https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89681
--- Comment #2 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 45951
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45951&action=edit
O0 expand pass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89681
--- Comment #1 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 45950
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45950&action=edit
O1 expand pass
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 45949
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45949&action=edit
source code
Compiling a simple test case with O1 gives incorre
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
$ cat l.c
__thread int a_thread_local;
int main(void)
{
a_thread_local = 3;
}
Note this does produce a binary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88432
--- Comment #3 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I considered a number of solutions, but they all had issues:
1) Place the RTL for the stack guard inside the prologue, giving:
*function prologue rtl
*stack guard code (__stack_chk_guard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88432
--- Comment #2 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 45200
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45200&action=edit
Final assembly dump for the .cc file with dwarf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88432
--- Comment #1 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 45199
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45199&action=edit
rtl final dump for the .cc file
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 45198
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45198&action=edit
Example breaking program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71752
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71752
--- Comment #4 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Wed Aug 17 15:31:44 2016
New Revision: 239542
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239542&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-08-17 Alan Hayward
PR tree-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71818
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71818
--- Comment #1 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Mon Aug 1 14:33:23 2016
New Revision: 238955
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238955&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-08-01 Alan Hayward
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71752
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This bug is for the regression found by Qirun Zhang here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667#c4
Splitting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667
--- Comment #6 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Fri Jul 8 08:50:24 2016
New Revision: 238160
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238160&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-07-08 Alan Hayward
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667
--- Comment #5 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Qirun:
That looks like a separate issue.
My fix for 71667 (under review) is specific to debug statements.
Could you please raise your test case as a new bug and assign it to me. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |alahay01 at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71438
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71439
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71483
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71483
--- Comment #3 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Wed Jun 15 15:45:47 2016
New Revision: 237483
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237483&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-06-15 Alan Hayward
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71439
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71439
--- Comment #3 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Wed Jun 15 10:53:01 2016
New Revision: 237476
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237476&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-06-15 Alan Hayward
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71483
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71416
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71416
--- Comment #9 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Mon Jun 13 11:07:35 2016
New Revision: 237375
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237375&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-06-13 Alan Hayward
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71416
--- Comment #8 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In my current checkout, there is no ICE on x86 or aarch64.
I've updated to latest head, and can now reproduce the ICE on x86 (but not on
aarch64).
Looks like there ends up being two stm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71439
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71407
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71416
--- Comment #5 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Fri Jun 10 08:46:55 2016
New Revision: 237288
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237288&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-06-10 Alan Hayward
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71407
--- Comment #8 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Fri Jun 10 08:46:55 2016
New Revision: 237288
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237288&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-06-10 Alan Hayward
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71407
--- Comment #5 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Qirun Zhang :
That's a different issue (original test fails due to data type mismatch, this
test fails because the loop boundary is unset).
Please could you raise your test as a new bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71416
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71407
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |alahay01 at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71271
--- Comment #1 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 38560
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38560&action=edit
slp1 pass output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71271
--- Comment #2 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 38561
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38561&action=edit
Final optimized tree output
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 38559
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38559&action=edit
Vectorizer pass output
Consider the following code, compiled with -O3 -fno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #3 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The standard way of dealing with condition reductions like this is to ignore
the contents of the "if" statement and produce a lot of code to deal with the
general case (it creates t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69053
--- Comment #4 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to alalaw01 from comment #3)
> Well, this fixes it, but I'm not sure it fixes it in the right place...
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c
&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68413
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68413
--- Comment #9 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Fri Nov 20 14:20:24 2015
New Revision: 230658
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230658&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-20 Alan Hayward
PR tree-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68413
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68413
--- Comment #5 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, your right, I meant to say vectorizable_reduction - it's a reduction of a
condition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68413
alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66558
--- Comment #3 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Fri Nov 13 10:51:34 2015
New Revision: 230297
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230297&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Optimize condition reductions where the resu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65947
--- Comment #5 from alahay01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: alahay01
Date: Fri Oct 23 12:40:33 2015
New Revision: 229245
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229245&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Support for vectorizing conditional expressions
48 matches
Mail list logo
