https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #6 from Benjamin Schulz ---
Hi thanks for the fast reply. Unfortunately none of these works...
(yes, putting in the -fno-math-errno option also raises this error, even if i
put it into -offload...
even if i try -foffload= -fno-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117278
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #8 from Benjamin Schulz ---
with this here it is satisfied:
// Normalize v
T norm=0;
// T norm=fabs(gpu_dot_product_w(v,v));
T normc= sqrt(norm);
// const T normc=norm;
#pragma omp parallel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #7 from Benjamin Schulz ---
with this here it is satisfied:
// Normalize v
T norm=0;
// T norm=fabs(gpu_dot_product_w(v,v));
T normc= sqrt(norm);
// const T normc=norm;
#pragma omp parallel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118787
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #4 from And
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118789
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118789
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118788
Bug ID: 118788
Summary: [15 Regression] during IPA pass: static-var, ICE:
qsort checking failed
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113204
--- Comment #12 from Sam James ---
*** Bug 118788 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118788
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
Bug ID: 118790
Summary: [15 Regression] during RTL pass: final, ICE in ???
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> Created attachment 60418 [details]
> gcc-118790.tar.xz
>
> Here's a reproducer. I won't reduce it though.
This is just enough:
```
gfortran -O2 -flto=jobserver -s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118530
--- Comment #6 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 60421
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60421&action=edit
test case quuux.C
Another test case from waffl3x which I think is probably a variant of this bug
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #19 from Diego Russo ---
> Can you make a simple table:
w/o tail-call - 1
with tail-call but not preserve_none - 0.94
with tail-call and preserve_none - 1
You understood correctly.
I think there is st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #20 from Ken Jin ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #17)
> I am not sure if I understand this correctly.
> Can you make a simple table:
>
> w/o tail-call - 1
> with tail-call but not preserve_none -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118789
kargls at comcast dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargls at comcast dot net
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> So I think it is a nested function that has been put in a different
> partition from its outer function. Still checking that theory.
Nope, because using -flto-p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #1 from Benjamin Schulz ---
Created attachment 60423
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60423&action=edit
main.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
Bug ID: 118794
Summary: The attached c++ openmp offload code fails, because
the c sqrt function makes nonlocal gotos..
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #2 from Benjamin Schulz ---
Created attachment 60424
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60424&action=edit
cmakelists.txt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #3 from Benjamin Schulz ---
gcc --version
gcc (Gentoo 14.2.1_p20241221 p7) 14.2.1 20241221
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Try -fno-math-errno ? Or add:
> [[assert(norm>=0)]];
>
> or:
> if (norm>=0)
> __builtin_unreachable();
Sorry the if statement should have been:
if (norm<0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118794
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Try -fno-math-errno ? Or add:
[[assert(norm>=0)]];
or:
if (norm>=0)
__builtin_unreachable();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118765
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118248
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #8)
> Rechecked with 20250203. this works for Debian unstable, but not for Ubuntu
> plucky. The differences for this are a different baseline (zEC12 vs z13),
> and enabl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118787
Bug ID: 118787
Summary: [15 Regression] ICE, Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785
Bug ID: 118785
Summary: [15 Regression] during IPA pass, ICE in decompose, at
wide-int.h:1049
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118784
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Thomas Khyn from comment #2)
> Sorry for the duplicate - I did a search but got 'Zarro Boogs found'!
It is fine. I only knew it was a dup of that one because I reduced the fmt
module twice befo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60419
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60419&action=edit
Semi reduced single file testcase
`gfortran -O2 -flto=jobserver -shared -fallow-argument-mismatch -g t.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
But this is related to VLA type used from a nested function though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60420
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60420&action=edit
Reduced testcase as much as I can do it
`-O2 -flto -flto-partition=none -shared -fallow-argument-mismatch -g -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117711
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-02-08
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117991
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pinski ---
>Can we have the same implementation/interface of LLVM?
Is there real documentation on this attribute or is it just ad hoc on what it
does on the LLVM side about the ABI implications? It seems to me there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117829
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117711
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117482
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114522
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d8e8f89732b1f13752e1b370852c7bcbbbde259
commit r15-7434-g7d8e8f89732b1f13752e1b370852c7bcbbbde259
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114522
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm aarch64 |arm
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-02-07
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #14 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #13)
> The request here notwithstanding, bug report(s) with testcases for missed
> opportunities in ipa-ra would be welcome too.
Agreed, if we find any. But just in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108080
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thomas.khyn_gccbugzilla@m4x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118784
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Khyn ---
Sorry for the duplicate - I did a search but got 'Zarro Boogs found'!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118781
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you also test after r15-7429-g7bee37094c502de7c191ee5f2f9ce72789d27c99 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|debug |lto
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 60415
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60415&action=edit
gcc-118785.tar.xz
```
$ g++ -fPIC -O2 -flto=jobserver -O3 -DNDEBUG
-Wl,--version-script=libmfx-gen.map -shared lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118786
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118097
--- Comment #36 from Sam James ---
*** Bug 118786 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118784
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Thomas Khyn from comment #2)
> Sorry for the duplicate - I did a search but got 'Zarro Boogs found'!
