https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Proposed patch at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00700.html
Can you give it a shot?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Roberts from comment #5)
> Do I need to raise another bug report to get the march=native to actually
> generate native code, or has one already been raised?
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70210
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm-linux-gnueabihf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70133
--- Comment #9 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks for picking this up.
I agree we should keep track of the extensions implied by the architecture
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
--- Comment #7 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Wed Mar 23 10:16:31 2016
New Revision: 234419
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234419&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR driver/70132: Avoid double fclose i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68536
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49526
Bug 49526 depends on bug 68536, which changed state.
Bug 68536 Summary: LRA ICEs with new arm pattern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68536
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70370
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70370
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> Confirmed on all branches.
> But on 4.9 I get a different ICE:
>
> internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:1142
Sorry, I me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64971
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70398
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69875
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:28:34 2016
New Revision: 234521
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234521&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM][5 Backport] PR target/69875 Fix atomi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69875
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:32:37 2016
New Revision: 234522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM][4.9 Backport] PR target/69875 Fix atomi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69875
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69614
--- Comment #27 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Vlad, do you intend to backpor this patch to 4.9/5?
I believe the original testcase doesn't reproduce the failure on those
branches, but the lra bug is still latent there?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu |powerpc64le-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Using gdb, the gimple stmt causing the ICE is:
# .MEM_10 = VDEF <.MEM_1(D)>
ret_5 = pow (1.0e+0);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70464
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to georg from comment #0)
> During our approach to get the raspberry pi3 and gentoo with an aarch64
> kernel and userland running i tried to cross compile a "native c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70464
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70473
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, memory-hog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70473
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> I suppose that for specific cases like building a compiler for/on raspi one
> could disable all but the "interesting" automaton
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I'm trying to perform an aarch64-none-linux-gnu bootstrap with -save-temps in
the BOOT_CFLAGS but I'm getting a -Wtautological-compare fa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70549
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70549
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ktkachov at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ah, on second glance the peephole looks correct in itself, but the second
branch following the bmi uses an incorrect condition code.
So we have:
tst r3, #2
bne .L3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #7)
> (In reply to ktkachov from comment #6)
> > Ah, on second glance the peephole looks correct in itself, but the second
> > branch fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
--- Comment #9 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch posted at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00351.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
--- Comment #10 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Fri Apr 8 09:39:44 2016
New Revision: 234825
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234825&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR target/70566 Check that condition reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Summary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70599
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70625
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70625
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #2)
> (In reply to ktkachov from comment #1)
> > I see the PR70623 ICE with 4.9 and 5 at -O2 on arm-none-eabi.
> > Do you have any oth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70628
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70628
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The ICE in cselib occurs when it calls gen_reg_rtx after reload, which is not
allowed.
This is through a call to simplify_unary_operation_1 on
(zero_extend:DI (high:SI (symbol_ref/f:SI ("
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
--- Comment #12 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Apr 12 10:58:28 2016
New Revision: 234898
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234898&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR target/70566 Check that condition reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70628
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Created attachment 38242 [details]
> gcc6-pr70628.patch
>
> IMNSHO simplify-rtx.c should never generate instructions, it ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
--- Comment #13 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Wed Apr 13 08:24:43 2016
New Revision: 234931
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234931&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR target/70566 Check that condition reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70566
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70656
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64971
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70044
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Thu Apr 14 13:45:34 2016
New Revision: 234974
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234974&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Backport of PR target/70044 fix to GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70044
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: arm, powerpc
As reported at:
https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70681
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70681
--- Comment #1 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Fri Apr 15 12:45:20 2016
New Revision: 235024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235024&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite] PR rtl-optimization/70681: X
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70681
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
Summary|[6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70477
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
> ...because neither LHS nor RHS have any location here.
Hi Marek,
does that mean you can reproduce?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64971
--- Comment #13 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Wed Apr 20 13:29:32 2016
New Revision: 235281
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235281&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Work around PR target/64971
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64971
--- Comment #14 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Wed Apr 20 13:38:31 2016
New Revision: 235282
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235282&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Work around PR target/64971
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64971
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0, 7.0
Target
: accepts-invalid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I'm hitting an error when trying to build an allyesconfig arm64 linux kernel
(4.5.2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70749
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Trunk errors with or without optimisation.
GCC 5 and earlier don't error with optimisation.
If this behaviour is expected (and the bug is in the kernel sources) feel free
to close the repo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
MED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: aarch64-none-linux-gnu
After:
Author: nickc
Date: Thu Mar 10 17:24:16 2016 +0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70764
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think so. gcc.log contains:
PASS: a is 0
FAIL: tmp is -1, not 0
FAIL: tmp2 is -1, not 0
PASS: a is 0
FAIL: tmp is -1, not 0
FAIL: tmp2 is -1, not 0
FAIL: tmp3 is -1, not 0
FAIL: 2 PASS, 5 FAIL
-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the code:
struct bar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70784
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70784
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Also note that finding the heuristics when to use this (for -Os it is of
> course clearer) is hard, if the pointer is sufficiently aligned or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70809
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70814
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70830
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm*
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70830
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70848
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70848
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also, this happens only for g++, compiling with gcc doesn't eliminate the
stores
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70848
--- Comment #9 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This also happens for:
volatile int *p;
void test()
{
(*(volatile int*)(p)) = 'a';
(*(volatile int*)(p)) = 'b';
(*(volatile int*)(p)) = 'c&#
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70848
--- Comment #10 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> With an old cross to arm I can indeed see (.018t.ssa):
>
> void test() ()
> {
> volatile int * _1;
> volatile int * _4;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
--- Comment #10 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Thu Apr 28 14:44:07 2016
New Revision: 235573
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235573&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR driver/70132: Avoid double fclose i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37780
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
As described here:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-04/msg00656.html
I upgraded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70903
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70903
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
-fno-rerun-cse-after-loop "fixes" the tescase. cse2 is where it starts to go
wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70903
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Although, that seems to be exposing something else that's fishy, looking at the
combine dumps I see it combining:
(insn 19 42 20 2 (set (subreg:DI (reg:QI 94) 0)
(const_int 255
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70903
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Basically at expand time we're expanding:
vector(32) unsigned char _4;
unsigned char _5;
_3 = {65535, _2};
_4 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(_3);
_5 = BIT_FIELD_REF <_4, 8, 8>;
: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: aarch64
The testcase:
int a, c, d, e, f;
int b[0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70964
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.1.0
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70964
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Another testcase that started ICEing with r235842.
int a, b;
int
fn1 (int p1)
{
return p1 < 0 ? p1 : a;
}
void
fn2 ()
{
lbl_100:
b = 1;
for (; b != 21; b = fn1 (b))
;
goto lbl_
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: arm*
Created attachment 38426
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70978
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.4, 6.1.0, 7.0
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70986
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work
: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: aarch64
Consider:
long int foo (long i)
{
return (i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70985
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66940
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70964
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Chengnian Sun from comment #4)
>
> Hi,
>
> May I know how did you find this bug-triggering test case? Is it generated
> by some program generator or from the tor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71041
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
--- Comment #11 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue May 10 16:15:20 2016
New Revision: 236092
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236092&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR driver/70132: Avoid double fclose i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70132
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71056
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71056
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70809
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
gcc --help="^"
ICEs with:
cc1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
0xae26d2 crash_signal
$SRC/gcc/to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70830
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch posted at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-05/msg00395.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71063
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee
601 - 700 of 2215 matches
Mail list logo
