https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83337
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83322
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81889
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60352
--- Comment #3 from Richard Smith ---
This bug still exists in GCC trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83286
--- Comment #8 from Alex Weslowski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> Illegal instruction is usually coming from gmp/mpfr which might be linked
> statically into your GCC binary on mingw.
This may indeed be the case. Also happens
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83286
--- Comment #7 from Alex Weslowski ---
Created attachment 42819
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42819&action=edit
Preprocessed file trans3.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81889
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61428
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #4)
> Aldy, here's another one to try with the new backwards threader.
I haven't done any in depth analysis here, but with the new threader we get one
threaded path
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48140
Albert Chan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||albertmcchan at yahoo dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83343
Bug ID: 83343
Summary: missing -Wstringop-overflow on writing via stpncpy
return value
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83342
Bug ID: 83342
Summary: extern marked variable template with later definition
emits error
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> This works for me, but I'll leave testcase and testing for tomorrow.
You are fast :-)
> @@ -5546,6 +5554,15 @@ vectorizable_operation (gimple *stmt, gi
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32623
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This works for me, but I'll leave testcase and testing for tomorrow.
--- gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c.jj2017-12-08 12:21:58.0 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c 2017-12-09 00:55:17.614147824 +0100
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83341
Bug ID: 83341
Summary: r254899 causes about 15000 test failures on powerpc
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35014
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35014
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cgw at alum dot mit.edu
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83340
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Dec 8 23:47:44 2017
New Revision: 255517
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255517&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-08 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/83317
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> I believe the bug is that get_vectype_for_scalar_type for the operands of
> POINTER_DIFF_EXPR is vector of unsigned elements, the result of
> POINTER_DIFF_EXPR is a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68419
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79509
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83340
Bug ID: 83340
Summary: Libgfortran.a (downloaded) is not PIC compiled...
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Guskov ---
32-bit SPEC CPU2006::447 also affected.
during GIMPLE pass: vect
fe.cc:681:1: internal compiler error: verify_gimple failed
0xcb7db1 verify_gimple_in_cfg(function*, bool)
/user/aguskov/scratch/agusko
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
void f(char**p,char**q,long*r){
for(int i=0;i<1024;i++)
r[i]=p[i]-q[i];
}
with g++ -O3 on x86_64 also ICEs, let's start with that (I don't have access to
SPEC).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83339
Bug ID: 83339
Summary: missing warning on a invalid attribute specified for a
builtin
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Guskov ---
32-bit SPEC CPU2006::436 also affected.
during GIMPLE pass: vect
regex.c: In function 'regexec.constprop':
regex.c:5755:1: internal compiler error: in vectorizable_mask_load_store, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:2349
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83179
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Guskov ---
Whoops. Sorry, 436 belongs to pr83338, even though its ICE message is the same
as 507`s.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80645
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Summar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83338
Bug ID: 83338
Summary: [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 510.parest_r ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83336
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'm afraid especially with LTO that will not be a good idea, the warnings are
nice, but memory consumption is more important if it causes swapping or is
otherwise excessive.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83336
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
I'm testing a fix for the above which simply removes the
540else if (!flag_auto_profile && debug_info_level == DINFO_LEVEL_NONE)
clause: i.e. to always retain blocks that satisfy
inlined_function_ou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83336
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
8.0.0 20171208 (experimental) [trunk revision 255516] (GCC)
$
$ gcctk -O2 -c small.c
$ gcc-7.2.0 -O3 -c small.c
$
$ gcctk -O3 -c small.c
during GIMPLE pass: linterchange
small.c: In function ‘j’:
small.c:9:6: internal compiler error: in interpret_rhs_expr, at
tree-scalar-evolution.c:1775
void j
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83336
Bug ID: 83336
Summary: Issues with displaying inlining chain for middle-end
warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70276
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81559
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82983
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83177
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79415
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79986
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81288
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I guess constraining the original patch to asms could be a solution. I can
> make a patch and after testing will commit it if it is ok with you.
>
> Something like
>
> Index: lra-constraints.c
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81303
--- Comment #15 from Pat Haugen ---
Just confirming that the changes have eliminated the bwaves degradation on
PowerPC that started with r249919.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83335
Bug ID: 83335
Summary: [8 regression][aarch64,ilp32]
gcc.target/aarch64/asm-2.c ICEs since 255481
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81595
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Dec 8 19:05:56 2017
New Revision: 255516
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255516&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/81595
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr81595.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Eric, I think the patch caused the problem was intended for asm insns but it
actually works on any insn.
