https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104237
--- Comment #9 from Chengnian Sun ---
Hi,
Could you explain why the flag `-fcompare-debug` does not detect this bug? Is
it because the bug is triggered with -flto and -fcompare-debug does not work
with -flto?
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104219
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104213
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||unlvsur at live dot com
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104190
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104265
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104266
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is another example:
class X { protected: ~X(); friend struct Y; };
struct Y { X x = {}; };
int main() {
Y b {};
}
But unlike the previous example, this one is rejected by clang in C++14 bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104266
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104268
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104277
Bug ID: 104277
Summary: [meta-bug] gstatement-frontiers causes fcompare-debug
issues
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compare-debug-fai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100930
Carl Love changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carll at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80641
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is interesting:
_48 = _149 + 18446744073709551612; // _149 - 4
_63 = _55 + _48;
_18 = _63 - _55;
_19 = _18 /[ex] 4;
_20 = (long unsigned int) _19;
if (_55 != _63)
_18 should be the same as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28134
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Darrell.Wright at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Fail to eliminate deadstore |memset is not elimited when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #3 from Darrell Wright ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> >clang is unable to remove the memset in code like
>
> I think you mean GCC there :).
:) both are true. This optimization would remove the need for things
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>clang is unable to remove the memset in code like
I think you mean GCC there :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Full testcase:
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#define SZ 4096
std::vector foo() {
auto result = std::vector(SZ);
int *ptr = result.data();
for (std::size_t n = 0; n < SZ; ++n) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98026
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #4)
> > void f4(signed int i,unsigned int j) {
> > if (i > 100) return;
> > if (j > i) return;
> >
> > if (j > 100) link_error();
>
> if i is -2 (0xfffe)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Bug ID: 104276
Summary: Fail to eliminate deadstore from vector constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98026
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod ---
> void f4(signed int i,unsigned int j) {
> if (i > 100) return;
> if (j > i) return;
>
> if (j > 100) link_error();
if i is -2 (0xfffe) and j is 0xff (-1)
then link error cant be remove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103872
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|riscv64-unknown-elf |riscv64-unknown-elf
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103872
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104273
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104270
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104255
--- Comment #4 from qingzhe huang ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #2)
>
> error: use of parameter outside function body before ‘)’ token
>
> due to 'e' being used outside of an unevaluated context within the signature
> of the f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52306|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101135
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 52311
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52311&action=edit
Patch that regtests ok.
The patch suggested by the reporter is rather close to this one.
We need t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103514
Navid Rahimi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103514
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cb3ac1985a5332fa811a62844adb33ca140bd4ba
commit r12-6928-gcb3ac1985a5332fa811a62844adb33ca140bd4ba
Author: Navid Rahimi
Date: Fri Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|hppa*-*-hpux* |
Build|hppa*-*-hpux*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104228
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #14 from Luke Dalessandro ---
Thanks for the information Iain.
Is there something short-term where gcc could provide an "unimplemented"
failure or warning diagnostic for requests for coroutine frames with extended
alignment?
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #8 from Michael Meissner ---
Yes, you are right. I didn't remember which functions were generated by the
compiler, but I just did all of the conversion functions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104275
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |ipa
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104275
Bug ID: 104275
Summary: Os does not apply return value optimization while O2
and O3 does
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92752
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression] Bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92752
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e971990cbda091b4caf5e1a5bded5121068934e4
commit r12-6926-ge971990cbda091b4caf5e1a5bded5121068934e4
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Conversion from __ibm128 to float/double etc. are done differently, and for si
<-> if named tf we want to use di instead.
So, shouldn't we just add
+ set_conv_libfunc (sfix_optab, DImode, mode, "__fixtf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101891
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-28
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104274
Bug ID: 104274
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/pr97029.c (test for excess
errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104273
Bug ID: 104273
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/pr103526.c (test for bogus
messages, line 31)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104255
--- Comment #3 from qingzhe huang ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #2)
> The error message is obscure, but it seems what GCC has issue with here is
> the use of the function parameter seq2 in the trailing return type occurring
> outsi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70230
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987
Bug 19987 depends on bug 95424, which changed state.
Bug 95424 Summary: Failure to optimize division with numerator of 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104272
Bug ID: 104272
Summary: finalizer gets called during allocate
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #4)
> Created attachment 52306 [details]
> Patch to use the correct names for __ibm128 converts if long double is IEEE
> 128-bit
>
> The problem was internally the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2b610e7c6c89fd422c5c31f01023bcddf3cf4a5
commit r12-6924-gc2b610e7c6c89fd422c5c31f01023bcddf3cf4a5
Author: Zhao Wei Liew
Date: Fri Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102204
--- Comment #3 from Ye Luo ---
I tried today's main 3f0fcda37f58d4108feb67de08f181a32bcb6388.
