https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98140
--- Comment #3 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #2)
> (In reply to Alexander Grund from comment #1)
> > It looks like this was fixed in 10.1 by this commit
> > https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/
> > 37e0df8a9be5a823
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115075
--- Comment #3 from Heiko Lewin ---
Thank you for the link and the quick answer!
I'll try the mentioned workaround.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115058
--- Comment #5 from xiaoyong yan ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> This looks like a binutils issue rather a gcc one. It might be already fixed
> in binutils too.
I encountered issues even with the latest version 2.42 of binutil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115058
--- Comment #6 from xiaoyong yan ---
~/x-tools/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-as
-mcpu=cortex-a78ae test.S
test.S: Assembler messages:
test.S: Warning: end of file not at end of a line; newline inserted
test.S:5: Error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111487
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Thinking about how to handle binary operators. Here are some rules I came up
with when we should prop the constant:
* constants for the other operand (will reduce to a constant)
* plus if it is used once (du
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111487
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Thinking about how to handle binary operators. Here are some rules I came up
> with when we should prop the constant:
I should note when I tested llvm, it does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115083
Bug ID: 115083
Summary: undefined reference for aarch64-w64-mingw32 target
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115083
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 58200
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58200&action=edit
error.txt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108678
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
/home/cqwrteur/toolchains_build/gcc/gcc/c-family/c-format.cc:5159:(.text+0x7c1):
undefined reference to `msformat_init()'
/usr/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15.0.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
c-f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115084
Bug ID: 115084
Summary: Missed optimization in division for AVR target, not
using __*divmodpsi4
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115084
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114846
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58067|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114412
--- Comment #4 from Filip Kastl ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #3)
> Hi Filip,
>
> Do you generate these runs with counters based PGO or compiler
> instrumentation?
>
> Just so I know before I start trying to reproduce them.
Hi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115002
--- Comment #5 from Haochen Jiang ---
It seems that mainly caused by codesize increase in GCC14 since the actual
instruction retired increase ratio is similar to the regression.
Also, just like PR114987, I tried with GCC11, seems it gets the be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114995
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> The above examples just show misunderstanding what __builtin_assume_aligned
> is and what it is not. You need to use the result of the built-in function
> in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114995
--- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 58202
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58202&action=edit
proof of concept implementing a range-op entry for builtin_assume_aligned
Something like this (properly code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115082
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-05-14
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115083
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
--- Comment #2 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115084
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is another bug dealing with division and truncation that was just filed.
It is a generic (non-avr) issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107750
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
When I hack locally to avoid the indirection in the
definitions of the SOCK_* constants, only two gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-*.c
tests FAIL on Solaris:
FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-access-mode-tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114995
--- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Just to clarify. prange as well as irange keep a value/mask pair where we can
store alignment info, so every calculation (range-op) along the way can track
this properly.
Now, for pointers we loose this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115058
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115085
Bug ID: 115085
Summary: Variable unqualified-id is falsely treated as rvalue
when appearing in braced-init-list
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115085
--- Comment #1 from Jan Schultke ---
Another user suggested that this is caused by falsely performing temporary
materialization.
This would make a an xvalue, which would also make the reference binding fail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115083
--- Comment #3 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> is this a build issue of GCC itself?
yes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115083
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 58203
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58203&action=edit
Patch
i have added a naive patch here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115083
--- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Please give the port developers time to finish working on the port. Only the
initial patches have been pushed so far and there is plenty of work left to do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115086
Bug ID: 115086
Summary: bic is not used when the non-not part is a constant
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhanc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115083
--- Comment #6 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #5)
> Please give the port developers time to finish working on the port. Only
> the initial patches have been pushed so far and there is plenty of work left
> to do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115084
--- Comment #2 from Kamil Kaznowski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> There is another bug dealing with division and truncation that was just
> filed. It is a generic (non-avr) issue.
I assume you mentioned this bug here:
https:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115082
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115086
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114866
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:95055199ee80e526da98c3458308fa345a041d9a
commit r14-10203-g95055199ee80e526da98c3458308fa345a041d9a
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115085
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think there is a dup of this bug already filed ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114692
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:788ccd269e0c32c33ce0c1359137fe1b35dc7a2d
commit r14-10205-g788ccd269e0c32c33ce0c1359137fe1b35dc7a2d
Author: Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115063
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c60205cd4aeea586b7b1fe06baa9861b6d279648
commit r14-10207-gc60205cd4aeea586b7b1fe06baa9861b6d279648
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114891
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4d3b358fd757ddd09cbee202f47939043c78676c
commit r14-10206-g4d3b358fd757ddd09cbee202f47939043c78676c
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115086
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw ---
And perhaps more importantly the mov can even be hoisted outside of a loop.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114359
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71e941b0e329d3a316e465569c92e08788a68614
commit r13-8771-g71e941b0e329d3a316e465569c92e08788a68614
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115063
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7dca716decf5a07f903610fda9457ff0422d2758
commit r13-8772-g7dca716decf5a07f903610fda9457ff0422d2758
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114866
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114359
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed for 13.3 and 14.1 so far, I still plan to backport this to gcc-12 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108678
--- Comment #14 from cqwrteur ---
libgcc:
/home/cqwrteur/toolchains_build/gcc/libgcc/libgcov.h:49:10: fatal error:
sys/mman.h: No such file or directory
49 | #include
| ^~~~
compilation terminated.
