https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120221
--- Comment #7 from Filip Kastl ---
So this isn't specific for switches. Rather, this is some kind of forward
propagation of a shift that we don't currently do, right?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120256
Bug ID: 120256
Summary: [16 Regression] 4% slowdown of 454.calculix on aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, needs-bisection
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120069
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[16 Regression] Yes another |[16 Regression] Yes another
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120069
--- Comment #11 from Filip Kastl ---
I've also just bisected this 2006 lbm -Ofast -march=native -flto PGO AMD Zen3
16% slowdown to r16-270-ga0a64aa5da0af5:
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=474.240.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120069
--- Comment #10 from Filip Kastl ---
I would make a pr for the arm slowdowns but it looks like they disappeared.
But do tell me if you think I should report those or feel free to report them
yourself.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120069
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[16 Regression] Yes another |[16 Regression] Yes another
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120069
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pheeck at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119900
--- Comment #8 from Filip Kastl ---
Looks fixed. Should we close this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 120226, which changed state.
Bug 120226 Summary: 8% regression of exchange2 with -O2 between
g:d0571638a6bad932 and g:9b13bea07706a7ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120226
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120219
--- Comment #4 from Filip Kastl ---
*** Bug 120226 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120226
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120219
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120219
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[16 Regression] ~11%|[16 Regression] ~11%
|s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119919
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120219
Bug ID: 120219
Summary: [16 Regression] ~11% slowdown of 548.exchange2_r on
AMD Zen
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120218
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120218
Bug ID: 120218
Summary: [16 Regression] 8% slowdown of 507.cactuBSSN_r on
Intel
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119919
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pheeck at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120080
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120080
--- Comment #10 from Filip Kastl ---
The line that crashes GCC seems to be this one
gcc_checking_assert (l > 0);
where l is the number of clusters of a switch. At this point in compilation
clusters = cases so this means that bit-test switch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119965
--- Comment #1 from Filip Kastl ---
Here is a graph showing this code size increase.
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=293.378.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119044
--- Comment #5 from Filip Kastl ---
Nice. From the graph it looks like this helped a lot.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114411
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 114411, which changed state.
Bug 114411 Summary: [14/15/16 Regression] 12% exec time slowdown of 433.milc on
aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114411
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 119924, which changed state.
Bug 119924 Summary: [16 Regression] ICE when building 531.deepsjeng_r during
ipa-cp since r16-101-g132d01d96ea9d6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119924
What|Remov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119924
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119965
Bug ID: 119965
Summary: [16 Regression] 531.deepsjeng_r binary is 50% bigger
since r16-116-gcfb04e0de6aa43
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119929
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pheeck at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119963
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119963
Bug ID: 119963
Summary: [16 Regression
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114411
--- Comment #5 from Filip Kastl ---
Soon after I reported this, the graph went to roughly the original values. So
if no one minds, I'll close this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119925
--- Comment #3 from Filip Kastl ---
(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #1)
> I've just noticed that there is also a 10% slowdown of 433.milc SPEC 2006
> benchmark also with -Ofast -march=native PGO. Looking at the graphs, I'd
> say these two
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119925
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15/16 Regression] 4% |[15/16 Regression] 4%
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119927
Bug ID: 119927
Summary: 5% slowdown of 415.gamess on Intel Ice Lake
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, needs-bisection
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119925
Bug ID: 119925
Summary: [15/16 Regression] 4% slowdown of 538.imagick_r on
Aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119925
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119924
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119924
Bug ID: 119924
Summary: [16 Regression] ICE when building 531.deepsjeng_r
during ipa-cp since r16-101-g132d01d96ea9d6
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119900
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[16 regression] imagick |[16 regression] imagick
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119723
--- Comment #4 from Filip Kastl ---
Bisection points to r15-7637-g94d01a88470293 being the first fast commit.
Author: Richard Biener
Date: Wed Feb 12 11:20:10 2025 +0100
tree-optimization/86270 - improve SSA coalescing for loop exit tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119723
Bug ID: 119723
Summary: 30% slowdown of 436.cactusADM on AMD Zen2 since
r15-9204-g0520ef274762f1
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: misse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119723
--- Comment #1 from Filip Kastl ---
> There was also this 10% regression for -O2 -march=native
s/regression/slowdown/ to be more clear. This slowdown also isn't a regression
against GCC 14.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119541
Bug ID: 119541
Summary: [15 Regression] asan: dynamic-stack-buffer-overflow in
modify_call_for_omp_dispatch at gimplify.cc:3976
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112548
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 regression] 5% exec |429.mcf sometimes speeds up
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 119055, which changed state.
Bug 119055 Summary: [15 Regression] 5-8% slowdown of 456.hmmer since
r15-7605-gc5752c1f01316a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119055
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119055
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 114412, which changed state.
Bug 114412 Summary: [14/15 Regression] 7% slowdown of 436.cactusADM on aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114412
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114412
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116763
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 116763, which changed state.
Bug 116763 Summary: [15 Regression] 14-19% slowdown of 436.cactusADM on aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116763
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119495
Bug ID: 119495
Summary: 8% slowdown of 436.cactusADM on AMD Zen2 since
r15-7895-gb191e8bdecf881
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 119270, which changed state.
