https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117811
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |rearnsha at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118796
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
Mine is still going. I have it self-contained but many source files, it'll be a
little while.
Yours dies in another pass and actually fails on verification rather than junk
going into FRE. Maybe file it separat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117010
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
C++ Itanium ABI has several types of constructors and destructors:
::= C1 # complete object constructor
::= C2 # base object constructor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118795
--- Comment #16 from Sam James ---
```
unsigned char *a();
struct b {
void c() const;
};
void b::c() const {
unsigned char *d = a(), *e = a();
for (long f; f; ++f) {
e[0] = e[1] = e[2] = d[0];
e[3] = d[0];
d += 4;
e += 4;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119387
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118796
--- Comment #9 from Lukas Mosimann ---
Pretty sure they are related, just need to add one line back (line 7):
https://godbolt.org/z/5dqG3bj7e
to get the same error:
internal compiler error: in copy_reference_ops_from_ref, at
tree-ssa-sccvn.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119387
--- Comment #13 from fiesh at zefix dot tv ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> Or if it is var tracking or statement frontiers, you can try -O2 -g
> -fno-variable-tracking-assignments and/or -O2 -g -gno-statement-frontiers.
% tim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119417
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118796
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 60875
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60875&action=edit
foo.f90
Attaching from godbolt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
--- Comment #28 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Indeed.
I /think/ __attribute__((no_sanitize("undefined"))) would work on that kind of
function.
It doesn't work on the subject of this PR, but maybe that's because the
"overflow" happens in a default a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 119320, which changed state.
Bug 119320 Summary: unexpected -Wstringop-overflow= when using memcpy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119320
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119320
He-Zhe Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118627
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119135
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:925a744efec5a630eb9bf49e755c554a884fda99
commit r14-11446-g925a744efec5a630eb9bf49e755c554a884fda99
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117010
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Thanks for having a look. In other words, you don't have an explanation off
hand, why "weak" and "comdat" get lost in the GCN offloading path? GCN (ELF)
does support all these things (to the best of my k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119283
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114206
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #60885|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119471
Bug ID: 119471
Summary: (a * b) != 0 then we know that both a!=0 & b != 0
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhanc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119382
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4cac3f83c2b31ab352f537368e4efdadd5c47a9a
commit r15-8916-g4cac3f83c2b31ab352f537368e4efdadd5c47a9a
Author: Sam James
Date: Tue Mar 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
--- Comment #17 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
In the same file we have: __has_input_iter_cat.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119466
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think w normally honor the C++17 rules, it can be seen on
int
foo (int &x, int *&y)
{
y = &x;
x++;
return x;
}
int &
bar (int *p)
{
return *p;
}
int
main ()
{
int a = 4;
int b = 9;
int *c =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
--- Comment #12 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
I have realized that with the resolution of the
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#3749, you can run into this
problem by doing:
auto r = std::views::iota(__int128(0)) | std::views::take(5)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108487
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119466
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And I guess it is solely if the RHS is a CALL_EXPR, if I change the testcase to
int
foo (int &x, int *&y)
{
y = &x;
x++;
return x;
}
int
main ()
{
int a = 4;
int b = 9;
int *c = &b;
*c = foo (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61105
Theodore.Papadopoulo at inria dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Theodore.Papadopoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
--- Comment #13 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to Tomasz Kamiński from comment #12)
> I have realized that with the resolution of the
> https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#3749, you can run into this
> problem by doing:
>
> auto r = std::v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113168
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66478
Theodore.Papadopoulo at inria dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Theodore.Papadopoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
--- Comment #11 from 康桓瑋 ---
> Use __cpp17_input_iterator can still produce hard errors in some edge cases.
With "hard errors", I mean the following:
struct I {
using difference_type = int;
using value_type = int;
int operator*() const;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57820
Theodore.Papadopoulo at inria dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Theodore.Papadopoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65656
Theodore.Papadopoulo at inria dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Theodore.Papadopoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119402
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #3)
>
> Seems like it's better to handle this at the GIMPLE level like we do today
> for the z case.
Yes I agree I originally was going to file this as an enhancem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
--- Comment #14 from 康桓瑋 ---
I believe the correct way should be:
else if constexpr (ranges::common_range<_Rg> &&
requires {
requires
derived_from>::iterator_category,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119463
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-25
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119440
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119463
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#1828
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119440
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7bec4570301c43ab948aca624d4cd7a3b33d65a1
commit r15-8901-g7bec4570301c43ab948aca624d4cd7a3b33d65a1
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
template
using __iter_category_t
= typename iterator_traits<_Iter>::iterator_category;
template
using _RequireInputIter =
__enable_if_t,
input_i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119467
Bug ID: 119467
Summary: Missed optimization on wrapping builtin function
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119467
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |15.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119150
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 Regression] |[14 Regression]
|Opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117070
--- Comment #3 from Ivan Pribec ---
According to my reading, the right hand side in the assignment matches the
following two cases of constant expressions, quoting 10.1.12:
2) an array constructor where each element ... is a constant expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119459
--- Comment #1 from Paul-Antoine Arras ---
My mistake! This should now be fixed in commit e0a1d0e044c.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119466
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119463
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>GCC accepts it just fine (found by my сolleague Egor).
