https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 52068 [details]
> gcc12-pr103842.patch
>
> Untested fix.
The patch is OK.
Thanks,
Uros.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103849
Bug ID: 103849
Summary: std::hash specializations with distinct concepts fails
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51964
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51964
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||13563
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51964
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
Las
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65426
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68694
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.1.0, 9.3.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86693
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #4)
> > Change testcase a little bit, gcc now can generate lock btc
> >
> >
> > void func1();
> >
> > void func(unsigned long *co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 57169, which changed state.
Bug 57169 Summary: fully unrolled matrix multiplication not vectorized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57169
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57169
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86132
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2012-10/msg00024.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99968
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53044
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Complete peeling was done by r0-119587-gb7442c2fe0e28 . So all fixed.
Note the testcases for this case were added with r0-119617-gc8379865b38e7 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53044
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.1, 4.9.2, 5.1.0, 6.1.0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98401
--- Comment #8 from Milo Brandt ---
I was trying to fix this and, from my work, I have a precise diagnosis of the
bug and a hack that *mostly* fixes things, but leaves a more subtle bug
unfixed. Debugging this is getting over my head, but the des
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98401
--- Comment #7 from Milo Brandt ---
Created attachment 52075
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52075&action=edit
A proposed testcase for a more subtle variant of the same bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98401
--- Comment #6 from Milo Brandt ---
Created attachment 52074
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52074&action=edit
A proposed testcase for the original bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46228
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 90200, which changed state.
Bug 90200 Summary: [graphite] ICE: Segmentation fault (in
apply_schedule_on_deps)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90200
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90200
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103848
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-28
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103848
Bug ID: 103848
Summary: std::deque<>::operator- uses "0" for nullptr check,
triggers "zero-as-null-pointer-constant"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96943
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.1.2
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68931
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103847
--- Comment #3 from matoro ---
Oh, and just for reference, I did confirm that these crashes do not occur on
amd64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103847
--- Comment #2 from matoro ---
Created attachment 52073
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52073&action=edit
build-without-network.log
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103847
matoro changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matoro_gcc_bugzilla@matoro.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103847
Bug ID: 103847
Summary: gccgo SIGSEGV in libgo standard library on sparc64
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102332
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103815
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from Francois-Xavier Coudert
> ---
> Hi Rainer,
>
> Apologies for that, apparently I got confused between the keyword and the
> macro
> form. Can you confirm that bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102332
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103418
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103418
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f8486c9fd71c08f30273e1a98b86e35a679ca229
commit r10-10364-gf8486c9fd71c08f30273e1a98b86e35a679ca229
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076
--- Comment #11 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Hi Rainer,
Apologies for that, apparently I got confused between the keyword and the macro
form. Can you confirm that bootstrapped is fixed if you change it to
static_assert(sizeof(GFC_UINTE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103776
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3c830e6d17b12aff2875b6e80e4404f09153
commit r11-9419-g3c830e6d17b12aff2875b6e80e4404f09153
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103634
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103634
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5b3587012951655d8e06dcfe683801862d3979de
commit r9-9889-g5b3587012951655d8e06dcfe683801862d3979de
Author: Harald Anlauf
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103634
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:39264acd7daaff4659fefa005ec02bccf685447d
commit r10-10363-g39264acd7daaff4659fefa005ec02bccf685447d
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103778
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103778
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:715842b02f8828f28affdbb5e164013c172a3fb9
commit r10-10362-g715842b02f8828f28affdbb5e164013c172a3fb9
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101329
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93c066f568822680506811d0de9c57c8a7a4e5d2
commit r10-10361-g93c066f568822680506811d0de9c57c8a7a4e5d2
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103778
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e6dcc14640105d2daf9c7f279980543470be7866
commit r11-9418-ge6dcc14640105d2daf9c7f279980543470be7866
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101329
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a25bfec3aacc34be624a620b00a72719ac03092f
commit r11-9417-ga25bfec3aacc34be624a620b00a72719ac03092f
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103832
--- Comment #2 from Joakim Rosqvist ---
Ok, may I then suggest that the docs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Common-Variable-Attributes.html#Common-Variable-Attributes
for the aligned attribute be augmented with a mention that if you
typ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103773
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103813
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7)
> Also, this is an automatic (i.e. stack) variable, so the destructor will run
> at the end of the block, meaning it will be settled twice.
