[Bug tree-optimization/121391] hard-reg constraints: ICE for undeclared variable

2025-09-15 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121391 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug middle-end/121269] [16 Regression] gcc.target/i386/asm-hard-reg-{1,2}.c ICEs with RTL checking

2025-09-15 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121269 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug middle-end/110470] Test gcc.c-torture/execute/pr105613.c ICEs in prepare_cmp_insn on s390x with -march=z14

2025-09-14 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110470 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/121904] New: [16 Regression] ICE in as_a, at value-range.h:668 since r16-1400-g2e4688a7202

2025-09-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121904 Bug ID: 121904 Summary: [16 Regression] ICE in as_a, at value-range.h:668 since r16-1400-g2e4688a7202 Product: gcc Version: 16.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug testsuite/121205] FAIL: gcc.dg/asm-hard-reg-2.c with -m32

2025-09-10 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121205 --- Comment #12 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #10) > I still meet FAIL on current trunk for now both for unix -m32/-m64: Patch https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-July/690433.html is su

[Bug testsuite/121511] FAIL: gcc.dg/asm-hard-reg-error-3.c on arm

2025-08-13 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121511 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug testsuite/121511] FAIL: gcc.dg/asm-hard-reg-error-3.c on arm

2025-08-12 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121511 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Ah that makes sense. Thanks for sharing! I created a patch adding option -marm: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692421.html

[Bug testsuite/121511] FAIL: gcc.dg/asm-hard-reg-error-3.c on arm

2025-08-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121511 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #0) > Given the dg-do line: > /* { dg-do compile { target { { aarch64*-*-* powerpc64*-*-* riscv64-*-* > s390*-*-* x86_64-*-* } && int128 } } } */ > >

[Bug target/117015] s390 should define spaceship4 optab

2025-08-07 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117015 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug tree-optimization/121391] hard-reg constraints: ICE for undeclared variable

2025-08-04 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121391 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- We need to stop error checking in case of an error node operand. So something along the lines diff --git a/gcc/stmt.cc b/gcc/stmt.cc index 7942aa3e484..6c4b35c52c3 100644 --- a/gcc/stmt.cc +

[Bug rtl-optimization/121198] [avr][hreg-constraints] error: 'asm' operand has impossible constraints or there are not enough registers

2025-07-28 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121198 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- During constraint processing we have 7: {r45:SI=asm_operands;clobber cc:CC;} REG_DEAD r47:HI REG_UNUSED cc:CC Alt 0: (0) ={r22} (1) {r22} Final costs after insn 7 (freq=10

[Bug rtl-optimization/121205] FAIL: gcc.dg/asm-hard-reg-2.c with -m32

2025-07-22 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121205 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #1) > With checking, I also see: > > +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/asm-hard-reg-1.c (internal compiler error: RTL check: > expected elt 3 type 'e' or 'u', have '0

[Bug rtl-optimization/121201] [16 regression] genpreds uses deprecated rawmemchr, breaks build on musl based system

2025-07-22 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121201 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Committed in r16-2421-g65f044a3ef6f5a

[Bug tree-optimization/120156] [14 Regression] Segfault while compiling eigen test bdcsvd.cpp

2025-05-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Brrr due to aggressive reduction t.ii became kind of invalid/incomplete which means the reduced test case errors out early for release branches 12 and 13. However, running the original tests

[Bug tree-optimization/120156] [14 Regression] Segfault while compiling eigen test bdcsvd.cpp

2025-05-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 61371 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61371&action=edit reduced test

[Bug tree-optimization/120156] [14 Regression] Segfault while compiling eigen test bdcsvd.cpp

2025-05-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Sorry for taking so long. I accidentally switched to a checking=release build. With checking=yes it is reproducible and I get a proper ICE. Now, even earlier tests fail. With the appended

[Bug tree-optimization/120156] [14 Regression] Segfault while compiling eigen test bdcsvd.cpp

2025-05-07 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I will try to reduce the test.

