https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115382
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #3)
> For the record - the hunk before bootstrapped and regtested on the cfarm
> machines and tested successfully on aarch64 qemu with sve. I still need to
> set up a r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115411
Bug ID: 115411
Summary: ICE : in expand_call, at calls.cc:3668
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115412
Bug ID: 115412
Summary: ICE: canonical types differ for identical types
‘stdis_sametypename fooTtype, U’ and ‘stdis_sameT, U’
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115386
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |15.0
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115395
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
It needs epilogue vectorization to trigger and it's the path re-using the
vector accumulator from the earlier loop that goes wrong when the main
vector loop is skipped.
We apply the initial value adjustmen
../git/gcc/gcc/passes.cc:2096
0xed86be execute_todo
../../git/gcc/gcc/passes.cc:2143
xgcc (GCC) 15.0.0 20240610 (experimental) [master r15-1126-gc1429e3a8da]
Confirmed as a tree-optimization problem with the new .SAT_ADD conversion pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115387
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The testcase is at [1].
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115404#c4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115404
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #4)
> I can hit ICE with the following testcase:
Then it is most likely a dup of bug 115387 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115395
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
In fact, the main loop ends up not using SLP but the epilogue one does and
we end up setting STMT_VINFO_REDUC_EPILOGUE_ADJUSTMENT which we do not
support for SLP.
The question is whether to add that suppor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115386
--- Comment #7 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> Are you using a compiler with release checking?
No, with asan & ubsan.
I tried running cc1 under gdb and got this backtrace:
#0 0x00b54615 in g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115411
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115386
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #7)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> > Are you using a compiler with release checking?
>
> No, with asan & ubsan.
>
> I tried running cc1 under
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115399
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-06-10
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115386
--- Comment #9 from David Binderman ---
I tried a release build and it seemed fine to me:
foundBugs $ ../results.20240610.release/bin/gcc -c -w -g -O3 bug1034.c
foundBugs $
I guess if both asan & ubsan together cause a stack overflow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115413
Bug ID: 115413
Summary: Missing optimization: devirtualize the call in
"if(typeid(*a)==typeid(A)) a->f();" structure
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115402
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue4069 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115410
--- Comment #9 from user202729 ---
Alright, I open https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115413 instead
(discussing one case where gcc already calls a different function from what it
should)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115410
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to user202729 from comment #7)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> > They can be different due to the way shared libraries work.
>
> Ah, too bad.
>
> Is it safe to at least assume t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115402
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There is a paper being written to address both those issues, but it hasn't been
published yet. It should be P3323 when it's ready.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115388
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
It's DSE5 deleting
Deleted dead store: a[b.19_216] = 1;
there's a big irreducible region following the loop with this store, but
I fail to see how we can reach the load without going through the other
r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115395
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4ed9c5df7efeb98e190573cca42a4fd40666c45f
commit r15-1160-g4ed9c5df7efeb98e190573cca42a4fd40666c45f
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115405
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114398
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:add6d89eaed4070803882b9a0b643d963ca8d80a
commit r15-1158-gadd6d89eaed4070803882b9a0b643d963ca8d80a
Author: Javier Miranda
Date: Thu Apr 18 09:54:22 2024 +
ada: Storage_Erro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115395
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114398
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1c1f128d1c1e1f548cbae4eb014e455cfdfccc8
commit r15-1161-ge1c1f128d1c1e1f548cbae4eb014e455cfdfccc8
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114398
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:72a59a1b8d4e69b1faac93a31c1162ef0dbe53e5
commit r14-10299-g72a59a1b8d4e69b1faac93a31c1162ef0dbe53e5
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114398
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a1bec0455fb6f871bbc2c80d6e19c90deebbf824
commit r14-10298-ga1bec0455fb6f871bbc2c80d6e19c90deebbf824
Author: Javier Miranda
Date: Thu Apr 18 09:54:22 2024 +
ada: Storage_Err
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114398
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02025fb144fcf4fbb964cd59e480149ac448ea6c
commit r13-8830-g02025fb144fcf4fbb964cd59e480149ac448ea6c
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114398
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e54d90911858174a0c528d2c06198bc2061b3b22
commit r13-8829-ge54d90911858174a0c528d2c06198bc2061b3b22
Author: Javier Miranda
Date: Thu Apr 18 09:54:22 2024 +
ada: Storage_Erro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114398
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114708
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e29af8de31ba4b73dcee82917c8cec60d53dfa82
commit r15-1162-ge29af8de31ba4b73dcee82917c8cec60d53dfa82
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114708
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b5ad4431f97eed60e46fc447fcd1eb4077b3cd80
commit r14-10300-gb5ad4431f97eed60e46fc447fcd1eb4077b3cd80
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115405
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
It's not visible but I assume that _4 doesn't have _BitInt(17) type?
