https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98254
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On December 12, 2020 8:36:07 PM GMT+01:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98254
>
>--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>(In reply to rguent...@s
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: doko at debian dot org
Target Milestone: ---
seen with 20201212 with a profiled bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98258
Bug ID: 98258
Summary: Can't compile programs for both OpenMP (CPU) + OpenACC
(GPU)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95150
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95150
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|10.1.0 |10.2.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98257
Bug ID: 98257
Summary: Replace Donald B. Johnson's cycle enumeration with
iterative loop finding
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl ---
On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 11:55:41PM +, damian at sourceryinstitute dot org
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
>
> Damian Rouson changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
Damian Rouson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98227
--- Comment #5 from Jim Wilson ---
My bootstrap with ada succeeded. I used the same configure options except for
--prefix. make check is still running.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
--- Comment #7 from Damian Rouson ---
I agree that it would have been better for image_distinct to be optional. I
co-hosted the 2018 WG5 meeting at which there were lengthy discussions around
random number generation. I don't recall whether mak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98256
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> Invalid expectation?
Not sure. This long response was composed before I saw Damian's reply.
At the risk of starting an existential argument, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
--- Comment #5 from Damian Rouson ---
Steve, thanks for all the time you put into implementing random_init and
responding to this PR. My confusion stemmed from the first sentence that I
quoted from the standard. It states that the provided rando
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90207
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-December/561720.html
allows debugging of the generated variables.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95150
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |---
Status|RESOLVED
11.0.0 20201212 (experimental) [master revision
ff2dfdef2f2:87144b47033:815eb852a2d293331eba2e241a986b8641d4da1f] (GCC)
[548] %
[548] % gcctk -O1 -c small.c
[549] %
[549] % gcctk -Os -c small.c
small.c: In function ‘g’:
small.c:3:6: error: definition in block 2 follows the use
3 | void g() { f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98255
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98254
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #2)
> Should already be handled by vectorizing the CTOR.
I've tried:
typedef int __attribute__((vector_size(16))) V;
V
foo (short *a)
{
return (V){a[0], a[1],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98252
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20201212 (experimental) [master revision
ff2dfdef2f2:87144b47033:815eb852a2d293331eba2e241a986b8641d4da1f] (GCC)
[511] %
[511] % gcctk -Os small.c; ./a.out
[512] %
[512] % gcctk -Os -fPIC small.c
[513] % ./a.out
Segmentation fault
[514] %
[514
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97455
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-12
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98252
--- Comment #2 from Azat ---
>If you compile your testcase with -fsanitize=undefined, you'll see that it
>invokes UB.
Jakub, Indeed I saw them, but is there any explanation (except "UB") why it
does copy by 16 if the memory overlaps?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86551
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The ICE is gone for GCC10.2.1 and 11.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-12
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98254
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On December 12, 2020 7:27:01 PM GMT+01:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98254
>
>Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
> What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98252
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98254
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022
--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl ---
On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 05:54:43PM +, pault at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022
>
> --- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
> The example that you give shows that se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
--- Comment #43 from abebeos at lazaridis dot com ---
The patch is now (after further validation zero regressions within gcc/g++
testsuite in 2 different test-setups) "out there":
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-December/561718.htm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Third thought. Here are the programs you meant to write (without error
checking such as how_to_use_random_init must be run before
how_to_seed_with_random_seed_like_random_init).
program how_to_use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
The example that you give shows that setting the undefined part to zero
certainly is not correct. I updated my tree for the commit and am only just now
rebuilding. It'll be tomorrow before I put this right.
I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
On 2nd thought.
Of course, the results are different.
In your first example, you have
call random_init(repeatable=.true., image_distinct=.true.)
which gets you processor-dependent seeds. In y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98254
Bug ID: 98254
Summary: Failure to optimize simple pattern for
__builtin_convertvector
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98003
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
There is no --as-needed support.
I think either approach would simplify things as most targets don't need to
link against libatomic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 04:02:54PM +, pault at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022
>
> --- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
> (In reply to kargl from comment #4)
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98228
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
I still see this with 20201212,
54f75d8fb3f:a415eda93e0:cc9b9c0b68233d38a26f7acd68cc5f9a8fc4d994
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
Bug ID: 98253
Summary: Conflicting random_seed/random_init results
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #4)
> (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #3)
>
> > function kn1() result(hm2)
> > complex :: hm(1:2), hm2(1:2)
> > data (hm(md)%re, md=1,2)/1.0, 2.0/
> > hm2 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff2dfdef2f2e01c579dd280daa1d81fbeb4d7ac5
commit r11-5959-gff2dfdef2f2e01c579dd280daa1d81fbeb4d7ac5
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Sat De
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97920
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96685
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0bd675183d94e6bca100c3aaaf87ee9676fb3c26
commit r11-5958-g0bd675183d94e6bca100c3aaaf87ee9676fb3c26
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96272
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fe78528c05fdd562f21e12675781473b0fbe892e
commit r11-5957-gfe78528c05fdd562f21e12675781473b0fbe892e
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98252
Bug ID: 98252
Summary: gcc 10 unaligned copy (with tree-loop-vectorize)
produce wrong result
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
44 matches
Mail list logo