We would rather have the dupe than people be too worried about filing bugs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117674
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #15 from Diego Russo ---
Folks, I think I've botched the performance measurement. Need to retake the
measurement. Give me some time and I'll come back with the right results.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reducing ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118574
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Unfortunately, it looks like the fixes weren't enough and the crashes are back
when dropping -fno-range-for-ext-temps.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #16 from Diego Russo ---
Right, I had a couple of problems with running the benchmarks. A few failures
and the wrong environment variable to select the binary of the compiler.
Anyway I re-ran the benchmarks and the binary without pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118623
--- Comment #17 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> Created attachment 60411 [details]
> gcc15-pr118623.patch
>
> Untested patch which seems to work for me on the new testcases and
> i386.exp=bt*.c so far.
When
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118089
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7bee37094c502de7c191ee5f2f9ce72789d27c99
commit r15-7429-g7bee37094c502de7c191ee5f2f9ce72789d27c99
Author: Richard Earnshaw
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118089
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0b6453d5575d4aa773a1fe25060123bc6f539891
commit r15-7430-g0b6453d5575d4aa773a1fe25060123bc6f539891
Author: Richard Earnshaw
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118782
Bug ID: 118782
Summary: Internal compiler error with -gnatyc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
Diego Russo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Diego.Russo at arm dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118168
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andi Kleen :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66af77cbed6c5bf15c19573ad21ebfd0552cc4b2
commit r15-7431-g66af77cbed6c5bf15c19573ad21ebfd0552cc4b2
Author: Andi Kleen
Date: Thu Dec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118168
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118781
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118781
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118328
--- Comment #13 from Sam James ---
The request here notwithstanding, bug report(s) with testcases for missed
opportunities in ipa-ra would be welcome too.
(btw, x86 has no_callee_saved_registers / no_caller_saved_registers too.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118623
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 60411
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60411&action=edit
gcc15-pr118623.patch
Untested patch which seems to work for me on the new testcases and
i386.exp=bt*.c so far
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113579
--- Comment #3 from Stefanus Du Toit ---
This bug affects us as well. I believe the relevant part of the documentation
is:
> Jumping out of a statement expression is permitted, but if the statement
> expression is part of a larger expression t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117477
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rsandifo at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118783
Bug ID: 118783
Summary: CLASS, pointer association, and an array element of a
component.
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118784
Bug ID: 118784
Summary: [modules] internal compiler error when consuming {fmt}
within a C++20 module
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118783
--- Comment #1 from kargls at comcast dot net ---
Created attachment 60413
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60413&action=edit
scalar test case that passes testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118784
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118787
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117674
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Let me try reproduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118789
Bug ID: 118789
Summary: [15 Regression] ICE in gfc_add_modify_loc, at
fortran/trans.cc:229
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118747
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> The issue in comment#2 is fixed by the following - I'd say obvious - patch:
It is also (and better?) fixed by r15-7433.
The remaining problems seem to be r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115478
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Yea, no surprise they're still failing as I haven't made any of Roger or
Richard S's suggestions yet. I'm playing with Roger's right now, though I
really like Richard S's idea of creating a match_operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118787
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117674
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c9b8a8fc55168ba9ec5432fc7b86621074e1b887
commit r15-7432-gc9b8a8fc55168ba9ec5432fc7b86621074e1b887
Author: Peter Bergner
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59252
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:818c36a85e3faec5442eb26799bfa3bba7764b36
commit r15-7433-g818c36a85e3faec5442eb26799bfa3bba7764b36
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118530
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 118791 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118791
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118791
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115458
--- Comment #13 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So just recording some thoughts as I initially look at this.
This is the key insn (from the combine dump).
(insn 35 34 37 2 (set (reg:RVVM8QI 112 v16)
(if_then_else:RVVM8QI (unspec:RVVM1BI [
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111673
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:846837c2406ae7a52d9123b29c13e4b8b9d14224
commit r15-7436-g846837c2406ae7a52d9123b29c13e4b8b9d14224
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri Feb 7 13:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118793
Bug ID: 118793
Summary: request NAMELIST reports of input errors indicate
position of error and show line containing error
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118623
--- Comment #16 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> So, if (reg:CCC flags) being non-zero in RTL means nc and (reg:CCC flags)
> being zero in RTL means c, shouldn't *bt be using (compare:CCC
> (zero_extract ...) (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|lto |ipa
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118789
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
I don't know much about Fortran so would prefer to defer to someone else to
handle extraction.
Here's some reproduction instructions:
```
cd /tmp
git clone https://github.com/ecmwf/ecbuild
git clone https://git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118789
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 60416
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60416&action=edit
fckit_C_interop.F90.fii.xz
```
$ gfortran -c fckit_C_interop.F90.fii
/tmp/fckit/src/fckit/module/fckit_C_interop.F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59252
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118790
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
case MEM_REF:
if (!integer_zerop (TREE_OPERAND (loc, 1)))
{
have_address = 1;
goto do_plus;
}
/* Fallthru. */
case INDIRECT_REF:
list_ret = loc_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118791
Bug ID: 118791
Summary: declare variant messes up template instantiation with
rvalue arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
1 - 100 of 170 matches
Mail list logo
