https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #251 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #249)
> Very nice. Can you please add it as a test case under
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/sh/torture on your github repo?
I've just add it as testsuite/gcc.target/sh/p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #250 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #247)
> Applying all necessary patches except 59000 makes the stack overflow with
> reload go away.
>
> Will try an LRA build now with the fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116691
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The difference is:
_39 = .SELECT_VL (ivtmp_37, POLY_INT_CST [4, 4]);
vs
loop_len_29 = MIN_EXPR ;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116691
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
`-march=rv64gcv_zba_zbb_zbc_zbs -mabi=lp64d -O3`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116691
Bug ID: 116691
Summary: RISC-V: Unexpected auto-vectorization codegen in
simple vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #249 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #248)
> Created attachment 59102 [details]
> a reduced C test case for the wrong code problem c#192
>
> typedef struct { int c[64]; } obj;
>
> extern void bar (int, i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
--- Comment #6 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> (In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #4)
> > Thanks for your kind and detailed explanation! BTW, when I change the value
> > of b to 1 in line 3 and compiled this code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #4)
> Thanks for your kind and detailed explanation! BTW, when I change the value
> of b to 1 in line 3 and compiled this code with -O0 flag, it gets killed
> with with pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #248 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 59102
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59102&action=edit
a reduced C test case for the wrong code problem c#192
typedef struct { int c[64]; } obj;
extern void bar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
--- Comment #4 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Note in C++, it is undefined at the point of return in a rather than
> afterwards.
>
> Also note PR 104690 is filed about catching this with -fsanitize=undefined.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
--- Comment #1 from Yunbo Ni ---
(In reply to Yunbo Ni from comment #0)
> Created attachment 59101 [details]
> The preprocessed file when using -O2
>
> When I compiled this code with -O0 and -O2 flags, its outputs were different:
>
> ```c
> #i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116690
Bug ID: 116690
Summary: Miscompile with different optimization flags
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116689
Bug ID: 116689
Summary: Some simple scheduling to reduce register presure
should be done on the gimple level
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Key
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116686
--- Comment #2 from YunQiang Su ---
Can you give out the output of
`./build-gcc-linux-stage2/gcc/xgcc -B./build-gcc-linux-stage2/gcc/ -v`
and
`tree
/scratch/ewlu/ci/triage/baseline/hash-ead5f587dad3206e45db7ac31f5c34c1530ae529/sysroot/`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116686
--- Comment #1 from YunQiang Su ---
It fixed the multlib path problem.
I guess that the problem is due to that ld-linux-riscv64-lp64d.so.1 found wrong
libraries.
Can you try to run pr114734.exe manually with LD_DEBUG=all option?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116672
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #5)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
>
> > Note GCC has an (I think undocumented) exception to the aliasing rule where
> > `void*` is allowed to alias all ot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116688
Bug ID: 116688
Summary: simd attribute vs clonable function
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116672
--- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Note GCC has an (I think undocumented) exception to the aliasing rule where
> `void*` is allowed to alias all other pointer types in a similar fashion as
> `char` d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116687
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: verify_flow_info |__builtin_return vs simd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116687
Bug ID: 116687
Summary: ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: return edge does
not point to exit in bb 2) with simd attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113563
waffl3x changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||waffl3x at protonmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116680
--- Comment #2 from Anonymous ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Note even with -fno-associative-math, some simple re-association happens
> with -ffast-math. Especially when it comes to always_inline too.
Thank you for clarifying
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 116496, which changed state.
Bug 116496 Summary: [modules] ICE in find_dependencies
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116496
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116496
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 116496, which changed state.
Bug 116496 Summary: [modules] ICE in find_dependencies
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116496
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116496
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba393bf8879e5cf1f917bd88246d6b80ac081052
commit r15-3592-gba393bf8879e5cf1f917bd88246d6b80ac081052
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116686
Bug ID: 116686
Summary: [15 Regression] RISC-V:
gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/pr114734.c failing with
zvl1024b lmul2
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116685
JuzheZhong changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116685
--- Comment #3 from Edwin Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> -fno-vect-cost-model fixes some of these.
I hadn't taken a look with -fno-vect-cost-model until now but it seems like
there's some weird codegen with the 3 element d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116661
--- Comment #5 from Edwin Lu ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #4)
> (In reply to GCC Commits from comment #3)
> > commit r15-3581-g4e9265a474def98cb6cdb59c15fbcb7630ba330e
> > Author: Tobias Burnus
> > Date: Wed Sep 11 09:25:47 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116685
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59100
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59100&action=edit
Full testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116685
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
-fno-vect-cost-model fixes some of these.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116685
Bug ID: 116685
Summary: RISC-V: missed optimization on vector dot products
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116662
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So the question in my mind, how important is this? On modern kernels &
toolchains it's possible to query the cboz extension & its block size which
effectively gives you the size of a cache line. But not e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116684
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||victorldn at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115130
Bug 115130 depends on bug 116520, which changed state.
Bug 116520 Summary: Multiple condition lead to missing vectorization due to
missing early break
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116520
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115866
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 116520 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 116520, which changed state.
Bug 116520 Summary: Multiple condition lead to missing vectorization due to
missing early break
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116520
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116520
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116684
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116672
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
A better way to explain this is that earlier versions of GCC didn't optimized
based on that different pointer types can not alias each other while GCC 11
starts to understand that different pointer types don
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116684
Bug ID: 116684
Summary: [vectorization][x86-64] dot_16x1x16_uint8_int8_int32
could be better optimized
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116683
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Maybe -munroll-only-small-loops is needed for powerpc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116683
Bug ID: 116683
Summary: new test g++.dg/ext/pragma-unroll-lambda-lto.C from
r15-3585-g9759f6299d9633 fails
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116352
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #13 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 59099
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59099&action=edit
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662641.html
reload1.cc: rtl-optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116681
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116681
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59098
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59098&action=edit
Reduced further and cleaned up slightly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116682
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reducing this ...
