https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Note I think this code has undefined code in it.
>
>
>
> double sm0[max_DQ*max_DQ*max_DQ];
> double (*u)[max_D1D][max_D1D] = (double (*)[max_D1D][max_D1D]) s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116784
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116784
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd83474b2fee54697f27719a4631a21d68cb4ab6
commit r15-3727-gfd83474b2fee54697f27719a4631a21d68cb4ab6
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #282 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #281)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #280)
> > (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #279)
> > > (In reply to John Paul Adria
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116784
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-09-20
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #281 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #280)
> (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #279)
> > (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #275)
> > > Created attachment 59152 [de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116783
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Yeah, I think when you involve RTL analysis you have to make sure regs
mentioned in the MEM are not modified inbetween the MEMs as RTL alias analysis
looks
at the apparent difference between x1-184 and x1 a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #280 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #279)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #275)
> > Created attachment 59152 [details]
> > Preprocessed source from from comment #273
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116786
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Variant: move 'x' into the function via 'static int x' inside the main
function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116786
Bug ID: 116786
Summary: [OpenMP] ICE in install_var_field, at omp-low.cc:798
for C++ lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-val
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116713
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116643
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2f4daa81b959ad27d161ae5219887a82ffe8069
commit r15-3724-gb2f4daa81b959ad27d161ae5219887a82ffe8069
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
that part comes from:
https://github.com/LLNL/RAJAPerf/blob/262dcbb405b00ebc3e3184685743e9d1199a45b6/src/apps/CONVECTION3DPA.hpp#L235
I really think that is undefined and you can't pointer casting like tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to kugan from comment #2)
> Created attachment 59155 [details]
> creduce reduced file
This just compiles down to an empty loop on the trunk and in GCC 14.
It is definitely not correctly reduced.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Link to the original source on github: https://github.com/LLNL/RAJAPerf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I think this code has undefined code in it.
double sm0[max_DQ*max_DQ*max_DQ];
double (*u)[max_D1D][max_D1D] = (double (*)[max_D1D][max_D1D]) sm0;
That seems questionable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
There's a bunch of uninit vars.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #2 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 59155
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59155&action=edit
creduce reduced file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #1 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 59154
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59154&action=edit
preprocessed file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
Bug ID: 116785
Summary: RAJAPerf REDUCE_SUM regresses with commit
f0a02467bbc35a478eb82f5a8a7e8870827b51fc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #279 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #275)
> Created attachment 59152 [details]
> Preprocessed source from from comment #273
Thanks for test cases. Both .ii are compiled successfully with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #278 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #277)
> Created attachment 59153 [details]
> [lra] take scratch as implicit unused output reloads
>
> > * call_pcrel patterns: match_scratch can cause ICE for th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113954
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
Thanks a lot!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114742
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
The minimum architecture for IEEE 128-bit support is power7, because it needs
the VSX registers to pass and return IEEE 128-bit values.
Now, in theory, IEEE 128-bit support could have required only Altiv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #277 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 59153
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59153&action=edit
[lra] take scratch as implicit unused output reloads
> * call_pcrel patterns: match_scratch can cause ICE f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #276 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
It will take some time to sort out the known issues and there may be unknown
problems. Further testing with gcc-15 sounds like a good idea.
Here is a list of known issues and their status.
* call_pcrel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116743
--- Comment #6 from Rama Malladi ---
I am trying to create a reproducer for this issue. Interim, I wanted to share
some stats I got from the MySQL build to highlight this issue w GCC 12.3.0 vs.
11.5.0.
Executable Size (B)Baseline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109656
--- Comment #9 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> Could it be the call to __builtin_cpu_supports("darn") which happens in the
> std::random_device x("default") initialization in test01?!
>
> Could that system
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116327
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ivor+gccbugzilla at posteo dot
ee
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116633
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116735
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109889
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114742
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116162
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116162
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a2746e4347076ea48f4aeb28e13e6337ff7799ad
commit r15-3721-ga2746e4347076ea48f4aeb28e13e6337ff7799ad
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116724
--- Comment #8 from Joseph S. Myers ---
Note that there are various places where translation happens without the
diagnostic machinery ever seeing an untranslated message. A representative
example is cp/typeck.cc:cp_build_unary_op, where message
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116784
Bug ID: 116784
Summary: [15 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-9.c fails after
r15-3715-g77bd23a3e24755
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #275 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 59152
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59152&action=edit
Preprocessed source from from comment #273
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #274 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 59151
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59151&action=edit
Preprocessed source from from comment #271
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #273 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Ran into another one:
/usr/bin/g++-15 -DBUILDING_GTK__=1 -DBUILDING_WEBKIT=1 -DBUILDING_WITH_CMAKE=1
-DGETTEXT_PACKAGE=\"WebKitGTK-4.1\" -DHAVE_CONFIG_H=1 -DJSC_GLIB_API_ENABLED
-DPAS_BMALLOC=1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #272 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #271)
> I just did some testing with the LRA-enabled gcc-15 to see which bugs would
> be fixed and while I can confirm that both PR target/814
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116774
--- Comment #9 from Andreas Schwab ---
The Unmatched has a temperature sensor that can be watched with sensors.