The
if (known_eq (offset, 0)
&& !reverse
&& poly_int_tree_p (TYPE_SIZE (type), &type_size)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114708
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ef494b147f6d210cfa7e1647fb0979aa3666022a
commit r13-8831-gef494b147f6d210cfa7e1647fb0979aa3666022a
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114708
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:12a3ba2be46e86ff1bffa5c876b6b17fe4929be3
commit r12-10501-g12a3ba2be46e86ff1bffa5c876b6b17fe4929be3
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114708
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.4
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115387
--- Comment #7 from Li Pan ---
Thanks a lot. I am testing a fix, and will send it out after no surprise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115414
Bug ID: 115414
Summary: Problems during GIMPLE pass: widening_mul
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115414
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115387
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115387
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115395
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
Thanks for the quick fix! We had another issue which bisected to the same, but
it was far harder to reduce so we decided to wait. Hopefully fixed by this too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115388
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:818e760528d436ea8f6c28ef620e2bb82d456ea1
commit r15-1163-g818e760528d436ea8f6c28ef620e2bb82d456ea1
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115388
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115399
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Assignee|unassig
Hi,
This mailing list is for automated mails from our bug database, not
for reporting bugs. Please see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ for how to
report bugs, although it looks like this was already reported as Bug
115399.
Thanks for finding the bug though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115406
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] wrong code |[15 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115378
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff8105b4910f7dbee326cb36b01c16ac9bf10c4b
commit r14-10301-gff8105b4910f7dbee326cb36b01c16ac9bf10c4b
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115378
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115415
Bug ID: 115415
Summary: New test case gcc.dg/torture/pr115388.c in
r15-1163-g818e760528d436 hangs
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115388
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115388
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #7)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> > Fixed. Unfortunately this didn't fix PR115256 if I checked correctly. Keep
> > searching!
>
> The testcase hangs on A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115415
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |testsuite
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111070
PaX Team changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pageexec at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105760
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.2|15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105229
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.5|15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=06
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.2|15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103338
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.2|15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109958
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.2|15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107575
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.2|15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
Bug ID: 115416
Summary: Setting --includedir to a nonexistent directory causes
a build error
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115415
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c3d1153bc0a2b820e3c373ecf19a5a127703f854
commit r15-1165-gc3d1153bc0a2b820e3c373ecf19a5a127703f854
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115388
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c3d1153bc0a2b820e3c373ecf19a5a127703f854
commit r15-1165-gc3d1153bc0a2b820e3c373ecf19a5a127703f854
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115415
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
--- Comment #2 from YunQiang Su ---
Can you give me the configure command, so that I can have a test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115411
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115411
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115417
Bug ID: 115417
Summary: Destructor is noexcept even though the class has a
throwing destructor subobject in an anonymous union
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janschultke at googlemail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115417
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note it is not just anonymous unions, it is all unions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115412
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
--- Comment #3 from YunQiang Su ---
Since it doesn't exist, why use --includedir with it?
Anyway, so, maybe we should detect the existence of this dir.
Can you have a try of this patch?
--- a/gcc/Makefile.in
+++ b/gcc/Makefile.in
@@ -560,10 +56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115418
Bug ID: 115418
Summary: [14 regression] Extra movapd emitted for MAX
implementation
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115418
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Ever confirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91590
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115419
Bug ID: 115419
Summary: [avr] IEEE double round-to-nearest should go to even
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115419
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115420
Bug ID: 115420
Summary: Default constructor of unordered_map deleted
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115418
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 regression] Extra |Extra movapd emitted for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
--- Comment #10 from John David Anglin ---
On hppa-linux, we have:
dave@atlas:~/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite$ ./poll.exe
wait_for(0s): 363ns for 81820 calls, avg 48.8874ns per call
wait_until(system_clock minimum): 15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115412
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-06-10
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115420
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
--- Comment #4 from Marcus Calhoun-Lopez
---
(In reply to YunQiang Su from comment #2)
> Can you give me the configure command, so that I can have a test.
The pertinent part of the configure command is
`configure --prefix=/opt/local --included
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
--- Comment #11 from John David Anglin ---
(In reply to John David Anglin from comment #10)
> On hppa-linux, we have:
>
> dave@atlas:~/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite$ ./poll.exe
> wait_for(0s): 363ns for 81820 calls, av
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
--- Comment #5 from Marcus Calhoun-Lopez
---
(In reply to YunQiang Su from comment #3)
> Since it doesn't exist, why use --includedir with it?
/opt/local/include/gcc is where the header files will be installed after the
build, so there is no r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421
Bug ID: 115421
Summary: Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when
linking as -static on Linux
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115422
Bug ID: 115422
Summary: Multi-threaded condition_variable app throws when
linking as -static on Linux
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 115422 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115422
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
What version of glibc do you have?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115422
Liviu Ionescu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #2 from Liviu Ionesc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115416
--- Comment #6 from YunQiang Su ---
(In reply to Marcus Calhoun-Lopez from comment #5)
> (In reply to YunQiang Su from comment #3)
> > Since it doesn't exist, why use --includedir with it?
>
> /opt/local/include/gcc is where the header files wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> This works fine with glibc 2.34 and above.
I should say with glibc 2.34 and above and GCC 13+.
Other combinations are know to fail since you need to link in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115421
--- Comment #5 from Liviu Ionescu ---
Here is a run on Arch, with 2.39:
```
Tests summary for gcc 13.3.0-1 on linux-x64 (Arch rolling)
394 test(s) passed, 4 failed:
- fail: static-sleepy-threads-cv-64
- fail: static-gc-sleepy-threads-cv-64
-
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