I guess constraining the original patch to asms could be a solution. I can
make a patch and after
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61428
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Related to PR81179 and http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg02054.html
As the patch doesn't apply cleanly, can't easily verify it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83334
Bug ID: 83334
Summary: __builtin_ms_va_copy used in function with sysv_abi is
broken
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Bug ID: 8
Summary: Incorrect demangling of lambda destructors
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: dema
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83332
Bug ID: 83332
Summary: [8 regression] new test case
gfortran.dg/vect/pr81303.f fails (r255499)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On December 8, 2017 4:56:12 PM GMT+01:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631
>
>Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
> What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83329
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Bisecting revealed that the first bad revision is Honza's r255268, but since
that is just a cost adjustment, it seems it has just revealed a pre-existing
latent bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83331
Bug ID: 83331
Summary: Compile time evaluation of cbrt does not match library
evaluation
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83317
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|ebotcazou at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixing it is an ABI change, so it's not that simple.
It should also have a const_iterator parameter, not iterator, and needs to be
fixed for both std::string implementations.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |matz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I guess include/debug/string should be adjusted too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71657
--- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to mpf from comment #11)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #10)
> > Meaning that this PR may still occur for the other archs that define the
> > target hook: mips and arc.
> >
> > Shouldn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83327
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 42817
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42817&action=edit
Demonstrator patch
Using this demonstrator patch, I managed to fix the failure and run the
test-case successfull
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83319
Ethan Gutmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gutmann at ucar dot edu
--- Comment #1 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83330
Bug ID: 83330
Summary: [7/8 Regression] generating unaligned store to stack
for SSE register with -mno-push-args
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83327
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83329
Bug ID: 83329
Summary: internal compiler error: in vectorizable_store, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:6327
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83326
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83321
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
It makes no sense:
==23914== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==23914==at 0x10C8165: improve_allocation() (ira-color.c:2820)
==23914==by 0x10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83328
Bug ID: 83328
Summary: string.insert does not return a iterator when using
initializer lists
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83327
Bug ID: 83327
Summary: Spilling into hard regs not taken into account in lra
liveness analysis
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Testing a fix now. Sorry for the delay.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83326
Bug ID: 83326
Summary: [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 648.exchange2_s ~6%
performance regression with r255267 (reproducer
attached)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324
--- Comment #1 from m...@daniel-mendler.de ---
See also bug 77734
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81782
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Dec 8 14:45:30 2017
New Revision: 255512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255512&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-08 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/81782
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83325
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
[local count: 78951607]:
# ou_lsm.117_263 = PHI
# mb_lsm.120_277 = PHI
mb.74_96 = mb_lsm.120_277;
if (mb.74_96 <= 1)
goto ; [36.00%]
else
goto ; [64.00%]
[local count: 28422578]:
# ou_lsm.117_262 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83325
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-linux
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83325
Bug ID: 83325
Summary: Compile time hog w/ -Os -fwrapv
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-time-hog
Severity: normal
Priority: P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324
Bug ID: 83324
Summary: [feature request] Pragma or special syntax for
guaranteed tail calls
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Fails with -O2 -funroll-and-jam --param unroll-jam-min-percent=0
int x[1024], y[1024];
void __attribute__((noipa)) foo ()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1024; ++i)
{
x[i] = 0;
for (int j = 0; j <
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308
--- Comment #8 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #7)
> Sorry, I did not mean to imply that I listed all the changes required. I'm
> sure there will be many more, though likely mostly simple.
Ah, I mis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83308
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Sorry, I did not mean to imply that I listed all the changes required. I'm
sure there will be many more, though likely mostly simple.
For the ones you mention, you'll need to add "sh" to the +build lines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652
Bug 81652 depends on bug 82699, which changed state.
Bug 82699 Summary: ENDBR isn't generated at function entrance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Testcase:
int x[1024], y[1024];
void __attribute__((noipa)) foo ()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1024; ++i)
{
x[i] = 0;
for (int j = 0; j < 1024; ++j)
if (y[j])
x[i] = y[j];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83323
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
-O2 -funroll-and-jam miscompares.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
>
> --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
> Fixed on trunk, should I backport both patc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83008
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, sergey.shalnov at intel dot com wrote:
> And it uses xmm+ vpbroadcastd to spill tmp[] to stack
> ...
> 1e7: 62 d2 7d 08 7c c9 vpbroadcastd %r9d,%xmm1
> 1ed: c4 c1 7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652
Bug 81652 depends on bug 82699, which changed state.
Bug 82699 Summary: ENDBR isn't generated at function entrance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82699
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk, should I backport both patches to gcc7? to gcc6?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Dec 8 12:11:02 2017
New Revision: 255510
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255510&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Prevent SRA from removing type changing assignment
2017-12-08 Martin J
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