This issue persists. Any chance this will be resolved in 12 release?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |testsuite
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |c++
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104263
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression]
|'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104263
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a591c71b41e18e4ff86852a974592af4962aef57
commit r12-6923-ga591c71b41e18e4ff86852a974592af4962aef57
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa*-*-hpux*
Build|hpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70230
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:90c31ff339015ddd89ac519656fbd23a36ee6271
commit r12-6922-g90c31ff339015ddd89ac519656fbd23a36ee6271
Author: Allan McRae
Date: Fri Jan 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103171
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a patch on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/589429.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104271
Bug ID: 104271
Summary: 538.imagick_r run-time at -Ofast -march=native
regressed by 26% on Intel Cascade Lake server CPU
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101391
--- Comment #8 from Gaius Mulley ---
Is it okay to close this PR as I've git committed some regression tests to
check that cgetopt and (other modules) are present and visible to the linker?
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2022-January/359
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103676
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression] internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103616
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
#c0 doesn't ICE on the trunk since
r12-5944-ga7acb6dca941db2b1c135107dac3a34a20650d5c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92752
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104228
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94801
dragan.mladjenovic at syrmia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dragan.mladjenovic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102178
--- Comment #27 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #17)
> So in .reload we have (with unpatched trunk)
>
> 401: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 6
> 462: ax:DF=[`*.LC0']
> REG_EQUAL 9.850689972416730997792
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104266
Jiang An changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de34 at live dot cn
--- Comment #1 from Jian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104228
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The .y var is added into the s function with:
#0 add_decl_as_local (decl=) at
../../gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc:257
#1 0x00c054f8 in gfc_finish_var_decl (decl=, sym=0x3e16a00) at ../../gcc/fortran/tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102449
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101783
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102178
--- Comment #26 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> make costs in a way that IRA/LRA prefer re-materialization of constants
> from the constant pool over spilling to GPRs (if that's possible at all -
> Vlad?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104228
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104270
Bug ID: 104270
Summary: -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value is incorrectly
suppressed by -ftrivial-auto-var-init=
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103483
--- Comment #21 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Yes, the wording is dreadful. Yes we need a better way to express to the user
the paths followed and how they impacted the analysis.
As for suppressing. There's not a great option here, which isn't a hug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104255
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103616
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I can not reproduce ICE on this week GCC. Probably it was fixed (or switched
off) by some recent RA patch.
As for the second issue (code generation for function foo), I thought for some
time how it coul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103035
Bug 103035 depends on bug 103489, which changed state.
Bug 103489 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE with -O3 in operator[], at vec.h:889
since r12-5394-g0fc859f5efcb4624
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103489
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103489
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103596
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:08f594465fa9b6a4ea1e3816cfecf256e883ff53
commit r11-9524-g08f594465fa9b6a4ea1e3816cfecf256e883ff53
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103489
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2c7d8ca8317981c2eb21eb1e85e0f55d3f71aff1
commit r11-9523-g2c7d8ca8317981c2eb21eb1e85e0f55d3f71aff1
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Bug ID: 104269
Summary: Bogus -Wuse-after-free seen in xen
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103341
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103341
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e272cf95ba048fde60b21aee046c9ca9c9264425
commit r12-6919-ge272cf95ba048fde60b21aee046c9ca9c9264425
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104267
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104267
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ec306582fd60e5b76f07eb81c9ed2415d9a3590
commit r12-6918-g9ec306582fd60e5b76f07eb81c9ed2415d9a3590
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104263
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5b6f04276e3d1f20817ed37b2e26e43bd12cc0d2
commit r12-6917-g5b6f04276e3d1f20817ed37b2e26e43bd12cc0d2
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103788
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103830
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103830
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103830
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
A fix in the source would be:
void MyClass::call() {
volatile char * volatile null = nullptr;
*null = 1; /* line 26 */
}
which then compiles to
movq$0, -8(%rsp)
movq-8(%r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103830
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
To clarify myself - the testcase is invoking UB, 'volatile' doesn't make a
difference here. That we get the DSE as a second-order effect is unfortunate
at most, in other places we try to preserve volatile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104172
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10 Regression] ppc64le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104142
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103790
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26e237fb5b83582b30ef7c5a388bc4e968a5a289
commit r12-6915-g26e237fb5b83582b30ef7c5a388bc4e968a5a289
Author: Andre Vehreschild
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104142
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo