https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69494
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to PR 47409
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
--- Comment #7 from Bernd Edlinger ---
even more surprisingly is that:
While thumb2 code (-march=armv6t2 -mthumb) has about the same stack size
as arm code (-marm), thumb1 code has only 1588 bytes stack, and it does
not change with -fno-schedule
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77316
--- Comment #3 from Roland Dreier ---
I managed to simplify the test case a bit by hand. The significant thing seems
to be "decltype(nullptr)" - if I change that to, say, void*, then I don't get
the spurious symbol.
$ cat b.cpp
template class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77316
--- Comment #2 from Roland Dreier ---
Yes, I hid that in the middle of the wall of text in my report - I only see
this with gcc 5.4. It works as expected with gcc 6 and also gcc 4.9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77316
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77316
Bug ID: 77316
Summary: Unnecessary template copy constructor weak symbol
emitted in wrong section
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69569
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I have a simple patch which handles the code in comment #0 but it does not
handle the code that is actually is in binutils.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77315
Bug ID: 77315
Summary: emit DW_OP_form_tls_address
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66072
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77314
Bug ID: 77314
Summary: Allows C++11 POD types in anonymous structures.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77313
Bug ID: 77313
Summary: Lambda that deletes itself accesses freed memory, but
only if class is templated
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77312
Bug ID: 77312
Summary: Lambda that deletes itself accesses freed memory, but
only if class is templated
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77298
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69569
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69410
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69410
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||7.0
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77311
Bug ID: 77311
Summary: bfin: error: unable to find a register to spill in
class 'CCREGS'
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69415
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Now I try to clear the out register when the shift < 32
Index: gcc/config/arm/arm.c
===
--- gcc/config/arm/arm.c(revision 239624)
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Edlinger ---
hmm, when I compare aarch64 vs. arm sha512.c.260r.reload
with -O3 -fno-schedule-insns
I see a big difference:
aarch64 has only few spill regs
subreg regs:
Slot 0 regnos (width = 8): 856
Slot 1 reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77300
Aurelien Jarno changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aurelien at aurel32 dot net
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77310
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
:: array(:)
end type
type(outer) :: var
associate (n_array => var%array%n)
select case (n_array(1)) ! <== ICE HERE
case default
end select
end associate
end subroutine
Here is the output I get:
gfortran-bug-20160821.f90:38:0:
select case (n_array(1))
internal co
-trunk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20160821
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69620
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does this fail on 5.4.0? 4.9.4 was the last release of 4.9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69623
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69685
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69683
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
For aarch64, the stack size is just 208 bytes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does -fno-schedule-insns help? Sometimes the scheduler before the register
allocator causes register pressure and forces more register spills.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77270
--- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Sun Aug 21 18:53:48 2016
New Revision: 239643
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239643&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/77270
* config/i386/i386.md (prefetch):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
Bug ID: 77308
Summary: surprisingly large stack usage for sha512 on arm
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77307
Bug ID: 77307
Summary: Bring memset + free optimisation to C++
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68843
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kim at mail333 dot com
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15319
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77288
--- Comment #6 from Ville Voutilainen ---
There's a superior fix that retains conversions but doesn't cause this
regression. Stay tuned.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77296
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52879
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Dominique
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52879
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77278
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> This led to error messages like
>
> lto1: warning: type of '_gfortran_st_write' does not match original
> declaration [-Wlto-type-mismatch]
> ../../../trunk/libgfortran/io/transfer.c:3746:1:
> note:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77278
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
Some information about the type mismatch.
The first mismatch about gfortran_st_write is
lto1: warning: type of '_gfortran_st_write' does not match original declaration
[-Wlto-type-mismatch]
Breakpoint 1, w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77261
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77296
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77278
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Here's a test case which shows a performance loss with LTO-enabled
libgfortran.
program main
implicit none
integer, parameter :: n=10**7
integer :: i
real, dimension(n) :: a
real :: t1, t2, t3
ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77270
vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org
-
47 matches
Mail list logo
