https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109362
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:87d3bc53b177037699f7f8dda3a3d17e647c459d
commit r13-6966-g87d3bc53b177037699f7f8dda3a3d17e647c459d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109339
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13 Regression] |[12 Regression] stop_token
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109368
Bug ID: 109368
Summary: LTO drops entry point symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109369
Bug ID: 109369
Summary: LTO drops explicitly referenced symbol
_pei386_runtime_relocator
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109369
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109368
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Are you sure this is a GCC issue rather than a binutils issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109368
--- Comment #2 from Pali Rohár ---
I do not know. The issue happens when LTO is enabled for GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109368
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109368
--- Comment #4 from Pali Rohár ---
Reported to binutils: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30300
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109369
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109369
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109369
--- Comment #4 from Pali Rohár ---
I wanted to point that marking _pei386_runtime_relocator() function with
__attribute__((used)) is working fine.
And whether _pei386_runtime_relocator() should participate in LTO at all? I
would rather ask, why
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109369
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
Indeed, sorry, __attribute__((used)) seems a much better solution for symbols
that might be referenced implicitly, in a manner that LTO plugin cannot see.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109368
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108799
Petr Skocik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pskocik at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53164
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b5e38b1c166357e2a63d38ae6da7ae5d68fc115b
commit r13-6970-gb5e38b1c166357e2a63d38ae6da7ae5d68fc115b
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105848
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b5e38b1c166357e2a63d38ae6da7ae5d68fc115b
commit r13-6970-gb5e38b1c166357e2a63d38ae6da7ae5d68fc115b
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109160
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5de246535db1b4fdc61287f27de0fdd074fc4b3
commit r13-6971-ga5de246535db1b4fdc61287f27de0fdd074fc4b3
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109160
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109160
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> Fixed for GCC 12 so far.
GCC 13*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109370
Bug ID: 109370
Summary: Missed optimization for std::optional branchless
unwrapping
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109370
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109370
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am not so sure this is worse.
Also I find LLVM code generataion depdedent on if the argument is a pointer vs
a reference (rvalue or normal):
```
struct a
{
int b;
bool c;
};
int f(struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103931
--- Comment #10 from Bernhard Reutner-Fischer ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #9)
> The reduced testcase compiles for me with today's 13-trunk, but not
> 12-branch.
> However, the full original testcase fails with varying errors depending o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109003
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldot at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109371
Bug ID: 109371
Summary: MIN_EXPR/MAX_EXPR and SMIN/SMAX trapping behavior is
not documented
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: documentat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95785
Tyler Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||whitesmith137 at outlook dot
com
--- Comm
27 matches
Mail list logo
