https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89229
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89226
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94343
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 48126
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48126&action=edit
A patch
Jakub, this is what I have. Feel free to ignore it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94343
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 48127 [details]
> gcc10-pr94343.patch
>
> That of course doesn't work if the input operand is memory. This should.
LGTM. Thanks.
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
CC: crazylht at gmail dot com, skpgkp2 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
'-falign-functions'
'-falign-functi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94381
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-03-28
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94381
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
CC: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
commit 7d57570b0658b8c1b8a97dafa53dfd4ab4bd3f65
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Sat Mar 28 19:11:35 2020 +
Patch for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94381
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94391
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
(I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94391
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #5)
> This bug exposes several problems:
>
> * GNU ld does not reject a PC-relative relocation referencing a SHN_ABS
> symbol
> * GCC should not produce R_X86_64_PC32 referen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94391
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Yuxuan Shui from comment #11)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> > Also it is wrong for a person to assume a normal C variable could be
> > SHN_ABS; that is the bug here. It is a bug in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94391
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
The current relocation doesn't support PC32 relocation against SHN_ABS
in PIE nor shared library. I will change ld to issue an error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94391
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #13)
> The current relocation doesn't support PC32 relocation against SHN_ABS
> in PIE nor shared library. I will change ld to issue an error.
I opened:
https://sourceware.org/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94391
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Yuxuan Shui from comment #15)
> Your code is going to dereference the value stored in the ABS symbol as an
> address (e.g. if the symbol has value 10, your code will access (*(char
> *)10), barring th
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Target: x86-64
From:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45364
Testcase:
void ext();
__attribute((noinline)) static void a() { ext(); }
void b() { a(); }
Compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94417
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-fcf-protection |-fcf-protection
|-mcmodel=la
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94417
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94417
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
URL|
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Target: i686
On Linux/i686, r10-7496 gave
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr92904.c -O3 -fomit-frame
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94449
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-01
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94449
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-master-intel64/bld/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-master-intel64/bld/gcc/
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-master-intel64/src-master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr48731.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94449
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-master-intel64/bld/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-master-intel64/bld/gcc/
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-master-intel64/src-master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94449
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94449
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4)
> It is caused by r10-7501:
It is r10-7491
> commit bd0f22a8d5caea8905f38ff1fafce31c1b7d33ad
> Author: Kewen Lin
> Date: Tue Mar 31 22:48:46 2020 -0500
>
> Fix PR9404
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94449
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
May need to boostrap GCC on Linux/x86-64 to see it. It can be reproduced
even when x32 isn't enabled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94449
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #8)
> May I ask for the configuration option?
>
> I used x86_64 machine in CFarm with cpuinfo
>
I used
--prefix=/usr/10.0.1 --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --enable-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94452
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90497
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
Why do we have
define_expand "sse2_umulv1siv1di3"
[(set (match_operand:V1DI 0 "register_operand")
(mult:V1DI
(zero_extend:V1DI
(vec_select:V1SI
(match_operand:V2SI 1 "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Why do we have
define_expand "sse2_umulv1siv1di3"
[(set (match_operand:V1DI 0 "register_operand")
(mult:V1DI
(zero_extend:V1DI
(vec_select:V1SI
(match_operand:V2SI 1 "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3)
> It looks to me that the fix for PR90497 is not entirely correct, because it
> allows to bypass builtins that have additional SSE* restrictions.
>
> The following test al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
The following ones:
BDESC (OPTION_MASK_ISA_SSE2 | OPTION_MASK_ISA_MMX, 0, CODE_FOR_sse2_cvtpd2pi,
"__builtin_ia32_cvtpd2pi", IX86_BUILTIN_CVTPD2PI, UNKNOWN, (int)
V2SI_FTYPE_V2DF)
BDESC (OPTION_MASK_ISA_SSE2 | OPT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> So, I believe the r10-400-gecfdb16c54ad06ac23193e5de292fc71e5958526 change
> has been incorrect.
> We should revert those i386-builtin.def changes, and instead treat bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 48186
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48186&action=edit
An incomplete patch
Jakub, this is an incomplete patch with 2 testcases. Can you take it over?
I will fix PR 94467.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94467
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
The bug was introduced by r10-393:
commit 16ed2601ad0a4aa82f11e9df86ea92183f94f979
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Wed May 15 15:26:19 2019 +
i386: Emulate MMX pshufb with SSE version
Emulate MMX version of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94467
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94486
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94417
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
It was caused by r5-901:
commit acea91c9012e211283130eb486d83243bcbbb327
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: Mon May 26 17:36:00 2014 +0200
ira.c (split_live_ranges_for_shrink_wrap): Remove bailout on subreg uses.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|hjl.tools at gmail dot com |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
Af
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
I am testing this:
diff --git a/gcc/lra-spills.c b/gcc/lra-spills.c
index 0caa4acd3b5..bd4ee80245d 100644
--- a/gcc/lra-spills.c
+++ b/gcc/lra-spills.c
@@ -844,9 +844,14 @@ lra_final_code_change (void)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #7)
> > After 284r.ira:
>
> That is fine according to the rules as long as TARGET_TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION
> is true.
We can't turn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #7)
> > > > After 284r.ira:
> > >
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugzilla.kernel.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94541
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://bugzilla.kernel.org |https://sourceware.org/bugz
: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Target: x86-64
On Linux/x32, GCC 10.0.1 20200324 caused
FAIL: nptl/tst-thread-exit-clobber
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 build-x86_64-linux]$ nptl/tst-thread-exit-clobber
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94556
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94556
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> It is caused by r10-2846:
>
> commit bc4aa158c9490e76573bee3eec90f893b7d0b1ae
> Author: Uros Bizjak
> Date: Wed Aug 28 17:09:51 2019 +0200
>
> * config/i386/i386-fea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94556
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 48256
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48256&action=edit
A tescase
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$ /usr/gcc-9.3.1-x32/bin/g++ -mx32 -O2 foo.cc -lpthread
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$ ./a.out
in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94556
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||83641
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
This is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94561
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94556
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
The code looks like:
vmovq %xmm2, %r15
vmovq %xmm3, %rbp
.LEHB0:
callpthread_exit
.LEHE0:
.L15:
movl%eax, %ebx
.L14:
vmovq %rbp, %xmm0
movl$4, %edi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94556
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Target: x86-64
On Linux/x32, I got
FAIL: gdc.dg/runnable.d -O0 execution test
FAIL: gdc.dg/runnable.d -O1 execution test
FAIL: gdc.dg/runnable.d -O2 execution test
FAIL: gdc.dg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94609
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
LP64 has:
(gdb) disass _D8runnable6test52FZv
Dump of assembler code for function _D8runnable6test52FZv:
0x0040943a <+0>: push %rbp
0x0040943b <+1>: mov%rsp,%rbp
0x004
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94609
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #5)
> The struct is built as a POD type. As the struct is nested, it should be
> considered non-POD, otherwise it gets left up to aggregate_value_p to decide
> how to pass it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94609
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94609
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
core.exception.RangeError@/export/gnu/import/git/gitlab/x86-gcc/libphobos/testsuite/../src/std/algorithm/mutation.d(1518):
Range violation
/export/gnu/import/git/gitlab/x86-gcc/libphobos/libdrunti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94417
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
Fixed for GCC 10, GCC 9.4 and GCC 8.5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94556
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
CC: crazylht at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Target: i386,x86-64
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 gcc]$ cat /tmp/foo.c
#include
typedef void *(*func_t) (void);
void *p;
void
__attribute__ ((noclone
strap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
[hjl@gnu-tgl-1 build-x86_64-linux]$ readelf -n /bin/ld 2>&1|more
Displaying notes found in: .note.gnu.property
OwnerData sizeDescr
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
On Fedora 31, r9-8540 gave
Executing on host:
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-release-1-ia32/bld/./gcc/xg++ -shared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94739
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-24
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94739
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Resolution|---
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
On Linux/x86-64, all jit tests failed with
$ make check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board='unix{-m32,}'"
...
spawn -ignore SIGHUP
/export/users/hjl/build/gnu/tools-build/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94739
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Manfred Schwarb from comment #4)
> This broke my i686 build (only, x86_64 build with same settings is OK), I get
>
> configure: error: Intel CET must be enabled on Intel CET enabled host
> make[2]: **
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94739
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 48383
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48383&action=edit
A patch.
Please try this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94739
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Manfred Schwarb from comment #9)
> Patch seems to work so far. Do you need any logfiles?
No need for it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94739
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Please DO disable -fcf-protection in the kernel build. We are enabling
CET for the user space first. The kernel CET will be the next.
I am enclosing a proposal to make -fcf-protection compatible with retpoline.
|1
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-28
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 48396
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48396&action=edit
A patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #48396|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.0|9.4
Summary|Inappropriate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84324
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94118
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94118
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||craig.topper at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94977
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
CC: rguenther at suse dot de
Target Milestone: ---
commit 283cb9ea6293e813e48a1b769e1e0779918ea20a (r11-161)
Author: Richard
||2020-05-08
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95008
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94778
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Ever confirmed|0
: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
On Linux/x86-64, GCC 10 and 11 give
[hjl@gnu-skx-1 creduce-1]$ cat foo.i
typedef long long a;
struct __jmp_buf_tag {
};
typedef struct __jmp_buf_tag sigjmp_buf[1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
271r.ce2 dump has
;; bb 0 artificial_defs: { d2(0){ }d5(1){ }d8(2){ }d9(6){ }d17(7){ }d34(16){
}d44(19){ }d47(20){ }d50(21){ }d53(22){ }d66(28){ }d69(29){ }d72(30){ }}
;; bb 0 artificial_uses: { }
;; lr in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
The problem is since df_lr_bb_local_compute has
/* If the def is to only part of the reg, it does
not kill the other defs that reach here. */
if (!(DF_REF_FLAGS (def) & (DF_REF_PARTIAL |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> GCC doesn't tail-call because the return types are not compatible. With a
> call
> it cannot optimize the stack adjustment because of the ABI.
>
> Note I'm not sure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95076
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
This ia32 psABI return value discussion also applies here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ia32-abi/return$20value%7Csort:date/ia32-abi/9H4BBrIdkmk/sjWw06ZPnS4J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
STV generates:
8d b6 00 00 00 00 lea0x0(%esi),%esi
a1 00 00 00 00 mov0x0,%eax R_386_32target_p
83 ec 08sub$0x8,%esp
f3 0f 7e 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Fixed on master branch so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94118
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6)
> On Tue, 12 May 2020, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
> >
> > --- Comment #4 f
1 - 100 of 7482 matches
Mail list logo