make[4]: *** [Makef
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115063
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ccc26a1af07b34ce2e7d3b2497f27992d1b1bbc2
commit r15-481-gccc26a1af07b34ce2e7d3b2497f27992d1b1bbc2
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115085
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
See https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1521 also.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115063
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115085
--- Comment #4 from Jan Schultke ---
https://github.com/cplusplus/CWG/issues/536
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115087
Bug ID: 115087
Summary: dead block not eliminated in SVE intrinsics code
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115085
Jason Liam changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jlame646 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113291
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ec49897253e093e1ef6261eb104ac0c111bac83
commit r15-482-g1ec49897253e093e1ef6261eb104ac0c111bac83
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Tue M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #28 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Martin Jambor
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:10bf53a80eefa46500bffb442719777e2640e7d7
commit r13-8773-g10bf53a80eefa46500bffb442719777e2640e7d7
Author: Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115066
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
Submitted here ( https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/651586.html
).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113719
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hongyuw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #29 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115066
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tom de Vries :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b7003b4cc5e263343f047fe64ed1ae12f561b2d1
commit r15-483-gb7003b4cc5e263343f047fe64ed1ae12f561b2d1
Author: Tom de Vries
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115066
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115088
Bug ID: 115088
Summary: Autofdo doesn't create correct cfg
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113719
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|g++.target/i386/pr103696.C |[13/14/15 regression]
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115089
Bug ID: 115089
Summary: -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value false negative
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115015
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|libstdc++ build with|[14/15 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114480
--- Comment #31 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #21)
> It is possible to reduce gcc_qsort workload by improving the presorted-ness
> of the array, but of course avoiding quadratic behavior would be much better
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115090
Bug ID: 115090
Summary: ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.cc:18907 (deduced
this)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115090
--- Comment #1 from José Cruz Serrallés ---
Pasting MRE here for convenience:
struct Base {
template
constexpr void operator()(this Derived&& der) {
operator()();
}
};
int main() {
Base b;
b();
}
This patch attempts to add __builtin_operator_new/delete. So far they
are not optimized, which will need to be done by extra flag of BUILT_IN_
code. also the decl.cc code can be refactored to be less of cut&paste
and I guess has_builtin hack to return proper value needs to be moved
to C++ FE.
How
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109442
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka ---
This patch attempts to add __builtin_operator_new/delete. So far they
are not optimized, which will need to be done by extra flag of BUILT_IN_
code. also the decl.cc code can be refactored to be less of cut&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107646
--- Comment #11 from David Malcolm ---
I've created a wiki page to track this project:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/StaticAnalyzer/CPython
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115087
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
--- Comment #1 from Richard Bi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113551
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115015
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6cc8698244b522ad079675022c9de9e40de85878
commit r15-485-g6cc8698244b522ad079675022c9de9e40de85878
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115015
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eefa4c06483f95f5076687ed6aae5c6001731164
commit r14-10208-geefa4c06483f95f5076687ed6aae5c6001731164
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115015
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107750
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f97d86f897bcf0ffda4d8d2e5b78a160e9ece140
commit r15-486-gf97d86f897bcf0ffda4d8d2e5b78a160e9ece140
Author: Rainer Orth
Date: Tue Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113551
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115089
--- Comment #2 from Alejandro Colomar ---
I found that Clang's analyzer finds this bug, so I'm less concerned that GCC
can't find it.
Feel free to ignore it if it's too hard to fix. ;)
$ clang-tidy ./bug.c
Error while trying to load a compi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #78 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Martin Jambor
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1db45e83021a8a87f41e22053910fcce6e8e2c2c
commit r13-8774-g1db45e83021a8a87f41e22053910fcce6e8e2c2c
Author: Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115090
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115079
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114635
--- Comment #19 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> Usually targets do have a limit on the actual length but I see
> constant_upper_bound_with_limit doesn't query such. But it would
> be a more appropriate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114767
--- Comment #7 from mjr19 at cam dot ac.uk ---
Another manifestation of this issue in GCC 13.1 and 14.1 is that the loop
do i=1,n
c(i)=a(i)*c(i)*(0d0,1d0)
enddo
takes about twice as long to run as
do i=1,n
c(i)=a(i)*(0d0,1d0)*c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114301
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109071
--- Comment #11 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
please see discussion at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/651482.html
A summary of the discussion:
1. The current warning is correct, which catches a potential source code e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99954
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c290e6a0b7a9de5692963affc6627a4af7dc2411
commit r15-491-gc290e6a0b7a9de5692963affc6627a4af7dc2411
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115091
Bug ID: 115091
Summary: Support value speculation in frontend
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 15.0.0 20240514 (experimental) (GCC)
[522] %
[522] % gcctk -O1 small.c; ./a.out
[523] %
[523] % gcctk -O1 -fgcse -ftree-pre -fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-fre
-fno-guess-branch-probability small.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115092
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-05-14
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115013
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Dimitar Dimitrov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fc559584fa5b1e101a4520e88a936246458d5a5d
commit r15-493-gfc559584fa5b1e101a4520e88a936246458d5a5d
Author: Dimitar Dimitrov
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115092
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||114902
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92539
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115093
Bug ID: 115093
Summary: RISC-V Vector ICE in extract_insn: unrecognizable insn
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115094
Bug ID: 115094
Summary: x86_64-w64-mingw32 multilib overrides libraries for 64
and 32 since they both copy to bin.
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115095
Bug ID: 115095
Summary: [missed optimization] fixed processing on constant
string
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106317
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67740
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clange001 at gmail dot com
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114902
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, is there a simplified testcase that *actually* shows any *actual* problem?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115095
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115094
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/651670.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115096
Bug ID: 115096
Summary: -fstrict-aliasing miscompilation or missing warning
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