$ sensors
nvme-pci-0600
Adapter: PCI adapter
Composite:+36.9°C (low = -5.2°C, high = +79.8°C)
(crit =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #271 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
I just did some testing with the LRA-enabled gcc-15 to see which bugs would be
fixed and while I can confirm that both PR target/81426 and PR target/115148 no
longer occur, another ICE has just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116783
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116416
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Though, we clearly do that already for CALL_EXPRs to constexpr functions
> during cp_fold. So guess it is just TARGET_EXPRs or what exactly this
> testcase need
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116783
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.3
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116783
Bug ID: 116783
Summary: [14/15 Regression] Wrong code at -O2 with late pair
fusion pass (wrong alias analysis)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116713
pietro changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pietro.gcc at sociotechnical
dot x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49330
--- Comment #36 from Namniav ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #35)
> It's "subtle" only in a way showing that we simplify ia == ib ? ia : ib
> to ib and that we simplify (int *)(uintptr_t)(&b + 1) to (&b + 1).
But it's in the branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116416
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Though, we clearly do that already for CALL_EXPRs to constexpr functions during
cp_fold. So guess it is just TARGET_EXPRs or what exactly this testcase needs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116416
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116416
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 101686, which changed state.
Bug 101686 Summary: export ; or export {} should not be accepted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101686
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101686
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116768
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5b5a36b122e1205449f1512bf39521b669e713ef
commit r15-3716-g5b5a36b122e1205449f1512bf39521b669e713ef
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116768
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 regression]|[12/13/14 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114229
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||john at johnmaddock dot co.uk
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116782
Bug ID: 116782
Summary: x86 backend cannot control vectorization of gather and
masked gather (and scatter) separately
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 105442, which changed state.
Bug 105442 Summary: [modules] exporting a class with an inline virtual
destructor causes linker errors (duplicate symbols)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105442
Wha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105442
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84870
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116748
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81426
--- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #16)
> It does. However, I'm currently having unreleated problems with CMake which
> means I cannot build the whole project at the moment. I need to debug tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53769
--- Comment #22 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #21)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #20)
> > It is not that easy. __STDC_NO_THREADS__ is a predefined macro, so it would
> > mean (at least on targets w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115347
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
So this maybe needs "add_inner_distances" as we have add_outer_distances? We
still get only ( 0 0 ) as zero distance.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81426
--- Comment #16 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #15)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #14)
> > This particular bug is resolved when building with an LRA-enabled gcc-15.
> >
> > See: htt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53769
--- Comment #21 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #20)
> It is not that easy. __STDC_NO_THREADS__ is a predefined macro, so it would
> mean (at least on targets without stdc-predef.h, with that header one would
> ho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116768
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xiaohuba2021 at 163 dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116781
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, ra
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116781
Bug ID: 116781
Summary: [lra][avr] internal compiler error: in
cselib_invalidate_regno, at cselib.cc:2545
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53769
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84870
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81426
--- Comment #15 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #14)
> This particular bug is resolved when building with an LRA-enabled gcc-15.
>
> See: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
That's great! I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53769
--- Comment #19 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #18)
> (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #17)
> > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> > > As explained above, this is not something that can be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116765
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 116765, which changed state.
Bug 116765 Summary: [12/13/14/15 regression] gcc generate wrong code with -O3
-march=skylake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116765
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116774
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
UR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116582
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, because multiple -mtune-ctrl options do not add!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90133
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85685
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83700
Bug 83700 depends on bug 85685, which changed state.
Bug 85685 Summary: [12/13/14/15 Regression][Coarray] ICE in
gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85685
What|Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116582
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
There's no gather in the bechmark, but yes.
> ./cc1 -quiet t.c -Ofast -march=znver4 -fopt-info-vec -I include -DT=float
> -mtune-ctrl=use_gather_4parts -mtune-ctrl=use_gather_8parts
> -mtune-ctrl=use_ga
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101100
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #6 from Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116582
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Here is a variant of benchmark that needs masking
#include
#define M 1024*1024
T a[M], b[M];
int indices[M];
char c[M];
__attribute__ ((noipa))
void
test ()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1024* 16; i++)
if (c[i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
Bug ID: 116780
Summary: [lra][avr] internal compiler error: output_operand:
address operand requires constraint for X, Y, or Z
register
Product: gcc
Version: 15.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101100
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106606
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53769
--- Comment #18 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #17)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> > As explained above, this is not something that can be fixed in GCC.
>
> I'm wondering why this bug was ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116578
Bug 116578 depends on bug 116573, which changed state.
Bug 116573 Summary: [15 Regression] Recent SLP work appears to generate
significantly worse code on RISC-V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116573
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 116573, which changed state.
Bug 116573 Summary: [15 Regression] Recent SLP work appears to generate
significantly worse code on RISC-V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116573
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116573
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116573
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5e3a4a01785e2d5135528a07bb8116af9c55ddf8
commit r15-3712-g5e3a4a01785e2d5135528a07bb8116af9c55ddf8
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113932
--- Comment #2 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
I'm not sure it makes sense to have this bug report depend on arch-specific
bugs such as 116778 and 116779.
This meta-bug should depend only on the LRA tracker bugs for each architecture
which i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116738
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 59147
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59147&action=edit
gcc15-pr116738.patch
I think I've managed to make it working. Here it is.
Rest in incremental changes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116779
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116779
Bug ID: 116779
Summary: [lra][avr] internal compiler error: in
patch_jump_insn, at cfgrtl.cc:1303
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116768
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
OK, so I think I understand what add_outer_distances does. Note for other
PRs we have a similar issue with respect to inner loops.
For
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
a[0] = a[0] + i;
the WAR dependen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53769
--- Comment #17 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> As explained above, this is not something that can be fixed in GCC.
I'm wondering why this bug was marked as FIXED, then. This is misleading.
> The macro
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
