https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.1.0
Summary|Another IC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #180 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #174)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/struct-ret-1.c -O2 execution test
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/struct-ret-1.c -O3 -g execution test
> > FAIL: gcc.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #179 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #178)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #177)
> > As for bootstrapping, afaik Jeff Law has been bootstrapping vanilla sh4
> > compiler on a regular basis,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #178 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #177)
> As for bootstrapping, afaik Jeff Law has been bootstrapping vanilla sh4
> compiler on a regular basis, see also
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #177 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #175)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #172)
> > ../../../src/libgcc/libgcc2.c:538:1: internal compiler error: Illegal
> > instruction
> > root@tir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #176 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
I am trying a full bootstrap with the patches applied now but with LRA disabled
by default.
This is my first time submitting a patch to gcc and sincerely thank you all for
your help.
Zhijin
> From: "Li, Pan2"
> Date: Sat, Aug 17, 2024, 12:15
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix factor in dwarf_poly_indeterminate_value
> [PR116305]
> To: "Li, Pan2", "Zhijin Zeng"
> Cc: "gcc-patc...@gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116305
曾治金 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
Should be in upstream already.
Pan
-Original Message-
From: Li, Pan2
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2024 11:45 AM
To: Zhijin Zeng
Cc: gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org; Kito Cheng
Subject: RE: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix factor in dwarf_poly_indeterminate_value
[PR116305]
Ok, I wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116305
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pan Li :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a11dcaff9fc94971188d54310d3053e9f68a0d3d
commit r15-2962-ga11dcaff9fc94971188d54310d3053e9f68a0d3d
Author: æ¾æ²»é
Date: Wed Aug 14 14:0
Ok, I will commit it if no surprise from test as manually changing.
Pan
-Original Message-
From: Zhijin Zeng
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2024 10:46 AM
To: Li, Pan2
Cc: gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org; Kito Cheng
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix factor in dwarf_poly_indet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114522
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #2)
> The patch has been un-reverted, so indeed this failure has re-appeared.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;
> h=9dbff9c05520a74e6cd337578f27b56c9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #175 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #172)
> ../../../src/libgcc/libgcc2.c:538:1: internal compiler error: Illegal
> instruction
> root@tirpitz:..sh4-linux-gnu/libgcc>
>
> Could this be ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #174 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #169)
> I'll try running gcc testsuite with the sh-elf cross compiler on old sh-sim.
> There may not be much chance, but it might catch the wrong code bug.
The r
The patch for 3c9c93 as follow. But it's a little strange that this patch
hasn't changed and I don't know why it apply fail. May you directly modify the
riscv.cc if this version still conflict? The riscv.cc just changed two lines.
Thank you again.
Zhijjin
This patch is to fix the bug (BugId:116
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116352
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cmuellner at gcc dot gnu.org,
Never mind, looks still conflict, could you please help to double check about
it?
Current upstream should be 3c9c93f3c923c4a0ccd42db4fd26a944a3c91458.
└─(09:18:27 on master ✭)──> git apply tmp.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58934|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116181
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58855|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116398
Bug ID: 116398
Summary: [15 Regression] gcc.target/aarch64/ashltidisi.c fails
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: norm
ctor:V16QI [
(const_int 0 [0]) repeated x16
]))
"/opt/compiler-explorer/arm64/gcc-trunk-20240816/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/15.0.0/include/arm_neon.h":7311:10
1268 {*aarch64_simd_movv16qi}
(nil))
(insn 9 8 10 2 (set (reg:V16QI 103 [ _6 ])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114522
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-16
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116397
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116397
Bug ID: 116397
Summary: [15 Regression] slp-reduc-3.c fails on
aarch64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115373
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-16
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113042
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116395
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116395
Stas Sergeev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #5 from Stas Sergeev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116395
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > va_list can't be used that way.
> > in x86 (32bit) va_list is a pointer while in x86_64, it is an array.
>
> http
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116395
--- Comment #3 from Stas Sergeev ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> va_list can't be used that way.
> in x86 (32bit) va_list is a pointer while in x86_64, it is an array.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/77647307/expression-in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116396
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70419
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 116396 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116395
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
va_list can only be assigned to via another va_list, initialized using va_start
or va_copy.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116395
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116396
Bug ID: 116396
Summary: __pic__ and __PIC__ are controlled by -fpie
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116395
Bug ID: 116395
Summary: -m32 forbids empty scalar initializer
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107757
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
Note, this code only shows up when the target CPU is power8.
For the following code:
vector long long lsb64()
{
return vec_splats(1LL);
}
Both power9 and power10 generate:
xxspltib 34,1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70419
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 116393 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116394
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
Stas Sergeev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Stas Sergeev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116394
Bug ID: 116394
Summary: Memory leaks in compute_dot_product
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70419
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70419
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stsp at users dot
sourceforge.net
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
--- Comment #5 from Stas Sergeev ---
The documentation says:
When this flag is set, the macros __pic__ and __PIC__ are defined to 1.
I checked and I get these defines with no -fpic and with
"-fpic -fpie" which supposedly discards -fpic. The onl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #2)
> > Can -fpic win, rather than to rely on a
> > command line args order, which is very fragile?
>
> No because that p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #2)
> Can -fpic win, rather than to rely on a
> command line args order, which is very fragile?