[Bug tree-optimization/120156] New: [14 Regression] Segfault while compiling eigen test bdcsvd.cpp

2025-05-07 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120156 Bug ID: 120156 Summary: [14 Regression] Segfault while compiling eigen test bdcsvd.cpp Product: gcc Version: 14.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/119235] Argument pointer survives LRA with -m31 -mzarch

2025-04-29 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119235 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug target/119834] [15 regression] Compiling harfbuzz 11.0.1 with gcc 15 20250413 fails on s390x since r15-1579

2025-04-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119834 --- Comment #25 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 61143 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61143&action=edit reduced test

[Bug target/119834] [15 regression] Compiling harfbuzz 11.0.1 with gcc 15 20250413 fails on s390x

2025-04-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119834 --- Comment #22 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I started a bootstrap+regtest, too, for targets z900,z10,z13,z16. Each run will take around 5 hours. I will report back once they finished or if some fail on the go. I have attached a prep

[Bug target/119834] [15 regression] Compiling harfbuzz 11.0.1 with gcc 15 20250413 fails on s390x

2025-04-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119834 --- Comment #20 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 61141 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61141&action=edit preprocessed

[Bug target/119834] [15 regression] Compiling harfbuzz 11.0.1 with gcc 15 20250413 fails on s390x

2025-04-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119834 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/114189] Target implements obsolete vcond{,u,eq} expanders

2025-03-20 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114189 Bug 114189 depends on bug 115519, which changed state. Bug 115519 Summary: s390 fallout from removing vcond{,u,eq} patterns https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115519 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/115519] s390 fallout from removing vcond{,u,eq} patterns

2025-03-20 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115519 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|

[Bug tree-optimization/119293] New: [15 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-121.c fails since r15-6811-g086031c0585985

2025-03-14 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119293 Bug ID: 119293 Summary: [15 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-121.c fails since r15-6811-g086031c0585985 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: te

[Bug target/119235] New: Argument pointer survives LRA with -m31 -mzarch

2025-03-12 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119235 Bug ID: 119235 Summary: Argument pointer survives LRA with -m31 -mzarch Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: build Severity: normal Prio

[Bug rtl-optimization/115835] FAIL: gcc.target/s390/section-anchors.c since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2025-03-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115835 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[15 regression] FAIL: |FAIL: |

[Bug target/118835] ICE in s390_valid_shift_count since r10-1731-ge2839e47894f0b

2025-02-26 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118835 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|

[Bug c/119014] Extending _Float16 constant at compile and run time differs

2025-02-25 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119014 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Thanks for pointing this out. I was fearing that this is valid but wasn't sure. Especially the difference between (_Float16) 42.42f16 and just the constant without the cast, I didn't have on

[Bug c/119014] New: Extending _Float16 constant at compile and run time differs

2025-02-25 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119014 Bug ID: 119014 Summary: Extending _Float16 constant at compile and run time differs Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug d/118248] [15 Regression] gdc ICE (segfault) building a riscv64 cross compiler on s390x-linux-gnu

2025-02-12 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118248 --- Comment #17 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Meanwhile bisect stopped at r15-508-gad22c607f3e17f Prior that commit we have for a call riscv_block_move_straight() with length=4 that regs = XALLOCAVEC (rtx, length / delta); is not call

[Bug d/118248] [15 Regression] gdc ICE (segfault) building a riscv64 cross compiler on s390x-linux-gnu

2025-02-12 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118248 --- Comment #15 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- So my reproducer looks like FROM ubuntu:plucky RUN sed -i 's/^Types: deb$/Types: deb deb-src/' \ /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources RUN apt-get update \ && apt-get -y upgrade \ &&

[Bug d/118248] [15 Regression] gdc ICE (segfault) building a riscv64 cross compiler on s390x-linux-gnu

2025-02-12 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118248 --- Comment #12 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Confirmed. Function riscv_block_move_straight() is called to copy 4 bytes. bits equals 64 which means delta equals 8. This in turn renders regs = XALLOCAVEC (rtx, length / delta - 1); into

[Bug target/118835] New: [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE in s390_valid_shift_count since r10-1731-ge2839e47894f0b

