https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109973
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
commit r14-2030-g5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110118
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
commit r14-2030-g5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Thu J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
Alexander Westbrooks changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ctechnodev at gmail dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110344
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-22
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110342
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Either r14-1981 or r14-1951
Reverting r14-1981-g85107abeb71bbf restores llvm-12 build for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110349
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106626
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0e466e978c728697f18c67c4eace9ba4633f9ef5
commit r14-2029-g0e466e978c728697f18c67c4eace9ba4633f9ef5
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #7)
> The problem seems really connected to optimization, if I compile our code
> with -g -O0 or -g -O1, everything works ok. Next, I will try to check why it
> is act
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #4)
> These die because the struct we're using to check the alignment of uses long
> double as the "big" aligned type. We could either disable the tests using a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110346
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Probably resolved by r14-1500-g4d935f52b0d5c0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110252
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 110337 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110341
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110348
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110346
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110341
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't think there is anything to do for this paper:
`GCC exposes the same behavior(the one proposed by this paper) in all language
modes.`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88873
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #55380|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110340
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Full testcase for the first 2 issues raised in the paper:
```
int \\
u\
0\
3\
9\
1 = 0;
#define CONCAT(x,y) x##y
int CONCAT(\,u0393)=0;
```
Testcase for the last one:
```
const char * foo=" // { dg-error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100650
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-21
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108961
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88688
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Fixed on trunk and closing.
I will build a composite patch for 13-branch in a few weeks.
Thanks for the report
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 107900, which changed state.
Bug 107900 Summary: Select type with intrinsic type inside associate causes ICE
/ Segmenation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107900
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107900
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 110224, which changed state.
Bug 110224 Summary: Rejects valid: function reference with data pointer result
as lhs in assignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For reference: testcase, cross-checked with NAG 7.1:
! { dg-do run }
! PR fortran/110360
program p
implicit none
character, allocatable :: ca
character, pointer :: cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
Another one reduced C testcase, very similar to the previous one but slightly
more reduced:
```
_Bool a;
struct s { int t; } c, d;
unsigned e, f;
unsigned transfer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110164
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 55380
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55380&action=edit
Patch
The attached patch fixes up the case of non-constant string expressions passed
to CHARACTER,V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110164
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #7)
> There are a few other testsuite regressions due to a linker warning the
> testsuite wouldn't ignore:
>
> /opt/binutils-power10/bin/ld: /tmp/ccysrhL7.o uses 64-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #88 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #85)
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler
> > "_f_loop1_rshift:.*mov\.l\\t(\.L\[0-9\]+),(r\[0-9\]+).*sts.l\\tpr,@-r15.*(\.L\[0-9\]+):.*jsr\\t@\\2.*bf\.s\\t\\3.*\\1:\\
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
--- Comment #7 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #6)
> I'm going to test the following to see whether anything bad falls out:
>
> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #87 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #53)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #52)
> > There is TARGET_LEGITIMATE_COMBINED_INSN though, which is a workaround for
> > if
> > you really do not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101836
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101832
--- Comment #11 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > This is intentional, if you embed an aggregate with flex array into another
> > struct and ask not to cross the field boundaries (i.e. bos1), th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110358
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109642
--- Comment #10 from Barry Revzin ---
Check out the report I opened for an example where the #pragma around the whole
class isn't really enough anyway - since you might want to disable the warning
for specializations of class/function templates.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
Bug ID: 110360
Summary: ABI issue with character,value dummy argument
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109642
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
My plan is to allow users to do
#pragma GCC diagnostic push
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdangling-reference"
...
#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
around the *class* itself to suppress the warning, not every
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110359
Bug ID: 110359
Summary: d: Suboptimal codegen for __builtin_expect(cond,
false) since PR96435
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109642
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110358
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110358
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110358
Bug ID: 110358
Summary: requesting nicer suppression for Wdangling-reference
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110350
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #5)
> The creation of the __ibm128 type is guarded by:
>
> if (TARGET_LONG_DOUBLE_128 && (!TARGET_IEEEQUAD || TARGET_FLOAT128_TYPE))
>
> Since the __ibm128 type is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110357
Bug ID: 110357
Summary: [C++26] P2592R3 Hashing support for std::chrono value
classes
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #4)
> gcc.target/powerpc/pr85657-3.c
> gcc.target/powerpc/signbit-1.c
> pr85657-3.c:38:20: error: unknown type name ‘__ibm128’; did you mean
> ‘__int128’?
>
> These d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110356
Bug ID: 110356
Summary: [C++26] P2637R3 Member visit
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110355
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-21
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110355
Bug ID: 110355
Summary: std::format("{}", 1e-7) returns "1e-07" instead of
"1e-7"
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110354
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110354
Bug ID: 110354
Summary: [C++26] P2587R3 to_string or not to_string
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110353
Bug ID: 110353
Summary: [C++26] P1383R2 More constexpr for cmath and complex
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110352
Bug ID: 110352
Summary: [C++26] P2630R4 submdspan
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109989
--- Comment #4 from palmer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I left some cruft in that reproducer, it should have been
volatile float f[2];
int x[2];
void func() {
x[0] = -1;
x[1] = 2;
for (int i = 0; i < 1; ++i)
f[i] = x[i];
}
Not sure what's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 55379
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55379&action=edit
reduced.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109989
palmer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110351
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110351
fabian_kessler at gmx dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110351
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110351
Bug ID: 110351
Summary: gcc does not recognize gcodeview as debuglevel
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110350
Bug ID: 110350
Summary: Intrinsic handling inside nested associate blocks
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110347
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
I note that for the ICE example, the OG13 compiles it without an ICE and has as
result:
firstprivate(this) map(tofrom:*this [len: 16])
map(firstprivate:this [pointer assign, bias: 0])
For the main testc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110349
Bug ID: 110349
Summary: [C++26] P2169R4 - Placeholder variables with no name
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110348
Bug ID: 110348
Summary: [C++26] P2741R3 - User-generated static_assert
messages
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110347
Bug ID: 110347
Summary: [OpenMP] private/firstprivate of a C++ member variable
mishandled
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110346
Bug ID: 110346
Summary: [C++26] P2752R3 - Static storage for braced
initializers
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110345
Bug ID: 110345
Summary: [C++26] P2552R3 - On the ignorability of standard
attributes
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110344
Bug ID: 110344
Summary: [C++26] P2738R1 - constexpr cast from void*
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110343
Bug ID: 110343
Summary: [C++26] P2558R2 - Add @, $, and ` to the basic
character set
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110342
Bug ID: 110342
Summary: [C++26] P2361R6 - Unevaluated strings
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110341
Bug ID: 110341
Summary: [C++26] P1854R4 - Making non-encodable string literals
ill-formed
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
commit r14-2022-g577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94380
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
commit r14-2022-g577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed Ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107900
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
commit r14-2022-g577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95398
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
commit r14-2022-g577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed Ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88688
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
commit r14-2022-g577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed Ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
commit r14-2022-g577223aebc7acdd31e62b33c1682fe54a622ae27
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed Ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110340
Bug ID: 110340
Summary: [C++26] P2621R2 - Remove undefined behavior from
lexing
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108961
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:caf0892eea67349d9a1e44590c3440768136fe2b
commit r14-2021-gcaf0892eea67349d9a1e44590c3440768136fe2b
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Wed J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110339
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||meta-bug
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110339
Bug ID: 110339
Summary: Implement C++26 library features
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||meta-bug
Alias|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338
Bug ID: 110338
Summary: Implement C++26 language features
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109704
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110337
Bug ID: 110337
Summary: Wrong code at -O2/s on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110018
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b9401c3a323c59705eca177bf72c13c0d2f462b6
commit r14-2020-gb9401c3a323c59705eca177bf72c13c0d2f462b6
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Wed J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110243
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
There's now a single strip_offset left in IVOPTs, the problematic one. That
one
isn't trivial to convert to split_constant_offset since that only deals with
pointer or sizetype quantities in a way that's r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106081
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||96208
--- Comment #5 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96208
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88873
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110251
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod ---
hmm. yeah. its triggering some kind of pathological edge evaluation between
GORI and cache updating.
There is a long sequence of dependent stmts, presumably the unrolled loop, and
a sequential series of co
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
