https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116174
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior ---
bisect says:
commit b644126237a1aa8599f767a5e0bbada1d7286f44
Author: liuhongt
Date: Wed May 29 11:14:26 2024 +0800
Align tight&hot loop without considering max skipping bytes.
When
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
Target Milestone: ---
The file lib_str.c:
char *stpcpy(char *dest, const char *src)
{
while ((*dest++ = *src++) != &#x
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
Target Milestone: ---
The .c file:
>8-
struct list {
struct list *prev, *next;
};
struct mutex {
struct list wait
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior ---
gcc -v
Target: arm-linux-gnueabihf
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 5.3.1-4'
--with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-5/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,ada,c++,java,g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
--- Comment #1 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior ---
Created attachment 37214
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37214&action=edit
-E output of the test case
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
Target Milestone: ---
Host: arm-linux-gnueabihf
Target: arm-linux-gnueabihf
Build: arm-linux-gnueabihf
Created attachment 37213
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
--- Comment #9 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior ---
I added the complete function including its callers.
$ gcc -g -o petite petite.c -Wall -O2
$ ./petite
447=> 5
452=> 5
447=> 5
452=> 5
447=> 0
452=> 0
Segmentation fault
---
$ gcc -g -o petite pet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
--- Comment #8 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior ---
Created attachment 34305
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34305&action=edit
self-contained complete TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.2
--- Comment #6 from Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior ---
Created attachment 34276
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34276&action=edit
tc-static function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34272|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64294
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior ---
It seems exit(0) is dropped with -O1 -ftree-vrp.
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #1)
> This condition is true if backsize == 0:
Ehm, yes. The Code is:
--
printf("bufsz: %u backsize: %d\
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
Created attachment 34272
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34272&action=edit
the testcase
The testcase is a minimized / cut-out of some code which basically doe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44116
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at breakpoint dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55396
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Res
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55396
Bug #: 55396
Summary: -O2 -m32 -fno-omit-frame-pointer: internal compiler
error: in check_rtl, at lra.c:2007
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52798
--- Comment #1 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2012-03-30 21:54:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 27051
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27051
.i test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52798
Bug #: 52798
Summary: __builtin_object_size() based overflow check is a
false positive due to parameter optimisation
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44606
--- Comment #17 from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2011-03-17 13:02:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Does the testcase still test for the problem if you replace the declarations
> of
> stderr etc. with "#include "? This fails with link errors
--- Comment #1 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-07-01 17:12 ---
This can be closed IMHO. In latest binutils (those in trunk) lwsync is turned
into in an (m)sync if -me500 is specified.
boehm-gc upstream is fixed since they use .long right now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #49 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-28 11:18 ---
>Modified:
>trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
>trunk/gcc/caller-save.c
>trunk/gcc/config/rs6000/e500.h
Is it possible to get this into the 4.4 and 4.5 branch as well?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
--- Comment #3 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-21 09:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=20952)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20952&action=view)
-S output of the first tc
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44606
--- Comment #2 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-21 09:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=20951)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20951&action=view)
slightly extended tc
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44606
--- Comment #1 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-21 09:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=20950)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20950&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44606
nt during computation
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
GCC build
--- Comment #1 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-21 07:56 ---
was too early
--
gcc at breakpoint dot cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
at breakpoint dot cc
GCC build triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
GCC host triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44605
--- Comment #42 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-09 13:52 ---
(In reply to comment #41)
> The ICE in #38 is due to a bug in caller-save.c
Thank you for the very quick fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44364
--- Comment #38 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-09 07:54 ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> Please bootstrap and test this addition to e500.h
>
> /* When setting up caller-save slots (MODE == VOIDmode) ensure we
>allocate space for DFmode. Save gprs in the corr
--- Comment #37 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-09 07:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=20873)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20873&action=view)
this fails to compile in -O2 with the fix
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44364
--- Comment #34 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-08 11:23 ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> #define HARD_REGNO_CALLER_SAVE_MODE(REGNO, NREGS, MODE) \
> (TARGET_E500_DOUBLE && ((MODE) == VOIDmode || (MODE) == DFmode) \
--- Comment #3 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-07 04:21 ---
Thank you Alan.
Trunk and 4.5 branch is affected, the 4.4 branch just built.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44067
--- Comment #5 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-03 20:17 ---
>So clearly the caller's assembly is wrong; it should be saving all 64-bits of
>r9 (volatile gpr) first.
Yes, that it what I've been pointing out. There is an optimization in the stack
code which uses 32
--- Comment #2 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-01 13:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=20794)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20794&action=view)
objdump of the compiled testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44364
--- Comment #1 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-06-01 13:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=20793)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20793&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44364
rity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
GCC build triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
GCC host triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
http:
--- Comment #11 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-05-21 15:21 ---
Reverting the change in PR39254 makes the issue go away.
Any ideas?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44169
--- Comment #27 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-05-21 15:16 ---
This fix is causing PR44169 on powerpc-linux-gnuspe, the second TLS load is
missing a lwz.
The same testcase on powerpc-linux-gnu has no problems. The gnuspe target has
(as far as I figured out) just different pre
--- Comment #3 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-05-17 15:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=20685)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20685&action=view)
rtl pass 186r.dce
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44169
--- Comment #2 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-05-17 15:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=20684)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20684&action=view)
rtl pass 185r.cprop_hardreg
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44169
--- Comment #1 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2010-05-17 15:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=20683)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20683&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44169
iority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
GCC build triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
GCC host triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux-gnuspe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44169
--- Comment #3 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2009-04-22 18:41 ---
Wasn't
# echo 'int main(void) { return 0; }' > file.c
not enough or did you overlook that part?
The -E output is pretty much the same, it is:
$ cat test.i
# 1 "test.c"
# 1 "&q
--- Comment #1 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2008-07-24 19:48 ---
Does anybody care about this bug?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36047
Summary: -pg does not work on large binaries and m68k
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at b
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
GCC build triplet: powerpc64-linux-gnu
--- Comment #2 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2007-04-12 18:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=13358)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13358&action=view)
Preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31552
--- Comment #1 from gcc at breakpoint dot cc 2007-04-12 18:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=13357)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13357&action=view)
test case for the "internal compiler error: in propagate_one_insn, at
flow.c:1699"
Reults ins:
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at breakpoint dot cc
GCC build triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target
51 matches
Mail list logo
