
> ```
> 0x15d1ed3 A
> 0x15d1ed2 ~A
> 0x15d1ed3 ~A
> ```
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53932
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84345
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
As to comment#7 I agree, for some qsort comparators we probably do not care if
the outcome is really sorted in the end and the issue with different qsort
implementations producing differently sorted results
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85497
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.5|8.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 85497, which changed state.
Bug 85497 Summary: [10/11/12/13 Regression] [graphite] ICE in
set_codegen_error, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:206
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85497
What|Remo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86905
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-09-05 00:00:00 |2023-1-19
--- Comment #11 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86960
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2018-08-14 00:00:00 |2023-1-19
--- Comment #14 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108457
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Space between cast and mode.
> Though I think various other uses of these macros solve this by simply using
> SCALAR_INT_TYPE_MODE (utype) directly as argument t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86960
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, clang rejects it:
t.ii:8:15: error: non-type template parameter conflicts with previous non-type
template parameter pack
template
^
t.ii:3:19: note: previous non-type template parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108450
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-01-19
Summary|[12/13 Reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108451
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108411
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a38c079248411ea9dc0610873b3366192315bfee
commit r13-5256-ga38c079248411ea9dc0610873b3366192315bfee
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108411
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:74833b3165865a9373506f447720cf20f29c20c8
commit r13-5257-g74833b3165865a9373506f447720cf20f29c20c8
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108453
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|[10/11/12/13 Regres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108411
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108462
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gaius at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108144
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108465
Bug ID: 108465
Summary: Optimize (a < b) == (b < a) to a == b
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107881
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||antoshkka at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108465
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108462
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
There should be archives in the different architecture directories as per
normal. Accompanying these should be the library module source SYSTEM.def
(which could vary depending upon architectural characterist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108373
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
git pushed the attachment and propose that the PR is closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108466
Bug ID: 108466
Summary: inconsistent -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning location
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108464
--- Comment #5 from Richard Purdie
---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Though, even for the other options the change doesn't seem to be a good idea
> as is.
> I think instead the syntax of those remapping options should be extende
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108144
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Isn't --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs completely broken anyway? See PR
32415
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108448
--- Comment #8 from Gavin Howard ---
Created attachment 54310
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54310&action=edit
Amalgamation with License Header
Not important for the bug, but I reuploaded the amalgamation with its proper
l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108448
--- Comment #9 from Gavin Howard ---
> I suspect cmake didn't add -fno-strict-aliasing really.
It did. I ran the build under `intercept-build` and looked at the
`compile_commands.json` output. It had the `-fno-strict-aliasing` for every
file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I went through the whole rr_{intersect,union}_table tables and I think just
--- gcc/value-relation.cc.jj2023-01-02 09:32:42.088000605 +0100
+++ gcc/value-relation.cc 2023-01-19 16:20:06.490126901
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108467
Bug ID: 108467
Summary: false positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning at -O1 or
higher
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108467
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
BTW, because both union and intersect are commutative, so perhaps we should
have a self-test that verifies that. Guess that would catch the VREL_UNDEFINED
line errors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53932
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, the problem is that build_anon_union_vars builds artificial variables for
the anon union members and they those VAR_DECLs have DECL_VALUE_EXPR set to the
D.2763.i and similar COMPONENT_REFs. But VAR_DECL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108238
--- Comment #2 from Barnabás Pőcze ---
Here is a change that I believe might address this. It seems to work but I have
never done anything in gcc, so probably has shortcomings.
The error points to the return expression, like this:
asd2.cpp:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53932
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108468
Bug ID: 108468
Summary: ICE in most_specialized_partial_spec/builtin_guide_p
in C++20 mode
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108468
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.4
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108469
Bug ID: 108469
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/pr104869.C (test for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108434
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:117848f425a3c0eda85517b4bdaf2ebe3bc705c2
commit r13-5260-g117848f425a3c0eda85517b4bdaf2ebe3bc705c2
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108455
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0d6f7b1dd62e9c9dccb0b9b673f9cc3238b7ea6d
commit r13-5261-g0d6f7b1dd62e9c9dccb0b9b673f9cc3238b7ea6d
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108455
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102471
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107797
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> I went through the whole rr_{intersect,union}_table tables and I think just
> --- gcc/value-relation.cc.jj 2023-01-02 09:32:42.088000605 +0100
> +++ gcc/valu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108459
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:46644ec99cb355845b23bb1d02775c057ed8ee88
commit r13-5262-g46644ec99cb355845b23bb1d02775c057ed8ee88
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108447
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 54312
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54312&action=edit
possible patch
The only place I think it matters is in set_one_relation.
THis is the central point where we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108459
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed on the trunk, will backport later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108470
Bug ID: 108470
Summary: Missing documentation for alternate uses of
__attribute__((noinline))
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
