https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
--- Comment #3 from Huaqi ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-14.2.0/gcc/Extended-Asm.html#Volatile-1
>
> Note that the compiler can move even volatile asm instructions relative to
> other code,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17884
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fanghuaqi at vip dot qq.com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Yeah, bisect landed on r15-8016-g8015a72ae49640
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Funny I pointed to the same documentation as mentioned in the LLVM issue
without seeing that.
Again this is not a bug in GCC.
If you want to do some really micro-benchmarking you will need to write
everyth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119253
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
res = a[0] * a[0];
__asm volatile("rdcycle %0" : "=r"(end_cycle) : "r"(res) : "memory");
Will cause the second rdcycle to stay after the mult.
Otherwise you could just write the full thing in asse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
If something behaves identically in GCC and in Clang, that usually means it's
UB (or some intentional behaviour, or both). You can style it as a feature
request but something fundamental isn't going to change li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
--- Comment #5 from Huaqi ---
And for llvm part, the author topperc is looking into this issue, and try to
find a way to fix it, see
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/130033#issuecomment-2707711817
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60750
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60750&action=edit
trying to get a testcase fails without std::vector
This one can be optimized in fre3 and we don't get the warn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
--- Comment #4 from Huaqi ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> res = a[0] * a[0];
> __asm volatile("rdcycle %0" : "=r"(end_cycle) : "r"(res) : "memory");
>
> Will cause the second rdcycle to stay after the mult.
>
> Otherw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
Bug ID: 119280
Summary: Unexpected inline asm rdcycle code misplaced cause
wrong cycle calculation
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119280
--- Comment #9 from Huaqi ---
Okay, thank you Andrew and Sam for your explaination.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115248
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a68e32b8e4b4c03c81e3a4b7560d52fef2d16088
commit r15-8024-ga68e32b8e4b4c03c81e3a4b7560d52fef2d16088
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119211
Bug 119211 depends on bug 119257, which changed state.
Bug 119257 Summary: Version of GCC COBOL on Compiler Explorer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119257
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117092
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||deferred, xfail
Summary|[15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108053
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119260
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119267
--- Comment #2 from Matteo Perotti ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> You can't use vsetivli this way. That is you can't set it via inline-asm.
>
> MAybe this should be documented.
1) Do you mean that it's not allowed to use vse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116545
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
(In reply to lucier from comment #8)
patch -p0 < x.patch (or git apply -p0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119268
Bug ID: 119268
Summary: Exception thrown when host_detect_local_cpu returns
NULL
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119272
Bug ID: 119272
Summary: Function misidentified as non-function in associate
statement
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113965
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119135
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:50359c0a44381edb6dbd9359ef2ebdadbcc3ed42
commit r15-8030-g50359c0a44381edb6dbd9359ef2ebdadbcc3ed42
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116545
--- Comment #8 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Created attachment 60738 [details]
> gcc15-pr116545.patch
>
> Full untested patch.
I don't know how to apply this patch to the git checked-out s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113965
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119267
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation, inline-asm
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117092
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e5d54c33a257b3f7137f8408592df009dffb5711
commit r15-8029-ge5d54c33a257b3f7137f8408592df009dffb5711
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119263
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42270
--- Comment #2 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've picked up this issue again (after almost 10 years!) because it continues
to annoy me how hard it is to find information in this chapter unless you
already know what to search for.
A problem I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111055
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:20828a812822f3009c3fe8a15d3db9160819b7de
commit r15-8039-g20828a812822f3009c3fe8a15d3db9160819b7de
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119270
Bug ID: 119270
Summary: [15 Regression] 5% slowdown of 507.cactuBSSN_r on
Intel Ice Lake
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119270
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117645
--- Comment #9 from John David Anglin ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
>> > The current implementation of addti3 on hppa only allows register
> > operands. The problem is avoided if we improve addti3 to support
> > the addition o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119268
--- Comment #4 from Antoni ---
Oh sorry. I thought this was merged.
I guess we can close this issue then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119259
--- Comment #11 from Patrick Palka ---
I recommend your workaround of removing the 'constexpr' specifier when
defaulting a function. A defaulted function is already implicitly constexpr if
its definition qualifies, regardless of whether it's ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94061
--- Comment #10 from Patrick Palka ---
Hmm, I'm not sure CWG 2568 makes this example well-formed? We already do
access checks in the context of the synthesized definition, the problem is that
the synthesized definition (as per comment #2) looks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119253
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115248
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119264
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119242
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 60740
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60740&action=edit
gcc15-pr119242-wip.patch
So I've played briefly with this PR and tried to convert the __int128 uses in
the COB
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119255
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119271
Bug ID: 119271
Summary: libgdiagnostics docs are missing build/installation
instructions
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113965
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df87b300bd13ed047b1159022c93445f130458e6
commit r15-8037-gdf87b300bd13ed047b1159022c93445f130458e6
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #7)
> (In reply to Sam James from comment #0)
> > $ A=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15/
> > $
> > B=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15/inc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116545
--- Comment #11 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu ---
Created attachment 60745
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60745&action=edit
Test summary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116440
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
gorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.1 20250313 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119273
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #2)
> A simple
>
> print *,temp_int(:,a%test_function())
>
> works fine, so it is likely a pure ASSOCIATE problem.
gfortran-14.2.0 even crashes on the print a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118104
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
For "void(Ts, Us)..." in the test we end up in use_pack_expansion_extra_args_p
with a TYPE _PACK_EXPANSION with pattern=void(Ts, Us) and the list of param
packs={Us, Ts}; parm_packs is { Ts -> , Us -> }. W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93264
--- Comment #24 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 119276 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116436
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90040
Bug 90040 depends on bug 116436, which changed state.
Bug 116436 Summary: ICE: in cfg_layout_redirect_edge_and_branch_force, at
cfgrtl.cc:4748 with -O2 -fmodulo-sched -fprofile-arcs -fgraphite-identity -fvpt
-freorder-blocks-and-partition
https:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119277
Bug ID: 119277
Summary: Building an arm-none-eabi GNAT cross-compiler on
latest master fails
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93264
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kito at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118104
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
A little different test I've been using:
```
template struct Z { };
template struct X {
template using Y = Z;
};
template
using foo = X::Y;
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119273
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||87477
--- Comment #2 from an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119220
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin ---
Created attachment 60748
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60748&action=edit
Patch
Your suggestion works.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119277
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119277
Zsolt Vadasz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Zsolt Vadasz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119268
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Antoni from comment #0)
> host_detect_local_cpu is called in gcc/config/i386/i386-jit.cc and the
> result is sent directly to a std::string, so if the result is NULL, this
> will throw an exception.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Bug ID: 119269
Summary: [15 Regression] 6-22% slowdown of 433.milc on Aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119268
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Ah, it's to do with your https://github.com/antoyo/libgccjit/pull/6.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119259
--- Comment #10 from Anders Wind ---
More interesting behavior: https://godbolt.org/z/K8cjEqTaa
```
#include
template
struct equatable {
T val;
// this does not
constexpr bool operator==(const equatable& o)const noexcept
requires
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119268
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Antoni from comment #0)
> host_detect_local_cpu is called in gcc/config/i386/i386-jit.cc and the
> result is sent directly to a std::string, so if the result is NULL, this
> will throw an exce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119242
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jklowden at schemamania dot
org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119257
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |MOVED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119264
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-13
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119264
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118869
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 119263 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #0)
> $ A=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15/
> $
> B=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15/include/g++-v15/bits/std.cc
> $ contrib/relpath.sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119273
Bug ID: 119273
Summary: subclass can not correctly access to superclass in
associate statement
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
I may well be getting mixed up then, sorry.
Are the paths meant to be relative to the .json file? The file for me is at
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15/libstdc++.modules.json, and std.cc is at
/usr/lib/gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116545
--- Comment #10 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Created attachment 60738 [details]
> gcc15-pr116545.patch
>
> Full untested patch.
I built and minimally tested this patch, and will upload the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2025-03-13 00:00:00 |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119147
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57dbbdd8e34b80926e06b352b6c442c555b303ed
commit r15-8041-g57dbbdd8e34b80926e06b352b6c442c555b303ed
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Thu M
64-unknown-linux-gnu-as --disable-multilib
--enable-libsanitizer --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-20250313133031-r15-8032-g6e47e6d48844ee-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-riscv64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.1 20250313 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119277
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119265
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119265
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100647
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
with: /home/slyfox/dev/git/gcc/configure --disable-multilib
--disable-bootstrap --disable-lto --disable-libsanitizer --enable-languages=c
CFLAGS='-O1 -g0' CXXFLAGS='-O1 -g0' LDFLAGS='-O1 -g0'
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 15.0.1 20250313 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |15.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93264
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=8015a72ae496401e05942f4d33c94aa45174f841
was not a full fix for RAW_DATA_CST.
GCC 14, but gives warnings with
GCC 15.
Compiled with:
g++ -Wfatal-errors -Werror=array-bounds -O2 -std=gnu++23 -c test.cpp
g++ (GCC) 15.0.1 20250313 (experimental)
g++ -Wfatal-errors -Werror=array-bounds -O2 -std=gnu++23 -c test.cpp
In file included from
/opt/gcc/gcc-15/include/c++/15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #10)
> OK, avoiding speculation and getting back to facts:
> ```
> $ cat ./build/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src/c++23/relpath.log
> called with '/usr/lib64' and
> '/usr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119272
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119106
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> Created attachment 60728 [details]
> Draft patch
>
> This patch fixes the testcase, but needs further testing.
Unfortunately this regresses on:
gfortran.d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119118
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5d56278d145d439092adf6f65c865c85623f881
commit r15-8040-ga5d56278d145d439092adf6f65c865c85623f881
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119147
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119273
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
OK, avoiding speculation and getting back to facts:
```
$ cat ./build/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src/c++23/relpath.log
called with '/usr/lib64' and
'/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15/include/g++-v15/bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60742
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60742&action=edit
Slightly reduced
ABle to remove the std::function part. but still has more missing.
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