2025-02-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118835 Bug ID: 118835 Summary: [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE in s390_valid_shift_count since r10-1731-ge2839e47894f0b Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Ke

[Bug target/118696] [15 Regression] qemu miscompilation on s390x since r15-7053

2025-01-30 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118696 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #6) > Patch LGTM and I started a bootstrap+regtest which will finish approximately > in 4 hours. Sorry for the hassle and thanks for fixi

[Bug target/118696] [15 Regression] qemu miscompilation on s390x since r15-7053

2025-01-30 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118696 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Patch LGTM and I started a bootstrap+regtest which will finish approximately in 4 hours. Sorry for the hassle and thanks for fixing this so quickly! I think what is missing is to adapt the e

[Bug rtl-optimization/115835] [15 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/s390/section-anchors.c since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2025-01-27 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115835 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |stefansf at gcc dot

[Bug target/118362] [15 Regression] ICE in require, at machmode.h:313 since r15-2002

2025-01-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118362 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Thanks for clarification. I'm way to unfamiliar with the vectorizer. At some point, when I was skimming over the code, I got the impression that also other modes than those defined by the ba

[Bug target/118362] [15 Regression] ICE in require, at machmode.h:313 since r15-2002

2025-01-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118362 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I wasn't sure whether also other vector modes may appear there. If only vector modes defined by the backend can appear there, then it should be sufficient to check for the size only.

[Bug target/118362] [15 Regression] ICE in require, at machmode.h:313 since r15-2002

2025-01-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118362 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Yikes, the optimization should only apply for constant vectors which are supported by the hardware. That means vectors up to 16 byte. For s390_constant_via_vgm_p() and s390_constant_via_vrep

[Bug rtl-optimization/118350] [12/13/14/15 Regression] Wrong number of loop iterations starting with r7-3839-gde0a3fa38e2ad8

2025-01-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118350 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 60071 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60071&action=edit loop2_doloop dump

[Bug rtl-optimization/118350] [12/13/14/15 Regression] Wrong number of loop iterations starting with r7-3839-gde0a3fa38e2ad8

2025-01-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118350 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 60070 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60070&action=edit loop2_unroll dump

[Bug rtl-optimization/118350] New: [12/13/14/15 Regression] Wrong number of loop iterations starting with r7-3839-gde0a3fa38e2ad8

2025-01-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118350 Bug ID: 118350 Summary: [12/13/14/15 Regression] Wrong number of loop iterations starting with r7-3839-gde0a3fa38e2ad8 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug sanitizer/117725] [15 Regression] s390 -m31 bootstrap failure in interception.h since r15-5164-gfa321004f3f628

2025-01-07 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117725 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug sanitizer/117725] [15 Regression] s390 -m31 bootstrap failure in interception.h since r15-5164-gfa321004f3f628

2025-01-06 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117725 --- Comment #12 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Since https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119248 is merged I created backports of all four commits in https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-January/672627.html

[Bug sanitizer/117725] [15 Regression] s390 -m31 bootstrap failure in interception.h since r15-5164-gfa321004f3f628

2024-12-19 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117725 --- Comment #10 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 59924 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59924&action=edit all patches so far

[Bug sanitizer/117725] [15 Regression] s390 -m31 bootstrap failure in interception.h since r15-5164-gfa321004f3f628

2024-12-17 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117725 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #5) > even with the changes from comment 3, it still fails with: > > In file included from > ../../../../../src/libsanitizer/interception/interception

[Bug rtl-optimization/117095] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8

2024-12-15 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Bootstrap and regtest are successful on s390.

