https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119698
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Building stage1 with gnat-12 - this means the bug is in GCC 12? Or is this a
"source error" in the GCC 15 sources?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115259
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Andrew P., thanks for having a look!
I tested attachment 61055; terminates normally. :-|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
--- Comment #4 from mcccs at gmx dot com ---
Created attachment 61059
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61059&action=edit
This is a reduced testcase, but modified in a way that it gives an error in VRP
stage instead of DOM
Whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 61060
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61060&action=edit
-fmem-report with detailed-mem-stats and -fsyntax-only
-fmem-report with details shows
tree_list
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 61061
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61061&action=edit
-fmem-report with detailed-mem-stats and -g
Using -g instead of -fsyntax-only (which will bring us to 10GB ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119710
Bug ID: 119710
Summary: failure demangling std::variant stuff
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119707
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115285
--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed for 15 and 14.3 so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119711
Bug ID: 119711
Summary: dw_attr_struct and dw_loc_descr_node are wasteful with
padding
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119351
--- Comment #16 from Tamar Christina ---
Ok, found the bug and c-vise is running for a testcase.
The issue is as follows:
For early break we need to know which value to start the scalar loop with if we
take an early exit.
Historically this me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104826
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119175
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:39892d9618ee0f06dd09271589878b0df7b1e75d
commit r15-9362-g39892d9618ee0f06dd09271589878b0df7b1e75d
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66681
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103001
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #1 from Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119707
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
__attribute__((noipa)) unsigned _BitInt(256)
foo (_BitInt(129) x)
{
return (unsigned _BitInt(255)) x;
}
int
main ()
{
if (foo (-1) !=
0x7fffuw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119393
--- Comment #6 from Alex Coplan ---
Alright, so after some digging through the dumps I realised that adding
-fno-early-inlining is enough to get a non-LTO testcase. So the following
testcase reproduces the different codegen before/after the abo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119684
--- Comment #22 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #21)
> If we want such checking, it should be done in CI (similar to the CI that
> verifies generated files that are checked in have been correctly
> regenerated), n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119712
Bug ID: 119712
Summary: compiler hang at -O{1,2,3,s} since 14.1
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119629
--- Comment #14 from Alexandre Oliva ---
ack, patch combining the patchlets in commits 7 and 9 looking good in gcc-14
ppc-elf test results.
I'll point out that this report was not so much about this specific mismatch
between ppc builtins and th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119684
--- Comment #21 from Joseph S. Myers ---
If we want such checking, it should be done in CI (similar to the CI that
verifies generated files that are checked in have been correctly regenerated),
not at .pot regeneration time or .po commit time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119712
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Sum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119712
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113524
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva ---
... and riscv*-elf, powerpc-elf.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119393
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't see any difference between 14 and 15 with your reduced testcase at
`-Ofast -fno-early-inlining -mcpu=neoverse-v1+nosve ` .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87326
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
--- Comment #7 from Jennifer Schmitz ---
Great, thanks a lot for the quick fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116591
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Ma Jin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:07d4c264a000b6448d6b519110c05c3b8a64d23b
commit r14-11581-g07d4c264a000b6448d6b519110c05c3b8a64d23b
Author: Jin Ma
Date: Wed N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87556
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #4 from Andre Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87939
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Andre Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88154
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #4 from Andre Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88254
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Andre Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88960
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Andre Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97210
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Andre Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103796
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #11 from Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119712
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|compiler hang at|[14/15 Regression] compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119684
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1f32b87117b0e2ecc33b844d929d723de3fe8085
commit r15-9366-g1f32b87117b0e2ecc33b844d929d723de3fe8085
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106671
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119708
Bug ID: 119708
Summary: : \00 should be rejected
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115259
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> Created attachment 61054 [details]
> Maybe a testcase
>
> I tried this on x86_64 with:
> -O2 -fdisable-tree-cselim -march=skylake-avx512 -fno-vect-cost-model
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119707
Bug ID: 119707
Summary: wrong code with _BitInt() mask and shift at -O1
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119692
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Jakub, could you please quickly describe the approach you'd take to get the
relevant 'DECL_TINFO_P' and 'DECL_VTABLE_OR_VTT_P' (correct, and complete list
of predicates?) into 'offload_vars' (via the usual
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As a temporary fix for GCC 15, I think we could always do something like
--- gcc/cgraph.h.jj 2025-04-08 14:08:48.517319926 +0200
+++ gcc/cgraph.h2025-04-10 10:07:19.059246243 +0200
@@ -896,8 +89
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
Bug ID: 119706
Summary: [15 regression] ICE in gimple pass 'dom' for -O3
-mcpu=grace
--param=aarch64-autovec-preference=sve-only
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119701
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119690
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Already -O1 fails:
int a, b = -__INT_MAX__, c;
int
main ()
{
d:
c = a + b + __INT_MAX__;
if (-c >= 0)
goto e;
goto f;
e:
a = c + 1;
goto d;
f:
if (a != 1)
__builtin_abort ();
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119610
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||15.0
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119692
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Schwinge ---
When still 'map'ping C++ 'typeinfo', 'vtable' at the OpenACC compute, OpenMP
'target' construct (as 'firstprivate', or 'map(to)'), there's an additional
issue. With attachment 61052 altered as follows:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119507
--- Comment #6 from chenglulu ---
Ping?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105926
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119399
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Overlap check in vectorized |[12/13/14 Backport] Overlap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119244
--- Comment #30 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:95f10974a9190e345776604480a2df0191104308
commit r15-9357-g95f10974a9190e345776604480a2df0191104308
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119690
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think at -O1 in *.sra it is still correct, we have
[local count: 118111600]:
a.0_12 = a;
b.1_13 = b;
_14 = a.0_12 + b.1_13;
_15 = _14 + 2147483647;
c = _15;
if (_15 <= 0)
goto ; [89.00%]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
mcccs at gmx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcccs at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119690
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think this is ivopts bug (or at least that pass introduces UB into the IL
that wasn't there before).
In particular on the c <= 0 guarded edge it adds
[local count: 105119324]:
+ _26 = b.1_13 + -214748
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119698
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119692
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Some generic remarks - regarding OpenMP to:
> When still 'map'ping C++ 'typeinfo', 'vtable' at the OpenACC compute,
> OpenMP 'target' construct
Obviously, the type info etc. is required for all work on th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119399
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c8c373495d7d863dfb7102726ac3b4b41685df4
commit r15-9355-g4c8c373495d7d863dfb7102726ac3b4b41685df4
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116593
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Ma Jin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2631ac38d9b2a9def13a04c1e1fefb3871e420ab
commit r14-11583-g2631ac38d9b2a9def13a04c1e1fefb3871e420ab
Author: Jin Ma
Date: Tue J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118601
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Ma Jin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f2e2e255004dc35beef9d8b5800d69d228f7eec1
commit r14-11584-gf2e2e255004dc35beef9d8b5800d69d228f7eec1
Author: Jin Ma
Date: Tue F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119709
Bug ID: 119709
Summary: RISC-V: Why volatile int16_t variables generate extra
shift instructions in compiler output
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
>From the profile it looks like using that much memory (creating that much
garbage) is the main issue, due to GC that always eats at compile-time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119707
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119707
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Further simplified
__attribute__((noipa)) unsigned _BitInt(256)
foo (unsigned _BitInt(256) x, _BitInt(129) y)
{
return x - (unsigned _BitInt(255)) y;
}
int
main ()
{
if (foo (0, -1) !=
0x800
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115285
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6343a0fef382a6f37f50755beb239f4e1e9e83cb
commit r14-11586-g6343a0fef382a6f37f50755beb239f4e1e9e83cb
Author: François Du
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115285
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5cfe086bea29799c2d4eff59d2d43e30a162bf9c
commit r14-11589-g5cfe086bea29799c2d4eff59d2d43e30a162bf9c
Author: Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119690
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78564
Jan Engelhardt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60354
--- Comment #3 from Jan Engelhardt ---
Issue persists as of
gcc version 15.0.1 20250408 (experimental) (SUSE Linux)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf812c6ad83ec0b241bb3fecc7e68f883b6083df
commit r15-9358-gbf812c6ad83ec0b241bb3fecc7e68f883b6083df
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|15.0|
Summary|[15 regression] IC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-04-10
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116294
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
It fails at -O1 only with statement-frontiers, so another bug again (but who
cares about frontiers).
Reducing -O2 with -gno-statement-frontiers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119687
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #15 from Sam James ---
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119399
--- Comment #5 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #4)
> >, so for a 4-element
> > vector, the only problem cases are p==q+4, p==q+8 and p==q+12. That's
> > equivalent to testing whether the unsigned value p-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119596
--- Comment #21 from Mateusz Guzik ---
Given the issues outline in 119703 and 119704 I decided to microbench 2 older
uarchs with select sizes. Note a better quality test which does not merely
microbenchmark memset or memcpy is above for one rea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614
--- Comment #24 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #21)
> I'll look at implementing the required IPA-VR streaming for return values
> this Friday.
If this ends up being too difficult (or has too high risk of fallout), is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
Bug ID: 119705
Summary: Massive memory use when building Flang (10GB+)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-time-hog, memory-hog
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 61056
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61056&action=edit
DataSharingProcessor.cpp.ii.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Patrick, would you be able to take a look with reducing it (or offer some
advice)? We've tried but it's challenging.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119705
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
(Clang fares far better on this, and takes > 50% less memory. I think it's far
quicker as well.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119691
--- Comment #6 from Sergey Fedorov ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #5)
> Lets take this discussion elsewhere - e.g. to my Darwin toolchains - there
> is no upstream solution to this on any of the components (cctools, ld64,
> gcc, llvm)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119711
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119669
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60749
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bigmagicreadsun at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119709
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I should mention this is a known issue and not one easily solvable. bug 60749
describes the internals of GCC on what is going wrong which is why it might not
read as a duplicate.
But this is the jist:
In par
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119714
Bug ID: 119714
Summary: Failure when using == operator on a class derived from
std::expected
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119708
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119714
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/expected/operator_cmp
This mentions that it is invalid for C++23 but would be valid for C++26. Looks
like we have not implemented the 26 rules either.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119713
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119669
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I can:
/opt/notnfs/gcc-bisect/obj/gcc/f951.r15-9357 -quiet pr119669.f90
f951.r15-9357: internal compiler error: in compare_parameter, at
fortran/interface.cc:2537
0x2d42e37 internal_error(char const*, ...)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119669
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, removing the ! character makes it work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119711
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119672
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||negge at dgql dot org
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119669
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119713
Bug ID: 119713
Summary: RISC-V: -march=rv64gcv gives an internal compiler
error in a_as
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119711
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
dw_discr_value has a similar issue too.
I wonder if dw_loc_descr_node fields (dw_loc_oprnd1 dw_loc_oprnd2) could use
the no_unique_address attribute? Since there is some padding inbetween them
too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119669
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
