https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119282
--- Comment #1 from Miro Palmu ---
Following will compile on gcc 14.2 but not on 15.0.1 20250314. It compiles on
Clang using either libc++ or libstdc++.
https://godbolt.org/z/GsneqbaWe
```
#include
#include
#include
namespace rv = std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119283
Bug ID: 119283
Summary: cobol FE uses memrchr unconditionally.
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
--- Comment #6 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Call instructions are normally valid anywhere in the function, including
> prologue and epilogue, even with frame pointers.
Sure, the call instruction actually
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119284
Bug ID: 119284
Summary: Overload resolution selects wrong overload with
`std::invocable` concept and `auto &` in lambda
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119241
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Iain mentioned the COBOL FE using fmodf128, that can perhaps be done using
fold_const_call (CFN_BUILT_IN_FMODF128, float128_type_node, real_cst1,
real_cst2)
Note, all of this is assuming you want to do const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, I've made an experiment
--- gcc/combine.cc.jj 2025-03-04 09:45:50.620584561 +0100
+++ gcc/combine.cc 2025-03-14 10:57:29.164681115 +0100
@@ -4204,7 +4204,8 @@ try_combine (rtx_insn *i3, rtx_insn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
`gcc xhci-hub.i -O2 -c -fno-strict-overflow``
```
unsigned a;
int b;
char c, d;
void e() {
c = a >> 14 & 1;
for (; d;)
c = 1;
b = c << 14;
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 regression] ICE when|[15 regression] ICE when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-14
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
--- Comment #27 from Chen Chen ---
I am a bit confused with your statement. For AOSC gcc 13.2 I got 8.52 with
parameters "-g -Ofast -march=la464 -flto", and 8.76 with parameters "-g -Ofast
-march=la464". These results are similar to yours.
For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
tree_nop_conversion_p certainly doesn't imply the two types are compatible
types.
So, I think we should go with
--- gcc/match.pd.jj 2025-03-13 14:05:09.689017389 +0100
+++ gcc/match.pd2025-03-14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
>
> --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> So, I've made an experiment
> --- gcc/co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
--- Comment #4 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> tree_nop_conversion_p certainly doesn't imply the two types are compatible
> types.
> So, I think we should go with
> --- gcc/match.pd.jj 2025-03-13 14:05:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119282
--- Comment #2 from Miro Palmu ---
Adding rn::to() between rv::transform and rv::join makes it
compile.
(I forgot --version flag to gcc trunk in above Compiler Explorer link.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 119269, which changed state.
Bug 119269 Summary: [15 Regression] 6-22% slowdown of 433.milc on Aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6470b4d749a0b9896b985858ee6eae095cd8a37a
commit r15-8050-g6470b4d749a0b9896b985858ee6eae095cd8a37a
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 119274, which changed state.
Bug 119274 Summary: [15 Regression] False positive array-bounds warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119274
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looking at df-scan.cc (df_recompute_luids), it uses INSN_P to determine what
should have luid assigned and so includes DEBUG_INSNs.
So DF_INSN_LUID difference can't be used for code generation, we'd need to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yes, I'll test it now together with the testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
>
> --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Looking at df-scan.cc (df_recompute_luid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Call instructions are normally valid anywhere in the function, including
prologue and epilogue, even with frame pointers.
E.g. for
void bar (char *);
void
foo (void)
{
char a[1024];
bar (a);
bar (a);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
--- Comment #4 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> I think
>
> asm ("" : : "g" (__builtin_frame_address_(0)))
>
> and using that input as frame pointer looks spot-on semantically, is that
> what you are actua
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
--- Comment #8 from peterz at infradead dot org ---
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 08:44:19AM +, torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> Now, I agree that the kernel could likely solve issues by just "don't check so
> much, then". But our build-time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
--- Comment #10 from peterz at infradead dot org ---
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 09:41:07AM +, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
>
> --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to peterz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119241
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to peterz from comment #8)
> There is the additional constraint that as long as the frame pointer
> unwinder does not have to guess, it is assumed to be 100% correct.
>
> By having calls before fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119279
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In any case, I agree with Richi that
__builtin_frame_address_(0)
is the right thing, even when the inline asm doesn't use itself %rbp, the
dependency on %rbp is what is needed in the compiler so that
post-pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119283
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-14
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119285
Bug ID: 119285
Summary: [15 Regression] 5% slowdown of 519.lbm_r on Zen2 and
Zen4 since r15-7932-ge355fe414aa3aa
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119285
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119155
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:adb14c7625178b501389c2d7d7c2feec37da7a19
commit r15-8047-gadb14c7625178b501389c2d7d7c2feec37da7a19
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119155
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Aligned vector element |[12/13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119214
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Robert Dubner from comment #14)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Robert Dubner from comment #7)
> >
> > Yes. IMO the least invasive way is to instead use labe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119281
Bug ID: 119281
Summary: libgcobol install fails when
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119281
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-14
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119288
Bug ID: 119288
Summary: [OpenMP] declare variant - adjust_args only detects
invalid use when invoked
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118959
--- Comment #10 from Filip Kastl ---
Ok, so these two benchmark configurations are back to their original speed:
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=465.10.0
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=993.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
--- Comment #5 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The proposed change fixes gnutls-3.8.9 build for me. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
--- Comment #4 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The proposed change fixes gnutls-3.8.9 build for me. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118959
--- Comment #11 from Filip Kastl ---
And btw there is also this slowdown
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=1101.10.0
which is 20%! But I didn't manage to replicate this on another Zen4 machine.
