https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Roberts ---
Created attachment 42691
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42691&action=edit
Script for matrix.c test program
Script for matrix.c test program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Roberts ---
Created attachment 42690
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42690&action=edit
Test results for Skylake system with matrix.c
Test results for Skylake system with matrix.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Roberts ---
Created attachment 42689
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42689&action=edit
Test results for Haswell system with matrix.c
Test results for Haswell system with matrix.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Roberts ---
Created attachment 42688
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42688&action=edit
Test results for Ryzen system with matrix.c
Test results for Ryzen system with matrix.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Roberts ---
Created attachment 42687
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42687&action=edit
Test program used for the attached performance results (matrix.c)
Test program used for the attached performan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Roberts ---
I've been testing on a Ryzen system and also comparing with Haswell and
Skylake. From my testing -mtune=znver1 does not perform well and never has,
including as of last snapshot:
gcc version 8.0.0 20171119 (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
Andrew Roberts changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrewm.roberts at sky dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83121
Bug ID: 83121
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: in linemap_ordinary_map_lookup, at
libcpp/line-map.c:995
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83104
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83119
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83111
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83120
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83120
Bug ID: 83120
Summary: [8 Regression] ext/special_functions/hyperg failure on
AIX
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
types -Wold-style-definition -std=gnu11 -version
-fgnu89-inline -fmerge-all-constants -fno-stack-protector -frounding-math -fpic
-o fetch-value.s
GNU C11 (GCC) version 8.0.0 20171122 (experimental) (powerpc64-linux)
compiled by GNU C version 8.0.0 20171122 (experimental), GMP version
6.0.0, MPFR v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82401
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82407
Bug 82407 depends on bug 82401, which changed state.
Bug 82401 Summary: [8 Regression] error: qsort comparator non-negative on
sorted output: 1 in insert_late_enum_def_bindings on an invalid code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82401
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83106
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80717
Bartłomiej Piotrowski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bpiotrowski at archlinux dot
org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82401
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 22 22:35:52 2017
New Revision: 255084
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255084&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/82401
* name-lookup.c (member_name_cmp): Return 0 i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118
--- Comment #1 from Neil Carlson ---
Note that the incorrect string "b" is not actually 1 character long, but 3
characters: a "b" followed by 2 non-printing characters. Vim shows them as ^@
with version 8.0 when the dynamic type is
CHARACTER.
Version 6.4.1 gives the expected result:
orig=["foo","bar"]
copy=["foo","bar"]
But 8.0 (20171122) gives an incorrect result:
orig=["foo","bar"]
copy=["foo","b"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79242
Jozef Lawrynowicz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jozefl.gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83030
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83030
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 22 21:43:22 2017
New Revision: 255083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255083&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83030
* doc/rtl.texi (Flags in an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82392
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Test case for the fact that we don't align, or that this
causes a performance loss?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82583
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Nov 22 21:12:36 2017
New Revision: 255082
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255082&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
jit: update test suite for change to -Warray-bounds
jit.dg/test-error-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82588
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Nov 22 21:12:36 2017
New Revision: 255082
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255082&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
jit: update test suite for change to -Warray-bounds
jit.dg/test-error-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83117
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83117
Bug ID: 83117
Summary: FAIL: gcc.target/x86_64/abi/ms-sysv/ms-sysv.c (test
for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83106
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 22 20:49:56 2017
New Revision: 255080
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255080&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgomp/83106
* target.c (gomp_target_init): Compute le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62170
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62170
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Nov 22 20:37:58 2017
New Revision: 255076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C/C++: fix quoting of "aka" typedef information (PR 62170)
PR 62170 de
or body gives correct code - this is stripped version,
originally there was assert(this->size() >= 0);
UBSAN gives no results.
This bug occurs also on 6.1.0, 6.2.0, 6.3.0, 7.1.0, 7.2.0 and today's trunk
(8.0.0 20171122), as tested on compiler explorer: https://godbolt.org/g/hr4Nq4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83074
--- Comment #7 from Stefan Vargyas ---
>
> libc.so.6 is a shared library, not a PIE. It is normally linked with -shared,
> just arranged to have .interp section and a meaningful e_entry in Ehdr.
> PIE is something significantly different, in pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83115
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Kolesov ---
The error we can see:
prog.cc: In function 'void doSomething(double)':
prog.cc:6:44: error: 'value' was not declared in this scope
[ now = std::chrono::system_clock::now(), value]{}();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83115
Bug ID: 83115
Summary: Capturing the local variable/function parameter by
value generates an compilation error
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83016
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
> errm - I think I need to rebuild the host compiler so I get the proper
> gnatlink to rebuild the cross compiler. Sorry.