Note what was provided was basically an unincluded version which just happens
to be ok in this case but not always. Next time please provide the full
preprocessed source and you can compre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116682
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59097
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59097&action=edit
Compressed testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96842
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116682
Huw Rogers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Build|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116682
Bug ID: 116682
Summary: internal compiler error: in tsubst_expr, at
cp/pt.cc:21463
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116681
Bug ID: 116681
Summary: [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE: in start, at
timevar.cc:491 with -ftime-report -std=c++20
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116680
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116597
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:670cfd5fe6433ee8f2e86eedb197d2523dbb033b
commit r15-3588-g670cfd5fe6433ee8f2e86eedb197d2523dbb033b
Author: Richard Earnshaw
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57492
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2013-05-31 00:00:00 |2024-9-11
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116677
--- Comment #2 from Wouter van Gulik ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> GCC doesn't implement the "common initial sequence rule", so I think you
> need to use -fno-strict-aliasing; struct sockaddr_storage and struct
> sockaddr_i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116672
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116680
Bug ID: 116680
Summary: wrong code at -O1 and above with "-ffast-math"
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116677
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116672
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116674
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116674
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:09a514fbb67caf7e33a6ceddf524ee21024c33c5
commit r15-3587-g09a514fbb67caf7e33a6ceddf524ee21024c33c5
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116679
Bug ID: 116679
Summary: Memory leak when creating derived type instance with
allocatable component within array expression
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116674
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
The issue is that when we're analyzing SLP instances sharing a node as in this
case a SIMD call but we fail an instance we're scrapping it and marking the
nodes we analyzed as part of that instance as not a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116678
Bug ID: 116678
Summary: "-Os" triggers [[deprecated]] on a class ctor
definition with implementation
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109448
Nigel Tao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nigeltao at golang dot org
--- Comment #6 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116673
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> I don't remember why I did it that way rather than with static_assert in the
> body of std::launder. I must hate fast compilations.
Oh, because doesn't inc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116674
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116677
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
GCC doesn't implement the "common initial sequence rule", so I think you need
to use -fno-strict-aliasing; struct sockaddr_storage and struct sockaddr_in
are not compatible with GCCs TBAA rules.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116636
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96265
--- Comment #17 from Jan André Reuter ---
Good news! I built GCC trunk on a GH200 system via EasyBuild and tried a few
examples. A very basic example (more or less a "Hello World") worked just fine.
Afterwards, I tried a few of our offload examp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116140
--- Comment #14 from Alex Coplan ---
This should be largely fixed now (and in a position to get further improvements
from vectorisation further down the line), perhaps folks that monitor x86_64
performance can confirm if they see the expected im
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116677
Bug ID: 116677
Summary: ARM: Incorrect code generated when testing value of
returned struct
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.0
URL: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/j3e51Y3TW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116140
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3fd07d4f04f43816a038daf9b16c6d5bf2e96c9b
commit r15-3586-g3fd07d4f04f43816a038daf9b16c6d5bf2e96c9b
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116140
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9759f6299d9633cabac540e5c893341c708093ac
commit r15-3585-g9759f6299d9633cabac540e5c893341c708093ac
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116140
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31ff173c70847bba94613eac5b1ef2c0bec842e6
commit r15-3584-g31ff173c70847bba94613eac5b1ef2c0bec842e6
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116140
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f97d86242b86e4ad2bef3623c97e91481840a210
commit r15-3583-gf97d86242b86e4ad2bef3623c97e91481840a210
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Fri
nd get result
```
In file included from
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20240911/include/c++/15.0.0/bits/stl_algobase.h:64,
from
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20240911/include/c++/15.0.0/string:51,
from
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20240911/incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109790
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116675
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116674
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-linux-gnu,
|
Hello!
This is Peter from JFG. We specialize in providing one-stop services for PCB
manufacturing, PCBA assembly, and component sourcing, helping you streamline
your supply chain, reduce lead times, and lower costs.
Our services include:
PCB Manufacturing: We support various types of boards incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116323
--- Comment #3 from Simon Martin ---
FYI this is related to the fix for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17314. I'll post a patch
momentarily.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116352
--- Comment #12 from Konstantinos Eleftheriou ---
How can I reproduce this on aarch64? I tried using the code in comment 3, using
`-O3 -fno-vect-cost-model` with SVE disabled as Andrew mentioned and GCC on
commit 7a970bd03f1d8eed7703db8a8db3c753
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #247 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Applying all necessary patches except 59000 makes the stack overflow with
reload go away.
Will try an LRA build now with the following patches and Ada enabled:
- 58832
- 58833
- 58883
- 58905
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116673
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Something like this:
--- a/gcc/cp/semantics.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/semantics.cc
@@ -13396,11 +13396,20 @@ finish_builtin_launder (location_t loc, tree arg,
tsubst_flags_t complain)
arg = decay_conversion (a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116675
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Same for V16QImode. It works for V4SImode using
shufps $216, %xmm1, %xmm0
pshufd $216, %xmm0, %xmm0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116675
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||53947
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116675
Bug ID: 116675
Summary: No blend constant permute for V8HImode with just SSE2
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116674
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao Liu ---
Created attachment 59094
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59094&action=edit
test.i
A more reduced case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116674
Bug ID: 116674
Summary: [15 regression] ICE in vectorizable_simd_clone_call
bisected to r15-3509-gd34cda72098867
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116627
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116673
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't remember why I did it that way rather than with static_assert in the
body of std::launder. I must hate fast compilations.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116673
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116661
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Keywords|
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