So it probably doesn't m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92713
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c650b557cb01f97bebb894aa68e5e74c2147c395
commit r15-8053-gc650b557cb01f97bebb894aa68e5e74c2147c395
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101544
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c650b557cb01f97bebb894aa68e5e74c2147c395
commit r15-8053-gc650b557cb01f97bebb894aa68e5e74c2147c395
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101544
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1268924a2eed4e4f4cf1f43cc996b2f0eedeb07e
commit r15-8052-g1268924a2eed4e4f4cf1f43cc996b2f0eedeb07e
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119214
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note,
* gengen.cc: applies if( !optimize ) test
is not properly formatted ChangeLog entry, unfortunately it got through
pre-commit hooks.
For next time, I think Richard provided what should have bee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks Jakub, the attachment looks good to me.
Sorry about the breakage.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Tamar's explanation why #c0 gcc 14 code is better than gcc 15:
"the mov is a zero latency instruction. sxtw, asr and sbfx themselves are
aliases to the same thing"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92713
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101544
Bug 101544 depends on bug 92713, which changed state.
Bug 92713 Summary: ICE in libsupc++ building an offload compiler targeting
amdgcn-unknown-amdhsa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92713
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f476ee30bab3976eefc3226481e617add83401a
commit r15-8058-g7f476ee30bab3976eefc3226481e617add83401a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ab0133cdba5dbcc29655593377e80586f7080472
commit r15-8060-gab0133cdba5dbcc29655593377e80586f7080472
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119287
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119227
--- Comment #7 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #6)
> Sorry if this comes across as blunt, but pushing changes and waiting for a
> cronjob to run (in production) seems very 1990s.
>
> Is there some automated way to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119284
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119211
Bug 119211 depends on bug 119281, which changed state.
Bug 119281 Summary: libgcobol install fails when
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119281
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119289
Bug ID: 119289
Summary: Incorrect behavior of std::filesystem::copy() with
none options and the destination link to non-existent
file
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119290
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101544
--- Comment #21 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(Note that wiring GCN, nvptx libstdc++ up for OpenACC, OpenMP offloading use is
still to be done.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119289
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Your test would be a lot simpler if you just use filesystem::copy_file and skip
all the filesystem::copy logic that ends up with a call to copy_file.
#include
#include
int main()
{
std::ofstream("sr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119214
--- Comment #19 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Robert Dubner from comment #18)
> I don't understand why the "The creation of assembler labels..." is going to
> become part of the ChangeLog. That text is above the line with the
> gcc/cobol: des
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105616
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
Note that we don't recommend use of -Werror with sanitizers in the
documentation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #18 from Richard Sandiford ---
Created attachment 60754
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60754&action=edit
Proof of concept patch with hard-coded limit
I'd been reluctant to get involved in this for fear of creat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 60755
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60755&action=edit
gcc15-pr116398.patch
My version of the patch (with punting only when the real uid distance is larger
or equal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119290
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119284
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
GCC is correct to reject this code.
In order to test whether the lambda is invocable it needs to be instantiated,
which triggers an error in the lambda body. That is outside the immediate
context of the c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119281
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119284
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> N.B. the error didn't happen because the wrong overload was selection,
Oops, that should say "was selected"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119012
--- Comment #18 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Levi Zim from comment #17)
> (In reply to Sam James from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Levi Zim from comment #15)
> >
> > As long as the flag is passed correctly and applied to both the stage2 +
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In this particular case it is a combination of one insn into another one which
produces a combined latter insn which doesn't need the former and the former
only needed because it has another use.
And, if th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
Robin Dapp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #17 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
--- Comment #29 from Xi Ruoyao ---
For 15 r15-7525 is intended for this issue. But I don't know if it's a good
idea to backport it, as it's only a workaround, not a proper fix.
Could someone try the diff in PR 115842 comment 6 (one time just o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119286
Bug ID: 119286
Summary: [15 Regression] GCN vs. "middle-end: delay checking
for alignment to load [PR118464]"
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119278
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119286
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119283
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
I wonder if it could just use strrchr as fallback?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119282
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|views::transform producing |[15 Regression]
|ran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119294
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
so we have `memset(&vector_char, x, sizeof(vector_char))`
A simple patch to gimple_fold_builtin_memset:
if (TREE_CODE (etype) == VECTOR_TYPE)
And that will fix it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119292
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-14
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119292
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60761
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60761&action=edit
better example
For x86_64 since -freorder-blocks-and-partition is turned on by default, the
throw part will go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119285
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I can not reproduce it on Intel (13600K). GCC with patch and without the patch
has the same score for lbm_s (11.4). But I see big lbm_s code increase with
the patch (+0.87%). And this is suspenseful.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119289
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill ---
So if toolexeclibdir is /usr/lib64, how is modules.json ending up in
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15/? It's supposed to be in toolexeclibdir.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #13 from Sam James ---
I'll investigate over the weekend.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119266
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> As pointed out in the CMake bug, Fedora is doing
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gcc/c/
> 46a6d807645871b4d243ef2be35f9677bd4d68cb?branch=rawhide but I don't k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
--- Comment #30 from Tianyang Chou ---
(In reply to Chen Chen from comment #27)
> I am a bit confused with your statement. For AOSC gcc 13.2 I got 8.52 with
> parameters "-g -Ofast -march=la464 -flto", and 8.76 with parameters "-g
> -Ofast -marc
101 - 191 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
