public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
@ 2021-10-11 20:44 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-11 21:02 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102690] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 more replies)
0 siblings, 15 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-11 20:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Bug ID: 102690
Summary: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Somewhere in the range
177b800f5fc861af1bf8700f050de28dd47ee1aa, r12-4288 to
338725652f84793805c55f08a7607c2f45d5512b, r12-4320
these tests started failing. For some reason git bisect isn't pointing me to
the right revision, though.
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++14 scan-tree-dump-not
optimized "goto"
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++14 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++17 scan-tree-dump-not
optimized "goto"
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++17 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++2a scan-tree-dump-not
optimized "goto"
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++2a (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++98 scan-tree-dump-not
optimized "goto"
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102690] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-11 21:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-12 6:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-11 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|testsuite |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords| |diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This was known to happen, see r12-4319 .
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102690] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-11 21:02 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102690] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-12 6:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-12 6:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-12 6:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes, sorry for that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102690] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-11 21:02 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102690] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-12 6:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-12 6:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 0:56 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-12 6:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2021-10-12
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Oh, I can probably fix the
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C -std=gnu++17 scan-tree-dump-not
optimized "goto"
since the expected optimization is not valid. But the IMHO bogus excess error
remains, see PR101480 for an analysis. Quote:
--
What we see is the global variable construction function which accesses
just 'a', and yes, the call to 'new' is considered clobbering global
variables (including 'a'):
<bb 2> [local count: 1073741824]:
MEM[(struct __as_base &)&a] ={v} {CLOBBER};
a.m = 0;
_5 = operator new [] (0);
a.p = _5;
goto <bb 4>; [100.00%]
<bb 3> [local count: 8687547547]:
_7 = (long unsigned int) i_6;
_8 = _7 * 4;
_9 = _5 + _8;
MEM[(int *)_9] = 0;
i_10 = i_6 + 1;
<bb 4> [local count: 9761289362]:
# i_6 = PHI <0(2), i_10(3)>
_11 = a.m;
if (i_6 < _11)
goto <bb 3>; [89.00%]
else
goto <bb 5>; [11.00%]
<bb 5> [local count: 1073741824]:
return;
I suppose implementing the global operator new as accessing a.m would
be valid as IIRC lifetime of a starts when the CTOR is invoked, not
when it finished (otherwise the CTOR could not access the variable itself).
We somehow conclude that
_9: void * [1B, +INF] EQUIVALENCES: { } (0 elements)
possibly because it cannot be NULL (?):
extract_range_from_stmt visiting:
_5 = operator new [] (0);
Found new range for _5: void * [1B, +INF]
marking stmt to be not simulated again
(huh?)
and then the -Warray-bounds warning concludes the access is always outside
of the allocated area.
I suspect when we'd arrive at VARYING we'd not issue the warning even
when the access would always extend beyond a zero-sized allocation.
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102690] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-12 6:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-09 0:56 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 2:30 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-09 0:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Was the change that caused this backported to gcc 11? I am seeing the same
failures there now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102690] [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-09 0:56 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-09 2:30 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 8:25 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-09 2:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It was backported here: g:19dcea67ac40cfdeb396fa264ebbe04fbe61fdc0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-09 2:30 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-09 8:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 8:55 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-09 8:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|12.0 |11.3
Summary|[12 regression] |[11/12 regression]
|g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-1 |g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-1
|6.C fails |6.C fails
Component|tree-optimization |testsuite
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes. Whatever solution we find for the testcase needs to be backported as
well.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-09 8:25 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-10 8:55 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 9:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-10 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So can we XFAIL it in the meantime, especially on the 11 branch?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-10 8:55 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-10 9:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-10 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #7)
> So can we XFAIL it in the meantime, especially on the 11 branch?
Let me do that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-10 9:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-10 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener <rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2cd32b743ba440e75505ce30c6b5c592ed144ea
commit r12-5107-gb2cd32b743ba440e75505ce30c6b5c592ed144ea
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Wed Nov 10 11:08:03 2021 +0100
testsuite/102690 - XFAIL g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C
This XFAILs the bogus diagnostic test and rectifies the expectation
on the optimization.
2021-11-10 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR testsuite/102690
* g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C: XFAIL diagnostic part
and optimization.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 10:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-10 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
<rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3dea90505df136a4b361665772ef8e62306cfcdb
commit r11-9233-g3dea90505df136a4b361665772ef8e62306cfcdb
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Wed Nov 10 11:08:03 2021 +0100
testsuite/102690 - XFAIL g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C
This XFAILs the bogus diagnostic test and rectifies the expectation
on the optimization.
2021-11-10 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR testsuite/102690
* g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C: XFAIL diagnostic part
and optimization.
(cherry picked from commit b2cd32b743ba440e75505ce30c6b5c592ed144ea)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-10 10:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 11:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-10 10:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |xfail
Priority|P1 |P2
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
XFAILed. I still think the diagnostic should be fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-10 10:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-10 11:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-21 7:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-10 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> XFAILed. I still think the diagnostic should be fixed.
This works fine on the 11 branch, thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-10 11:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-04-21 7:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-30 2:15 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 10:05 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13/14 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-04-21 7:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|11.3 |11.4
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 11.3 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 11.4.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2022-04-21 7:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-06-30 2:15 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 10:05 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13/14 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-30 2:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Kito Cheng <kito@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f6eef398045deb2a62d18b526831719c7c20c8a
commit r13-1357-g0f6eef398045deb2a62d18b526831719c7c20c8a
Author: Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@sifive.com>
Date: Tue Jun 28 18:43:42 2022 +0800
testsuite/102690: Only check warning for lp64 in Warray-bounds-16.C
That warning won't happen on ilp32 targets, seems like Andrew Pinski
already mention that[1] before.
Verified on riscv32-unknown-elf and riscv64-unknown-elf.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92879#c1
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR testsuite/102690
* g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C: XFAIL only on lp64 for the
warning.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13/14 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2022-06-30 2:15 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-29 10:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-29 10:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102690
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|11.4 |11.5
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 11.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 11.5.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-05-29 10:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-10-11 20:44 [Bug testsuite/102690] New: [12 regression] g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-16.C fails seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-11 21:02 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102690] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-12 6:21 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-12 6:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 0:56 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 2:30 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-09 8:25 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 8:55 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 9:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 10:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 10:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-10 11:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-21 7:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-30 2:15 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 10:05 ` [Bug testsuite/102690] [11/12/13/14 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).