https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107704
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
So here is the reason why it regressed:
Before the patch, ce1 is able to find the ifcvt.
After the patch, gcc is not to find the ifcvt until ce2.
Since ce2 happens after combine.
Nothing "combines":
(insn 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117667
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eschwartz93 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102233
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117667
Kamil Dudka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kdudka at redhat dot com
See Al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107704
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
I assume it's because of the abnormal edge from setjmp?
```
long vgetq_lane_u64___a;
long vgetq_lane_u64(int __b) {
__builtin_aarch64_im_lane_boundsi(sizeof(vgetq_lane_u64___a), sizeof(0),
__b);
}
int _setjmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
diff --git a/gcc/tree-inline.cc b/gcc/tree-inline.cc
index d16ad6a28de..ee089ee67cc 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-inline.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-inline.cc
@@ -5417,6 +5417,7 @@ static void
fold_marked_statements (int fir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
And fixes the original one too. Let me clean it up tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Component|ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51049
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64 aarch64
Assignee|unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110833
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think we can close this as fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107190
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106240
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Note I expect the issue to eventually show up elsewhere, too, so I do plan
> to look into this eventually. Just as with other targets now that we have
> vec_cm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Almost definitely r15-5336-gcee7d080d5c2a5 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Sam James from comment #2)
> > I assume it's because of the abnormal edge from setjmp?
>
> It is also due to this __builtin_aarch64_im_lane_boundsi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117666
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117666
Bug ID: 117666
Summary: Audit the aarch64 builtins for adding leaf and/or
nothrow attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: internal-i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117667
Bug ID: 117667
Summary: -flto=auto prevents -fanalyzer from reporting any
warnings on a build of systemd
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117667
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117667
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117477
--- Comment #4 from Dhruv Chawla ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Do you have a testcase which comes from some real code that shows the issue
> or is this just noticed from the small testcase you produced?
Hi, I noticed this oc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> Actually I think a better way of fixing this is adding nothrow and leaf
> attributes to __builtin_aarch64_im_lane_boundsi . Since this function will
> either er
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
Bug ID: 117665
Summary: [15 regression] ICE when building crypto++
(single_succ_edge, at basic-block.h:332)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117665
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116587
--- Comment #11 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I consider it is a LRA bug.
We have
281: {r360:DI=~227:DI&[r363:SI+r362:SI];clobber flags:CC;}
and choose alternative "(0) &r (1) r (2) o"
LRA assigns (hr0,hr1) to spilled p227, then assigns (hr4,h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117661
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117654
Nick changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117419
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116743
--- Comment #17 from Eugene Rozenfeld ---
Rama, just a note that I have this on my list and will look into this as soon
as I can.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117626
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53357
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117350
ak at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117357
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:344356f781ddb7bf0abb11edf9bdd13f6802dea8
commit r15-5426-g344356f781ddb7bf0abb11edf9bdd13f6802dea8
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Mon N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82660
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sidenote: on 15-trunk, try: -fcheck=bounds -finline-intrinsics=maxloc
At line 8 of file pr82660.f90
Fortran runtime error: Array bound mismatch for dimension 1 of array 'res'
(3/2)
Error terminat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108900
--- Comment #8 from Ovidiu Panait ---
Jeremy, could you please consider sending the fix in comment 6 to the
gcc-patches mailing list, to try to get the fix merged?
It would be very useful to finally have an official fix for this corner case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117649
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
Dump of assembler code for function md_convert_frag:
0x0003ddb8 <+0>: lw a5,96(a2)
0x0003ddba <+2>: addisp,sp,-80
0x0003ddbc <+4>: sd ra,72(sp)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117210
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Maybe we just need to include sys/cdefs.h in os_defines.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 116638, which changed state.
Bug 116638 Summary: False-positive maybe-uninitizlied warning: ‘*(const
std::array*)((char*)& +12)’ may be used uninitialized
[-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116638
accelerator0099 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113560
accelerator0099 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117655
--- Comment #2 from Mathias Stearn ---
It looks like a similar optimization would make sense for operator=(string&&):
https://godbolt.org/z/Wo19fjKeK. It might also make sense to just copy the
whole buffer for the local case in operator=(const s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117650
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117651
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117657
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Stubbs ---
This appears to have been caused by the recent maskload patches, which is weird
because I thought I already tested the patches that were posted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117657
--- Comment #3 from Robin Dapp ---
My first mistake was not squashing the commits as they depend on each other,
sorry about that.
The latest error you showed should be the "correct" one.
I couldn't test gcn but Andrew's latest test seems to hav
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116253
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5af2ec16fa75941a39a5a339d13590cd13c54e9
commit r15-5417-ga5af2ec16fa75941a39a5a339d13590cd13c54e9
Author: David Malcolm
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117654
Bug ID: 117654
Summary: block construct in openmp single parallel
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117456
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 59618
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59618&action=edit
gcc15-pr117456.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117655
Bug ID: 117655
Summary: std::string::swap() could be much faster and smaller
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117620
--- Comment #2 from Michael Duggan ---
I'm willing to help debug this if someone can point me to the right way to set
a breakpoint in the error reporting code such that I can walk back up the stack
and see why the error is being triggered.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103459
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117657
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #3)
> Is there a way to test it short of a cross compile?