No because that part is documented.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
--- Comment #2 from Stas Sergeev ---
Can -fpic win, rather than to rely on a
command line args order, which is very fragile?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116393
Bug ID: 116393
Summary: -fpie discards -fpic
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85624
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.0|14.3
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85624
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c8981bde45d365330a5e7c2e33c8dbaf3495248a
commit r15-2956-gc8981bde45d365330a5e7c2e33c8dbaf3495248a
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116391
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114146
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:07ece73d4712c68144a07681b24a8c1f963256ab
commit r15-2955-g07ece73d4712c68144a07681b24a8c1f963256ab
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85624
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:507b4e147588c0fafe952b7226dd764ebeebb103
commit r14-10595-g507b4e147588c0fafe952b7226dd764ebeebb103
Author: Georg-Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116030
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101373
Torbjorn SVENSSON changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||azoff at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116392
Bug ID: 116392
Summary: RFE: capture inlining information in SARIF output
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: SARIF
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114603
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114607
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.4.1, 13.3.1, 14.1.0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114603
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:33b11c6d9a600fac25b7cc714e9905aac049685b
commit r12-10674-g33b11c6d9a600fac25b7cc714e9905aac049685b
Author: Richard Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114607
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2d1b1f404f3361a0e3d9d2a2bee5cf68c1290fe5
commit r12-10673-g2d1b1f404f3361a0e3d9d2a2bee5cf68c1290fe5
Author: Richard Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #173 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Here's what I got from gdb:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x0109fee4 in wi::add_large(long long*, long long const*, unsigned int,
long long const*, unsigned int, unsigned int, signop, wi::overflow_type*) ()
#1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116391
Bug ID: 116391
Summary: Emit spellcheck suggestions for __arm_rsr and
__arm_wsr intrinsics
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116384
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #172 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Interesting, it's showing an illegal instruction now:
root@tirpitz:..sh4-linux-gnu/libgcc>
/srv/gcc-snapshot-3YBWb3/gcc-snapshot-20240715/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/srv/gcc-snapshot-3YBWb3/gcc-snapsho
Sorry, the line number changed. The newest version as follow,
This patch is to fix the bug (BugId:116305) introduced by the commit
bd93ef for risc-v target.
The commit bd93ef changes the chunk_num from 1 to TARGET_MIN_VLEN/128
if TARGET_MIN_VLEN is larger than 128 in riscv_convert_vector_bits. So
Is this you newest version?
https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/patch/8fd4328940034d8778cca67eaad54e5a2c2b1a6c.1c2f51e1.0a9a.4367.9762.9b6eccc3b...@feishu.cn/
If so, you may need to rebase upstream, I got conflict when git am.
Applying: RISC-V: Fix factor in dwarf_poly_indeterminate_valu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86468
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
A
Hi Pan,
I am a new guy for GCC and don't have authority to commit. Please help to
commit this patch. Thank you very much.
Zhijin
> From: "Li, Pan2"
> Date: Fri, Aug 16, 2024, 20:15
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix factor in dwarf_poly_indeterminate_value
> [PR116305]
> To: "曾治金"
> Cc: "gcc-p
Hi there,
Please feel free to let me know if you don't have authority to commit it. I can
help to commit this patch.
Pan
-Original Message-
From: Kito Cheng
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 3:48 PM
To: 曾治金
Cc: gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115511
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56496
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46371
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115511
--- Comment #9 from dv at vollmann dot ch ---
Just asking: is there anything that's required from my side to close this as
fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
Bug ID: 116390
Summary: Another ICE for avrtiny and optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116389
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9cdde72d1cefdf252ad2eec1ff465dccb3ab
commit r15-2949-g9cdde72d1cefdf252ad2eec1ff465dccb3ab
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116389
Bug ID: 116389
Summary: ICE in extract_constrain_insn for avrtiny and -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
(In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #3)
> Created attachment 58936 [details]
> Dump from r15-2890
Ups, I actually meant "Dump from r15-2889" of course.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Created attachment 58937
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58937&action=edit
Dump from r15-2890 with r15-2903
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Created attachment 58936
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58936&action=edit
Dump from r15-2890
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Finally a more manageable reproducer:
long x = -0x7fff - 1;
int main (void)
{
long y = x % (-0xf - 1);
if (-0x7fff - 1 + y == x == 0)
__builtin_abort ();
}
If compiled with -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87440
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116388
Bug ID: 116388
Summary: [13/14/15 regression] Finalizer called on
uninitialized components of intent(out) argument
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #171 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #170)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #168)
> > I am getting a segmentation fault when building libgcc2.c now:
> > (...)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110345
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2f90f3850eaf9d703d9eb63d5f0347158aa11027
commit r15-2948-g2f90f3850eaf9d703d9eb63d5f0347158aa11027
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113454
edison changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||edison_chan_gz at hotmail dot
com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113042
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Blah, adding popcountti2 does not work as the middle-end (in
> fold_builtin_bit_query) splits it into 2 __builtin_popcountll already ...
I have a patch for that
LGTM, thanks for fixing that :)
On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 2:06 PM 曾治金 wrote:
>
> This patch is to fix the bug (BugId:116305) introduced by the commit
> bd93ef for risc-v target.
>
> The commit bd93ef changes the chunk_num from 1 to TARGET_MIN_VLEN/128
> if TARGET_MIN_VLEN is larger than 128 in risc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #10 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Gaius Mulley from comment #9)
> Created attachment 58934 [details]
> Proposed fix
>
> Many thanks Iain and Andrew for your investigation and diagnosis, here is a
> patch based on your analysis:
94 matches
Mail list logo