I think there might be a defect report about this case but I can't find it
right now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117010
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Schwinge ---
First observation: the same (per my understanding) happens with LTO: compile
this code, still at '-O0' with '-foffload=disable' but with '-flto', and see
the x86_64 '[...].ltrans0.ltrans.s' file:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108487
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e200f53a5556516ec831e6b7a34aaa0f10a4ab0a
commit r15-8904-ge200f53a5556516ec831e6b7a34aaa0f10a4ab0a
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119419
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Koenig :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:737a5760bb24a0a945cc2c916ba452e3f0060c58
commit r15-8906-g737a5760bb24a0a945cc2c916ba452e3f0060c58
Author: Thomas Koenig
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101881
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118627
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c6279fffdbf8e13e46932eb8e100cfc579d06f2c
commit r15-8892-gc6279fffdbf8e13e46932eb8e100cfc579d06f2c
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115827
--- Comment #7 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> IMO a testsuite issue then.
Why would a missing warning from
return f; /* { dg-warning "may be used" "unconditional" } */
be a testsuite issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119325
--- Comment #24 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:56189d0ffeb35769637347720dfb24d2e4d7d47f
commit r15-8893-g56189d0ffeb35769637347720dfb24d2e4d7d47f
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119450
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Created attachment 60872 [details]
> gcc15-pr119450.patch
>
> Untested fix.
OK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119010
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
I have sent patches for two larger issues, remaining, when checking on
gfortran.dg/vect/fast-math-mgrid-resid.f the ones below. It would be nice
if the -fsched-verbose dumps would print recog data (alterna
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114525
--- Comment #5 from Simon Martin ---
I'm back to this PR after a long while. I'm currently testing the following
patch, that fixes the PR testcase
diff --git a/gcc/cp/typeck2.cc b/gcc/cp/typeck2.cc
index 1adc05aa86d..45edd180173 100644
--- a/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119466
Bug ID: 119466
Summary: Incorrect result generated by g++
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119463
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#125
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117504
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Summary|[12/13/14 Regre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 117504, which changed state.
Bug 117504 Summary: [12 Regression] Incorrect code emitted when using
"constexpr std::array" since r8-3497-g281e6c1d8f1b4c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117504
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119465
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96226
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:584b346a4c7a6e6e77da6dc80968401a3c08161d
commit r15-8896-g584b346a4c7a6e6e77da6dc80968401a3c08161d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119428
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:584b346a4c7a6e6e77da6dc80968401a3c08161d
commit r15-8896-g584b346a4c7a6e6e77da6dc80968401a3c08161d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118318
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Martin Jambor
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:82bd83122a483275787fcd18131bf6cd91fbdbd4
commit r14-11447-g82bd83122a483275787fcd18131bf6cd91fbdbd4
Author: Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119464
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117705
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118796
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-source|
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119417
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 60876
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60876&action=edit
gcc15-pr119417.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119224
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Vineet Gupta :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cb6070c79dd9334e7cfff40bacd21da4f337cc33
commit r15-8895-gcb6070c79dd9334e7cfff40bacd21da4f337cc33
Author: Vineet Gupta
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119465
Bug ID: 119465
Summary: gcc.target/i386/pr55583.c FAILs with 32-bit-default
compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119465
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119455
Bug ID: 119455
Summary: gcobol: needs optimization for direct assignments
(don't call into runtime)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119386
--- Comment #45 from Ard Biesheuvel ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #44)
> (In reply to Ard Biesheuvel from comment #43)
> > arch/arm64/Makefile specifies '-shared' for the linker flags, but does not
> > pass -fpic of -fpie to th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119457
Bug ID: 119457
Summary: gcobol: big codegen for simple STRING plus malloc/free
(and missing optimization)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118939
--- Comment #20 from Eric Botcazou ---
> If the value returned is different from earlier, then it has changed. Using
> different methods for calculating the size during different passes would a
> recipe for endless bugs, especially if crufted i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117504
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Simon Martin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f078a613bf85eff138c2567b599779dee6ae4b22
commit r14-11445-gf078a613bf85eff138c2567b599779dee6ae4b22
Author: Simon Martin
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119454
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119450
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119458
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119455
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-25
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119376
--- Comment #22 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:698e337bec3a36230c72816fcb82f1a239e64eba
commit r15-8878-g698e337bec3a36230c72816fcb82f1a239e64eba
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118795
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=118795
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
(Reducing it.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
--- Comment #10 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to Tomasz Kamiński from comment #9)
> > Hum, meeting Cpp17LegacyIterator requirements does not mean it is a C++17
> > input iterator, only iterator_traits::iterator_category represents its
> > category, s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118795
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
typedef unsigned char V __attribute__((vector_size (16)));
V
foo (V x)
{
return __builtin_shuffle (x, x, (V) { 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 4, 4, 4, 8, 8, 8, 8, 12,
12, 12, 12 });
}
compiles fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119447
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
pop_nested_class assumes push_nested_class actually did something, but that is
not always the case:
void
push_nested_class (tree type)
{
/* A namespace might be passed in error cases, like A::B:C. */
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119429
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119459
Bug ID: 119459
Summary: gfortran.dg/gomp/interop-5.f90 FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119459
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119460
Bug ID: 119460
Summary: gfortran.dg/reduce_1.f90 FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114074
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|rguenth at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.0|12.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117128
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.0|14.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119415
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tkaminsk at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117010
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tschwinge at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119327
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, the difference that precludes inlining is OPTION_MASK_SAVE_TOC_INDIRECT.
This is set conditionally based on
/* If we can shrink-wrap the TOC register save separately, then use
-msave-toc-indirec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114991
--- Comment #9 from Alex Coplan ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> Is this now fixed on trunk?
No, not really. The codegen at -O2 on trunk is:
f:
stp x29, x30, [sp, -144]!
mov x29, sp
add x0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119327
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118795
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
101 - 200 of 202 matches
Mail list logo