I guess not - but compiling shouldn't be difficult as no libraries are needed.
Otherwise, I use for a full cr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116997
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Andre Simoes Dias Vieira
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b51b45eaf7131ec97b7fa180ffa6e8dedc24e74f
commit r14-10938-gb51b45eaf7131ec97b7fa180ffa6e8dedc24e74f
Author: An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117660
Bug ID: 117660
Summary: Errors referring to variables of type array could
display full declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117649
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Thanks a ton of that Andreas!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117654
kargls at comcast dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargls at comcast dot net
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117628
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:39a39d1f38ccb9ba292b22003dc3c7febb0b6512
commit r15-5408-g39a39d1f38ccb9ba292b22003dc3c7febb0b6512
Author: Jeff Law
Date: Mon Nov 18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117595
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f5ceca96278b2ffaff838216aa6644fedb603573
commit r15-5412-gf5ceca96278b2ffaff838216aa6644fedb603573
Author: Jeff Law
Date: Mon Nov 18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117594
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c108785c425b2042f63fa975c58c274d19a8d160
commit r15-5413-gc108785c425b2042f63fa975c58c274d19a8d160
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117660
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117595
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117594
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Target Milestone|15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117662
Frantisek Sumsal changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53357
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:386f6d98ba0d438d65da1ad5b203f7b2743fc6da
commit r15-5414-g386f6d98ba0d438d65da1ad5b203f7b2743fc6da
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108900
--- Comment #10 from Jeremy Bettis ---
Sent: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-November/669322.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117571
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117656
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117661
Bug ID: 117661
Summary: Possible inconsistency with ns traversals in
type-bound procedures
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117555
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59625|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84211
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c3db52bb47913a35900f0ae99469fec521003a49
commit r15-5415-gc3db52bb47913a35900f0ae99469fec521003a49
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117645
--- Comment #3 from John David Anglin ---
I tried the following to disable late_combine2:
diff --git a/gcc/config/pa/pa.cc b/gcc/config/pa/pa.cc
index 941ef3a7128..4dfc7da0f2f 100644
--- a/gcc/config/pa/pa.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/pa/pa.cc
@@ -586,6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66511
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117555
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d90f5d0ae928320e6e4ce9fce8e658404d8cb72
commit r15-5416-g6d90f5d0ae928320e6e4ce9fce8e658404d8cb72
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117419
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Uecker :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3098b9a7281adef2028c2be3674094697557c2c
commit r15-5425-ga3098b9a7281adef2028c2be3674094697557c2c
Author: Martin Uecker
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112556
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
Thanks. I'll take a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87031
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|nios2 optimization for size |[12/13/14/15 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112556
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117663
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117663
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
gcc.dg/graphite/*.c was fixed with r15-5332-g714f7d8e3ace3f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103027
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sundeep KOKKONDA from comment #6)
> This bug is still not in Confirmed status. Is it still active and is there a
> fix planned?
For bugzilla New is the confirmed status. While there is an uncon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117664
--- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> GCC trunk now defaults to -std=gnu23. C23 removes unprototyped functions, so
> `void foo()` now means `void foo(void)`.
Thanks, Sam, for the immediate reply. Is tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49807
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51049
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Let me take a look into fixing that for GCC 16. Since aarch64 should
> generate ccmp here (with a csel).
I might be able to get it into GCC 15 but I am not 100%
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112556
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Joseph Myers :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3d525fce70fa0ffa0b22af6e213643e1ceca5ab5
commit r15-5431-g3d525fce70fa0ffa0b22af6e213643e1ceca5ab5
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112556
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
This needs backporting to GCC 14 too, no? We have a lot of upstream maintainers
using GCC 14 with -std=gnu23 or -std=c23 to reproduce and fix problems. If they
can only reproduce "real" C23 problems with unrelea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112556
--- Comment #7 from Joseph S. Myers ---
I don't object to a backport if someone wishes to backport it. (Technically
this is a regression between GCC 10 where false in had type int and
GCC 11 where it had type _Bool in C2X mode, so resulting in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96032
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96032
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117649
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-11-19
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91736
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |ipa
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117664
Bug ID: 117664
Summary: [15 regression] incompatible pointer type
[-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117664
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
GCC trunk now defaults to -std=gnu23. C23 removes unprototyped functions, so
`void foo()` now means `void foo(void)`.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61270
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103027
Sundeep KOKKONDA changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sundeep.kokkonda at gmail dot
com
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117664
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117664
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117663
Bug ID: 117663
Summary: [15 regression] Several "old-style function
definition" warnings starting with
r15-5327-g55e3bd376b2214
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
1 - 100 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
