https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115445
--- Comment #1 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
Works fine on gcc-14 and clang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115438
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69374
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Gerald Pfeifer :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:919e88f7915b57ae3a2152a1947dbfac3fccfe88
commit r15-1197-g919e88f7915b57ae3a2152a1947dbfac3fccfe88
Author: Gerald Pfeifer
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115455
Bug ID: 115455
Summary: ICE: verify_flow_info failed during GIMPLE pass: cfg
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115425
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: tree check: expected |[13/14/15 regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115365
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|New test case |[15 regression] New test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113681
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66f48557e11a530646e5562c50a75b4b9839f171
commit r15-1196-g66f48557e11a530646e5562c50a75b4b9839f171
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115454
Bug ID: 115454
Summary: std::experimental::find_last_set is buggy on x86-64-v4
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115389
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #2)
> So, what value do we output? And why?
The invalid offset is zero, so: hashst r0,0(r1)
As the assembler mentions, the range of valid offsets is [-512,-8] and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Also it is not just old glibc but most non-"modern" libc out there (e.g.
Solaris I think). So maybe don't reference glibc in the comments in
configure.ac either. Just say some libc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> Also, a typo: it has ac_cv_search_pthread_crate (not create).
Someone had rust crate on their mind when they did the patch :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Also, a typo: it has ac_cv_search_pthread_crate (not create).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 regression] Noise from |[15 regression] Noise from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
246:configure:8884: checking for library containing dlopen
634:ac_cv_search_dlopen='none required'
246:configure:8884: checking for library containing dlopen
634:ac_cv_search_dlopen='none required'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115453
Bug ID: 115453
Summary: [15 regression] Noise from ne wdlopen, pthread
configure checks
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115452
Bug ID: 115452
Summary: ICE when dump stv2 for gcc.target/i386/pr70322-2.c
with -march=cascadelake
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115262
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #2)
> (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #1)
> > It looks like the test wants to see xxsel, but after that change we get
> > xxlor and what looks like a slight diff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115295
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #4)
> Created attachment 58410 [details]
> candidate patch
>
> This patch reverts dg-additional-sources to the earlier behavior, in which
> sources are added regard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115451
--- Comment #1 from Povilas Kanapickas ---
Link to godbolt https://godbolt.org/z/MbnMhzrTT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115451
Bug ID: 115451
Summary: ARM neon: float32 comparison intrinsics get scalar
implementation since GCC 11
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115295
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 58410
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58410&action=edit
candidate patch
This patch reverts dg-additional-sources to the earlier behavior, in which
sources are added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>[r15-1006-gd93353e6423eca] Do single-lane SLP discovery for reductions
Interesting because PR 115256 bisect it to an earlier patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115450
Bug ID: 115450
Summary: cpu2017 502.gcc runtime miscompute
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115449
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58409
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58409&action=edit
Patch which I am testing
Just attaching it for now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115384
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115384
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1d496d2cd1d5d8751a1637abca89339d6f9ddd3b
commit r15-1191-g1d496d2cd1d5d8751a1637abca89339d6f9ddd3b
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115176
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115389
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #2)
> So, what value do we output? And why?
It would be nice if the assembler told us, btw :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115389
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, what value do we output? And why?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115449
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115449
Bug ID: 115449
Summary: `(truncate)a` and `(nop_convert)~(truncate)a`
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: enhanc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115448
Bug ID: 115448
Summary: Improvements to CFG edge visualization in diagnostic
paths
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115436
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115447
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note if you don't do the assignment (to extend the lifetime of the temp), GCC
does tail calls bar unlike clang/LLVM.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115447
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115447
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58408
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58408&action=edit
testcase from godbolt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69374
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Gerald Pfeifer :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6bc26cceb243c6f359f65a1afa5515f911f3327d
commit r15-1189-g6bc26cceb243c6f359f65a1afa5515f911f3327d
Author: Gerald Pfeifer
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115447
Bug ID: 115447
Summary: GCC fails to tail call unless variable wrapped in a
block
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115312
--- Comment #3 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Brecht Sanders from comment #2)
> I have made a native Windows MinGW-w64 build where the lines "gcc_assert
> (!the_parser);" were commented out in file gcc/cp/parser.cc and got
> confirmation this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115446
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
s/unsigned long/decltype(sizeof(0))/
to make the testcase more portable since not all targets use `unsigned long` as
size_t.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115446
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115446
Bug ID: 115446
Summary: [15 Regression] Segfault when exporting operator new
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115440
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114905
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115205
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/652975.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115262
--- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #1)
> It looks like the test wants to see xxsel, but after that change we get
> xxlor and what looks like a slight difference in register allocation. I
> can't real
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115445
Bug ID: 115445
Summary: [15 Regression] ICE when repeating an export of
function declared in GMF
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115444
Bug ID: 115444
Summary: std::copy_n generates more code than needed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115443
Bug ID: 115443
Summary: aarch64: Test gcc.dg/vect/pr99102.c FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
Ismael Luceno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58406|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6eb0e931097a8fec01591051c9ef582d52fe7f0c
commit r13-8842-g6eb0e931097a8fec01591051c9ef582d52fe7f0c
Author: Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e6b1c0820590a1f330099ed7560982b5c6da4e91
commit r14-10304-ge6b1c0820590a1f330099ed7560982b5c6da4e91
Author: Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e4244b88d75124f6957bfa080c8ad34017364e53
commit r15-1188-ge4244b88d75124f6957bfa080c8ad34017364e53
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #6)
> Are you going to post a patch?
I was going to let the arm folks take care of it since I have no way to test
it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
--- Comment #6 from Robin Dapp ---
Looks reasonable. That's what we were doing before in internal-fn.cc before
expanding (except operands[2]).
Are you going to post a patch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
--- Comment #5 from Ismael Luceno ---
Applies fine to 14.1.0 too. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
--- Comment #4 from Ismael Luceno ---
I see, I didn't see your comment before attaching it; I had already come up
with that patch before filing the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Ismael Luceno from comment #2)
> Created attachment 58406 [details]
> Avoid poisoning on musl
That is not the correct fix. see comment #1 for the correct one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
--- Comment #2 from Ismael Luceno ---
Created attachment 58406
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58406&action=edit
Avoid poisoning on musl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115295
--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #2)
> Ugh, it looks like D deviates from one of the fundamental assumptions behind
> the change, namely, that for each named source file, the compiler would
> attempt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115442
Bug ID: 115442
Summary: gcc/jit/jit-recording.cc fails to build against musl:
attempt to use poisoned "calloc"
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115437
--- Comment #3 from Kang-Che Sung ---
Now I come to realize that the C standard doesn't say that a pointer type is
"compatible" with any other pointer type. So that "Foo **" type and "Bar **"
type are assumed to never alias. This is troubling be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115440
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
People certainly do write --std, I see it all the time. I don't like it though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37475
--- Comment #12 from Kristian Spangsege
---
These changes look good to me.
A couple of points:
* Should the `else`s still be there now that the preceding branches terminate
with `break`?
* `do_out()` has the same problem as `do_in()`.
* If ther
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> I think something like this:
> ```
> [apinski@xeond2 arm]$ git diff mve.md
> diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/mve.md b/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
> index 9fe51298cdc..8af4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think something like this:
```
[apinski@xeond2 arm]$ git diff mve.md
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/mve.md b/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
index 9fe51298cdc..8af4797e935 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/mve.md
+++ b/gcc/c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
--- Comment #3 from Carlos Eduardo Seo ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #2)
> We already discussed that briefly on the mailing list. Richard Sandiford
> suspected a target bug. What options do I need to configure GCC in order to
> repr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115382
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2b438a0d2aa80f051a09b245a58f643540d4004b
commit r15-1187-g2b438a0d2aa80f051a09b245a58f643540d4004b
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Fri Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115428
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I can't figure out why GCC didn't warn about summary_cast_reg though ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115428
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111632
--- Comment #35 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a995fded34fe488153b06bb41e026277f01efded
commit r12-10548-ga995fded34fe488153b06bb41e026277f01efded
Author: Francois-Xavi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111632
--- Comment #34 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8f11ed1c58e14421ba4be1652764fc47fdce8dc7
commit r12-10547-g8f11ed1c58e14421ba4be1652764fc47fdce8dc7
Author: Francois-Xavi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115428
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The reason why has_pointer_operand_p is not warned about is because it is a
`static inline` function which GCC will never warn about. Looks like clang only
warns about them if they are in a main source.
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
Robin Dapp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115431
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||115331
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/654086.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm-eabi
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95715
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||patrick at rivosinc dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115441
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115441
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68615
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82013
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115440
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-06-11
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80742
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115441
Bug ID: 115441
Summary: Pointer/integer mismatch in __atomic_fetch-* not
covered by -Wint-conversion
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63556
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30688
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115440
Bug ID: 115440
Summary: unrecognized command-line option '--c++17'; did you
mean '--stdc++17'?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115439
Bug ID: 115439
Summary: [Regression] ICEs after 7ca35f2e43 on
master-thumb_m55_hard_eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115143
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] tree |[11 Regression] tree check:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115143
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d30afaae6764379a63c22459b40aaecfa82b0fc4
commit r12-10546-gd30afaae6764379a63c22459b40aaecfa82b0fc4
Author: Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100285
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|13.3|12.4
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113042
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
New patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/654115.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114367
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114359
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110542
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:874896659df65b4bdf85b3dbca0ab527bb4c920e
commit r12-10540-g874896659df65b4bdf85b3dbca0ab527bb4c920e
Author: Jonathan Wa
1 - 100 of 245 matches
Mail list logo