See also PR ada/81878.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79072
--- Comment #19 from Neil Carlson ---
This fixes the code of comment 12 for me. All the other test cases continue to
work as expected. This can be closed as "fixed" as far as I'm concerned.
Thanks Paul!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83030
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|gcov-profile|rtl-optimization
--- Comment #5 from Eri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83097
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83097
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Nov 22 19:19:13 2017
New Revision: 255072
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255072&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 83097 Use __BYTE_ORDER__ predefined macro instead of runtime check
By u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83114
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83114
Bug ID: 83114
Summary: [7/8 Regression] ICE in gen_vec_cmpv2dfv2di, at
config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md:2495
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81228
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83016
--- Comment #9 from simon at pushface dot org ---
errm - I think I need to rebuild the host compiler so I get the proper gnatlink
to rebuild the cross compiler. Sorry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83016
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon at pushface dot org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82674
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83100
--- Comment #3 from James Clarke ---
With the same example, I can reproduce on aarch64, armel, powerpc, ppc64 and
ppc64el.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82253
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83111
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
By reverting the patch, I was able to finish the build.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83095
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83113
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83113
Bug ID: 83113
Summary: Bogus "duplicate allocatable attribute" error for
submodule character function
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83104
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83112
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82190
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83112
Bug ID: 83112
Summary: Silence warnings from PowerPC libgcc float128-ifunc.c
compilation
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83106
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
If you already know strlen (d) you can use strcpy or memcpy instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83111
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82907
Carl Love changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #2 from Carl Love ---
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83111
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||sh
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80711
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
There is a warning like that in the middle-end: -Wsuggest-attribute=pure.
Unfortunately, it's only good for functions that are actually emitted (i.e.,
not for C++ inline functions).
$ cat t.C && gcc -O2 -S -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83104
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
Author: glisse
Date: Wed Nov 22 16:44:46 2017
New Revision: 255068
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255068&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Avoid two_valued_val_range_p for pointers.
2017-11-22 Marc Glisse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83111
Bug ID: 83111
Summary: [sh] stack smashing detected in gen_udivsi3
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83110
Bug ID: 83110
Summary: Relocation error when taking address of protected
function in shared library.
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83064
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83069
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #2)
> The specific revision this starts failing with is 254888.
This is r254888.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83069
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83069
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The specific revision this starts failing with is 254888.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82862
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82268
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83106
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Yes, exactly. It's these unintended uses that are a common problem and that
the warning is designed to help prevent. They are rare in carefully written
code bases like GCC but more common in software develop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83109
Bug ID: 83109
Summary: [CET] improper code generation for builtin_longjmp
with -fcf-protection -mcet
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
Bug 67239 depends on bug 60336, which changed state.
Bug 60336 Summary: empty struct value is passed differently in C and C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68355
Bug 68355 depends on bug 60336, which changed state.
Bug 60336 Summary: empty struct value is passed differently in C and C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53871
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david at westcontrol dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80872
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
--- Comment #31 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Nov 22 16:06:18 2017
New Revision: 255066
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255066&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60336
PR middle-end/67239
PR target/683
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68355
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Nov 22 16:06:18 2017
New Revision: 255066
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255066&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60336
PR middle-end/67239
PR target/6835
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
--- Comment #50 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Nov 22 16:06:18 2017
New Revision: 255066
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255066&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60336
PR middle-end/67239
PR target/683
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82401
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83106
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #3)
> The warning for strncat helps find similar bugs as for strncpy: defeating
> the size constraint by specifying the length of the source rather than the
> amount of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66264
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59930
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
When we parse the template friend declaration, we're not injecting an invisible
template decl into the enclosing namespace.
When we instantiate the template we do an unqualified lookup (and ask for
hidden o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83007
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83106
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
The warning for strncat helps find similar bugs as for strncpy: defeating the
size constraint by specifying the length of the source rather than the amount
of space in the destination:
strncat (d, s, strlen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83007
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82862
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
I don't have any good ideas here. Fortran with allocated arrays tends to use
quite some integer registers for all the IV setup and computation.
One can experiment with less peeling of vector epilogues (--p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83108
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jon Levell from comment #3)
> I'm surprised this was closed invalid.
>
> "While the x86 architecture originally did not require aligned memory
> access, and still works without it, some SS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83106
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mliska at suse dot cz
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83108
--- Comment #3 from Jon Levell ---
I'm surprised this was closed invalid.
"While the x86 architecture originally did not require aligned memory access,
and still works without it, some SSE2 instructions on x86 CPUs do require the
data to be 128-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83108
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83108
--- Comment #1 from Jon Levell ---
Created attachment 42682
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42682&action=edit
Plain source file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83108
Bug ID: 83108
Summary: Unaligned 128bit dereference causes segfault with -O2
on x86-64
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83102
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