Bug 119270 Summary: [15 Regression] 5% slowdown of 507.cactuBSSN_r on Intel Ice
Lake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119270
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119270
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119411
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119413
Bug ID: 119413
Summary: [15 Regression] 11% slowdown (but only 3% regression
against GGC 14) of 507.cactuBSSN_r on Aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119412
Bug ID: 119412
Summary: 7% slowdown of 482.sphinx3 on Aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, needs-bisection
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119411
--- Comment #1 from Filip Kastl ---
>
here there should have been "GCC 14" inserted into my bugreporting template :D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119411
Bug ID: 119411
Summary: [15 Regression] 5% slowdown of 505.mcf_r on Aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, needs-bisection
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119413
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119410
Bug ID: 119410
Summary: 5% slowdown of 510.parest_r on Intel Ice Lake
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119389
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] tree FRE|[15 Regression] tree FRE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119389
--- Comment #1 from Filip Kastl ---
This is how it looks on r15-6120-g56946c801a7cf3a831a11870b7e11ba08bf9bd87
> gcc bugreport.c -O1 -c -ftime-report
Time variable wall GGC
phase setup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119389
Bug ID: 119389
Summary: [15 Regression] tree FRE very slow when dealing with
big switch statements
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119055
--- Comment #2 from Filip Kastl ---
It looks like this benchmark is roughly at the same time as it was before.
I'll close this if there are no objections.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116763
--- Comment #2 from Filip Kastl ---
Indeed. If we look at these comparisons
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.5=596.100.0&plot.6=755.100.0&plot.7=868.100.0&plot.8=1032.100.0&plot.9=586.100.0&;
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114412
--- Comment #9 from Filip Kastl ---
If we look at these comparisons
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.5=596.100.0&plot.6=755.100.0&plot.7=868.100.0&plot.8=1032.100.0&plot.9=586.100.0
we see that we are now even faster than
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118959
--- Comment #11 from Filip Kastl ---
And btw there is also this slowdown
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=1101.10.0
which is 20%! But I didn't manage to replicate this on another Zen4 machine.
So it probably doesn't m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118959
--- Comment #10 from Filip Kastl ---
Ok, so these two benchmark configurations are back to their original speed:
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=465.10.0
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=993.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 119269, which changed state.
Bug 119269 Summary: [15 Regression] 6-22% slowdown of 433.milc on Aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119285
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119285
Bug ID: 119285
Summary: [15 Regression] 5% slowdown of 519.lbm_r on Zen2 and
Zen4 since r15-7932-ge355fe414aa3aa
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119270
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119270
Bug ID: 119270
Summary: [15 Regression] 5% slowdown of 507.cactuBSSN_r on
Intel Ice Lake
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119269
Bug ID: 119269
Summary: [15 Regression] 6-22% slowdown of 433.milc on Aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118966
--- Comment #4 from Filip Kastl ---
Yeah, it looks like this is fixed. I'll wait for the automated benchmark to
reproduce the speedup and then I'll close this PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115118
--- Comment #5 from Filip Kastl ---
Btw I also ran into 5% -Ofast -march=native -flto *speedup* on a Zen5 machine.
But that still doesn't offset the 13% that the graph shows.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115118
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] 5-13% |[15 Regression] 5-13%
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119159
--- Comment #1 from Filip Kastl ---
>From the graph it looks like the slowdown is gone. The benchmark exec time is
at its previous value. I'm gonna wait for the automated benchmark to run again
and confirm this and then I'll close this PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119168
--- Comment #2 from Filip Kastl ---
I have seen noisier, but yeah. And 5% isn't *that* much and the benchmark got
a bit better (as I wrote). Maybe we could mark this as WONTFIX. I'll probably
do it if nobody becomes interested in this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119168
Bug ID: 119168
Summary: [15 Regression] 5% 477.dealII slowdown since
r15-7605-gc5752c1f01316a
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119168
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119159
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119159
Bug ID: 119159
Summary: [15 Regression] 6% slowdown of 520.omnetpp_r on
aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118957
--- Comment #6 from Filip Kastl ---
I've measured this again. I used -O2 -march=generic -flto PGO on an AMD Zen4
machine.
Between
r15-7400-gd3ff498c478ace
r15-7852-ge836d80374aa03
the slowdown disappears. So, as with pr118959, I think the i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118959
--- Comment #9 from Filip Kastl ---
Ah, I see. Thanks, I'll make a mental note of that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118959
--- Comment #5 from Filip Kastl ---
I measured (-O2 -march=native -flto on an AMD Zen3 machine)
r15-7400-gd3ff498c478ace and r15-7852-ge836d80374aa03 and there is an 11%
speedup which means we're back to the execution time before
r15-7400-gd3ff4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117919
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117919
--- Comment #4 from Filip Kastl ---
Ok, figured it out and posted a fix to the mailing list
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-February/676649.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119055
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119055
Bug ID: 119055
Summary: [15 Regression] 5-8% slowdown of 456.hmmer since
r15-7605-gc5752c1f01316a
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: miss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119044
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|5-16% slowdown of |5-16% slowdown of
|436.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119044
Bug ID: 119044
Summary: 5-16% slowdown of 436.cactusADM since
r15-7661-g8293b9e40f12e9
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimiza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117919
--- Comment #3 from Filip Kastl ---
I found that arguments of the PHI get removed because its whole basic block
gets removed. Actually, basic blocks 10-13 get removed. This happens in a
call to 'replace_uses_by' function. I think that EH edge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118967
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118967
Bug ID: 118967
Summary: 5% slowdown of 473.astar on AMD Zen3 since
r15-7400-gd3ff498c478ace
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118966
--- Comment #1 from Filip Kastl ---
I've recently reported some slowdowns related to r15-7400. Maybe that commit
caused this slowdown too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118966
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Host|x86_64-linux
1 - 100 of 328 matches
Mail list logo