Sorry, auto-corre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Also, this is an automatic (i.e. stack) variable, so the destructor will run at
the end of the block, meaning it will be settled twice. So another form of
undefined behaviour. The program is just broken, i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100985
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100985
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c92fcb13a4979232787f0476bf7469ccbb03617
commit r9-9888-g8c92fcb13a4979232787f0476bf7469ccbb03617
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103830
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100985
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103846
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103846
Bug ID: 103846
Summary: [9 Regression] unmatched extern "C" block in
aarch64/arm_acle.h
Product: gcc
Version: 9.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100415
--- Comment #2 from Marc Mutz ---
Confirmed with
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/d/gcc/11/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.2.1/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103835
--- Comment #2 from lavr at ncbi dot nlm.nih.gov ---
Irrespective of whether atoi() is known, printing an "int" (or two) will never
produce this many characters... This, however, also seems to have triggered
some weird logic that took the entire
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101236
Bug 101236 depends on bug 101239, which changed state.
Bug 101239 Summary: "Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines
re-entered." in size_in_bytes_loc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101239
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101239
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101239
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:916ec36d0a3ef3fe44c1657746922a5f18b60326
commit r12-6124-g916ec36d0a3ef3fe44c1657746922a5f18b60326
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 103700, which changed state.
Bug 103700 Summary: Incomplete type not causing constraints to fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103700
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103700
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.3|12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103700
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:88cdcb5c18d73bfc9960d774c678f0e8103b8031
commit r12-6123-g88cdcb5c18d73bfc9960d774c678f0e8103b8031
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101324
--- Comment #24 from Raoni Fassina Firmino ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #21)
> Fixed on trunk.
I tested gcc trunk with glibc master and I confirm that it fix the problem with
__memmove_ppc. I tested both running glibc check with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57245
Bug 57245 depends on bug 103735, which changed state.
Bug 103735 Summary: [12 Regression] Extra glibc "make check" failures by
r12-4764
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103735
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103735
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103762
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9407058a430316db5299bc7867e4a31f900cd197
commit r12-6122-g9407058a430316db5299bc7867e4a31f900cd197
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Sun Dec 19 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103836
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103837
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103837
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The loop body is:
(code_label 10026 4 10019 3 4 (nil) [0 uses])
(note 10019 10026 5 3 [bb 3] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(debug_insn 5 10019 6 3 (var_location:DF a (reg/v:DF 84 [ a ])) -1
(nil))
(debug_insn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
Georgii.Shagov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #5 from Georgii.Shag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103837
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, exactly, looking into that now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103837
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
It looks like can_move_invariant_reg is not ignoring debug insns.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103837
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-27
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103839
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
Bug ID: 103845
Summary: ICE in execute, at gimple-harden-conditionals.cc:552
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103838
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 52067
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52067&action=edit
gcc12-pr103838.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103838
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
Georgii.Shagov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Georgii.Shag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103844
Bug ID: 103844
Summary: [modules] ICE when exporting shared_ptr alias
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103838
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(gdb) n
534 rtx op1 = lowpart_subreg (V4SFmode, operands[1],
1: debug_rtx(operands[1]) = (subreg:V2SF (reg:DI 123) 0)
void
(gdb) n
536 rtx op2 = gen_rtx_VEC_CONCAT (V4SFmode, operands[2],
1: debu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
--- Comment #1 from Georgii.Shagov ---
>From experiments, I would guess that in case of -O3 the call to destructor was
substituted by initializer:
This works fine:
cat ./d.cpp
#include
class S {
public:
S() : i{1} {}
~S() { i=0; }
v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(insn 56 55 57 (set (subreg:V4SF (reg:V2SF 124 [ vect__35.17 ]) 0)
(div:V4SF (nil)
(reg:V4SF 126))) "t.c":18:23 -1
(nil))
Yes that nill there is wrong.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This was exposed/caused by r12-6113 as far as I can tell.
We didn't do SLP of the divide before and now we do and it caused the ICE
somehow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 52065
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52065&action=edit
bug.cpp.cpp.orig.gz
bug.cpp.cpp.orig.gz - unreduced file (had to compress to get past 1MB limit)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103843
Bug ID: 103843
Summary: Direct call to Desctructor is optimized out
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103842
Bug ID: 103842
Summary: [12 regression] ICE on ilmbase-2.5.7: during RTL pass:
expand
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103823
--- Comment #10 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/587376.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95046
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e078de24eae8253fd4f24342f65166b525dd99c6
commit r12-6121-ge078de24eae8253fd4f24342f65166b525dd99c6
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Mon D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98886
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rding at gatech dot edu
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100105
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo