https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97756
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|enhancement |normal
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100308
Bug ID: 100308
Summary: IPA CP ipcp_modif_dom_walker removes calls w/o
updating the cgraph
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100308
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100284
--- Comment #8 from Gilles Gouaillardet
---
I made a mistake when building GCC 11.1.0, and I am happy to make the following
correction: GCC 11.1.0 is *not* affected by this issue. The stack trace came
from the master branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100305
--- Comment #4 from Gilles Gouaillardet
---
Thanks Alex for the more minimal reproducer.
Sadly, the just released GCC 11.1.0 crashed with this code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100305
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100302
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100302
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Related to PR94121, just another abs_hwi needs to change to absu_hwi.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100305
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is one slightly more reduced testcase:typedef struct {
int g[3];
int h[3];
} i;
i j;
double k;
int l;
void w(void *);
void x(char);
void u(void *, void *);
void m() {
char a[4096], o[4096], s[4096
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100309
Bug ID: 100309
Summary: [11 regression] false positive
-Wstringop-overflow/stringop-overread/array-bounds on
reinterpret_cast'd integers
Product: gcc
Version: 11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100302
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
Summary|ICE in abs_hwi,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100284
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100310
Bug ID: 100310
Summary: [AVX512] Missing support for v{,p}expand* instructions
that w/o mask operands
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100311
Bug ID: 100311
Summary: UB in sel-sched.c:init_regs_for_mode with
-march=armv8-m.base
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66837
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100309
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100302
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
With -march=armv8.2-a+sve -O1 -ftree-loop-vectorize -fno-tree-scev-cprop
--param vect-partial-vector-usage=0 -fvect-cost-model=unlimited
it started to ICE already with
r11-2221-g9fb832ce382d649b7687426e6bc4e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263
--- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Prior postreload we have
(insn 12 379 332 3 (set (reg:QI 17 %f2 [orig:198 l_lsm_flag.27 ] [198])
(const_int 1 [0x1])) 1480 {*movqi}
(expr_list:REG_EQUIV (const_int 1 [0x1])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38325
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100267
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
After support v{,p}expand* thats w/o mask operands, codegen seems to be optimal
dummyf1_avx512x8:
.LFB5668:
.cfi_startproc
movl(%rdi), %edx
movq8(%rdi), %rax
vmovdqu (%
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100293
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100293
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The log file contains:
error reading R:\winlibs64_stage\_TMP_\ccYEwkZW.o
collect2.exe: error: ld returned 1 exit status
which I bet is the problem, but it is unclear if the _TMP_ subdir exists...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100312
Bug ID: 100312
Summary: __builtin_ia32_maskloadpd256 and friends should be
pure
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100312
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100313
Bug ID: 100313
Summary: pointer to member function is not const with
sanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #7)
> Confirmed, let me fix this.
Please note that the current definition of vzeroupper does not model effects of
the instruction at all. The current definition is intende
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Indeed as far as I understand an unspec volatile isn't sth clobbering
> registers (not even memory?!). The insn is missing inputs/outputs
> (we might be able to m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100302
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 50698
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50698&action=edit
gcc12-pr100302.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97571
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100309
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Summary|[11 regr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100307
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #9)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > Indeed as far as I understand an unspec volatile isn't sth clobbering
> > registers (not even memory?!). The insn i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100303
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100305
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100267
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3)
> After support v{,p}expand* thats w/o mask operands, codegen seems to be
> optimal
>
I was wrong, without mask, it's just simple move.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100304
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100293
--- Comment #6 from Brecht Sanders
---
Yes, that folder exists and that's where my TMP and TEMP environment variables
point to.
I also tried to point them to a folder on the C: drive, as R: is a RAM drive
and I wanted to exclude that that was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100292
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7ee6a1e8ac62950dd32874bf75e748a2895d595
commit r12-212-gf7ee6a1e8ac62950dd32874bf75e748a2895d595
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100292
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100312
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 50699
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50699&action=edit
not working patch
This one misses the RTL expansion part. I'm too lazy to writing duplicate code
to handle t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100307
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210428 (experimental) [master revision
852dd866e2f:9b04e5b2651:b81e2d5e76a6bcc71f45b122e8b5538ddb7ebf4c] (GCC)
[593] %
[593] % gcctk -O1 -S -o O1.s small.c
[594] % gcctk -O3 -S -o O3.s small.c
[595] %
[595] % wc O1.s O3.s
21 45 392 O1.s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100293
--- Comment #7 from Brecht Sanders
---
I ran the following commands based on what was in config.log
cat > conftest.c << EOF
/* confdefs.h */
#define PACKAGE_NAME "GNU Atomic Library"
#define PACKAGE_TARNAME "libatomic"
#define PACKAGE_VERSION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97367
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #1)
> Care to submit this to gcc-patches?
Please send it to the mailing list. Patches don't go in bugzilla, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100293
--- Comment #8 from Brecht Sanders
---
Additional test:
Running this manually (in MSYS2 shell) also fails:
R:/winlibs32_stage/gcc-offload-nvptx-11.1.0/gcc-11.1.0/build_win_offload-nvptx/gcc/as
-v -m sm_35 -o 'R:\winlibs32_stage\_TMP_\ccYJWYIt.o
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210428 (experimental) [master revision
852dd866e2f:9b04e5b2651:b81e2d5e76a6bcc71f45b122e8b5538ddb7ebf4c] (GCC)
[584] %
[584] % gcctk -O1 -S -o O1.s small.c
[585] % gcctk -O3 -S -o O3.s small.c
[586] %
[586] % wc O1.s O3.s
14 30
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97367
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99954
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b091cb1efa1881e93fb2e264daaab8876acf6800
commit r9-9471-gb091cb1efa1881e93fb2e264daaab8876acf6800
Author: Richard Biener
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97367
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Rebased patch:
https://svn.exactcode.de/t2/trunk/package/develop/gcc/g5-cell-not-power7.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I did a quick test by using instead
>
> diff --git a/gcc/postreload.c b/gcc/postreload.c
> index dc67643384d..64297be2c45 100644
> --- a/gcc/postreload.c
> +++ b/gcc/postreload.c
> @@ -1732,12 +1732,7 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100182
--- Comment #23 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c03f3077b1517a01c917f75179100f9d10b39156
commit r11-8313-gc03f3077b1517a01c917f75179100f9d10b39156
Author: Uros Bizjak
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100311
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #12 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Last touched in PR99563.
> I guess for the explicit user vzeroupper we need to add the clobbers/sets
> earlier than in the vzeroupper pass, but ideally in a way t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100236
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:100cc845cda3843e87f152f845b11b70fee3d7bc
commit r11-8315-g100cc845cda3843e87f152f845b11b70fee3d7bc
Author: Richard Earn
h-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-212-20210428120349-gf7ee6a1e8ac-checking-release-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #7 from rudi at heitbaum dot com ---
Here is the find / -name mman.h
http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/KVdjQp8qq3/
./usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/mman.h
./usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/mman.h
./usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/mman.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #8 from rudi at heitbaum dot com ---
This is after a success LibreELEC10 build with gcc 10.3.0.
Just testing build of gcc:bootstrap and gcc:host after doing a scripts/clean
gcc.
This works.
So now doing a full make clean (which is w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100298
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-28
Summary|noexcep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263
--- Comment #9 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Shouldn't we rather check for REG_CAN_CHANGE_MODE_P? A check for
TARGET_HARD_REGNO_MODE_OK for a FP register and QImode is successful.
Using the following also fixes the test for me:
diff --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100298
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5cc28000cfcc219fb4c45dbc5388ec05109049af
commit r12-215-g5cc28000cfcc219fb4c45dbc5388ec05109049af
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100298
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aae5106525d850c5f3ae8265374ead16c5e0a9b7
commit r11-8316-gaae5106525d850c5f3ae8265374ead16c5e0a9b7
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100298
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Shouldn't we rather check for REG_CAN_CHANGE_MODE_P? A check for
> TARGET_HARD_REGNO_MODE_OK for a FP register and QImode is successful.
OK, then it's probably better to add it to:
if (!is_a (reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100102
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |c++
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #9 from rudi at heitbaum dot com ---
After a full make clean:
The bootstrap build fails:
In file included from
/storage/home-rudi/LibreELEC.tv/build.LibreELEC-Generic.x86_64-10.0-devel/build/gcc-11.1.0/libgcc/libgcov-merge.c:26:
/s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #10 from rudi at heitbaum dot com ---
After a full make clean:
The bootstrap build fails:
In file included from
/storage/home-rudi/LibreELEC.tv/build.LibreELEC-Generic.x86_64-10.0-devel/build/gcc-11.1.0/libgcc/libgcov-merge.c:26:
/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #11 from rudi at heitbaum dot com ---
Created attachment 50700
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50700&action=edit
Config.log
As requested by Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #12 from rudi at heitbaum dot com ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> (In reply to rudi from comment #4)
> > .x86_64-linux-gnu-bootstrap/x86_64-libreelec-linux-gnu/libgcc/config.log
> > http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Y6wFsSB
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100295
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100316
Bug ID: 100316
Summary: Regression: __clear_cache() does not support
NULL-pointer arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100303
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92621
--- Comment #10 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> > Patch (version 2) posted:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055991.html
>
> Please assign the PR to yourself when y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100232
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100317
Bug ID: 100317
Summary: 64-bit integer compare gives wrong result when
MIN_INT64 is one of the operands
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #13 from Marcin Ślusarz ---
FTR, to reproduce this problem with gcc 9 and 10 I had to either replace -mavx
with -march=native or add -mtune=native. The problem starts reproducing with
-march=haswell.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100232
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
This commit:
...
commit 3af3bec2e4d344bd54a134d8b2263f44d788c3d8
Author: Richard Sandiford
Date: Mon May 4 21:21:16 2020 +0100
internal-fn: Avoid dropping the lhs of some calls [PR94941]
...
adds:
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100182
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:39e8bfe7217898e8d21bcc55efe6992fbde262f1
commit r10-9775-g39e8bfe7217898e8d21bcc55efe6992fbde262f1
Author: Uros Bizjak
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100317
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.0, 9.3.1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92621
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I don't think I have the necessary permissions, but I may be missing
> something
> obvious...
Did you try to click on 'take' in
Assignee:
Not yet assigned to anyone (edit) (take)
?
If y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100317
Alex Peshkoff changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.2.0
--- Comment #2 from Alex Peshkof
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263
--- Comment #11 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #10)
> OK, then it's probably better to add it to:
>
> if (!is_a (reg_mode[regno], &old_mode)
> || !MODES_OK_FOR_MOVE2ADD (mode, old_mod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100317
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100317
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
An the reason it hasn't been backported to 8 branch is that ABSU_EXPR doesn't
exist there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100232
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-April/569038.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100318
Bug ID: 100318
Summary: [OpenMP] Offloading with two identically named static
functions fails
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100262
--- Comment #6 from Romain Naour ---
Hello,
Thanks for the help and confirm that's a problem on the existing code, not on
gcc.
Best regards,
Romain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100240
Peter Taraba changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100102
Peter Taraba changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||taraba.peter at mail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100319
Bug ID: 100319
Summary: Incorrect check for detach clause argument in
data-sharing clauses
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100320
Bug ID: 100320
Summary: regression: 32-bit x86 memcpy is suboptimal
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100319
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 50702
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50702&action=edit
gcc11-pr100319.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96560
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-28
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100321
Bug ID: 100321
Summary: [OpenMP][nvptx] (Con't) Reduction fails with
optimization and 'loop'/'for simd' but not with 'for'
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100320
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100320
--- Comment #2 from Denis Vlasenko ---
The relevant code in current git seems to be:
static void
expand_set_or_cpymem_via_rep (rtx destmem, rtx srcmem,
rtx destptr, rtx srcptr, rtx value, rtx orig_value,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94418
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Implemented downstream:
https://gitlab.com/jonathan-wakely/gcc
1 - 100 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