[Bug sanitizer/117725] [15 Regression] s390 -m31 bootstrap failure in interception.h since r15-5164-gfa321004f3f628

2024-12-09 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117725 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I cherry picked those and found some left overs which are handled by https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119248

[Bug sanitizer/117725] New: [15 Regression] s390 -m31 bootstrap failure in interception.h since r15-5164-gfa321004f3f628

2024-11-21 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117725 Bug ID: 117725 Summary: [15 Regression] s390 -m31 bootstrap failure in interception.h since r15-5164-gfa321004f3f628 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/112274] Bug due to unused expressions on s390x

2024-10-26 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112274 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug target/112274] Bug due to unused expressions on s390x

2024-10-26 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112274 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I cannot reproduce the problem, i.e., I tried it on Ubuntu 22.04 natively and also via a cross+qemu and in both cases a zero is printed while using -O2 or -O3. The generated assembly also loo

[Bug tree-optimization/85316] [meta-bug] VRP range propagation missed cases

2024-10-23 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316 Bug 85316 depends on bug 114678, which changed state. Bug 114678 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/range-sincos.c scan-tree-dump-not evrp "link_error" on s390 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/114678] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/range-sincos.c scan-tree-dump-not evrp "link_error" on s390

2024-10-23 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug target/115860] [15 regression] Register pairs and regrename since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-10-23 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115860 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug tree-optimization/117119] New: [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE in int_cst_value, at tree.cc:11115

2024-10-13 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117119 Bug ID: 117119 Summary: [12/13/14/15 Regression] ICE in int_cst_value, at tree.cc:5 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-c

[Bug target/117095] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8

2024-10-13 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 59331 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59331&action=edit cse2 dump

[Bug target/117095] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8

2024-10-13 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Calling cse_insn() for (insn 99 98 100 12 (set (reg:SI 138) (const_int 1 [0x1])) "t.c":9:31 1507 {*movsi_zarch} (nil)) results in a call to insert_regs() where we have (gdb) ca

[Bug target/117095] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8

2024-10-12 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Prior cse2 we have (jump_insn 217 78 216 10 (parallel [ (set (pc) (if_then_else (ne (reg:SI 165) (const_int 1 [0x1])) (

[Bug target/117095] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8

2024-10-12 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- For the outcome basically only b = fn3(q == &l); *h = b; if (c != 1) __builtin_abort(); matters. The optimized tree output for that part looks good to me (using -O2 of course): a

[Bug target/117095] New: [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8

2024-10-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095 Bug ID: 117095 Summary: [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong code since r13-5103-g7c9f20fcfdc2d8 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code

[Bug ada/117087] New: [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure in validate_size since r15-4166-g9fd38cc5d63612

2024-10-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117087 Bug ID: 117087 Summary: [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure in validate_size since r15-4166-g9fd38cc5d63612 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/116997] [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong bitfield accesses since r13-3219-g25413fdb2ac249

2024-10-08 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116997 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I gave it a try on s390 and I also end up with MEM [(void *)Ptr.0_1] = { 7, 6291456 }; Thanks for the very fast fix :)

[Bug middle-end/116997] New: [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong bitfield accesses since r13-3219-g25413fdb2ac249

2024-10-07 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116997 Bug ID: 116997 Summary: [13/14/15 Regression] Wrong bitfield accesses since r13-3219-g25413fdb2ac249 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords

[Bug target/116799] [14/15 Regression] Miscompiled code on s390x at -O2 since r14-2675-gef28aadad6e

2024-09-23 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116799 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- It looks like we are increasing pat once too often, i.e., the loop body while (pat[0] == '*' && pat < pat_end - 1) pat++; is executed twice instead of only once. Prior loop2, IL

[Bug target/113953] Finish LRA transition for s390 by removing -mlra

2024-09-20 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113953 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4) > Heh, I thought you forgot the manual, but -mlra apparently never was > mentioned > in there anyway :-) Uff you almost had me there, i.e., if

[Bug target/113932] [meta-bug] Targets which should be ported to LRA

2024-09-20 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113932 Bug 113932 depends on bug 113953, which changed state. Bug 113953 Summary: Finish LRA transition for s390 by removing -mlra https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113953 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/113953] Finish LRA transition for s390 by removing -mlra

2024-09-20 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113953 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug target/115860] [15 regression] Register pairs and regrename since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-09-13 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115860 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Michael Matz from comment #1) > If you're interested you might want to test a patch from > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116650 > which came up during m68k vs LRA

[Bug rtl-optimization/116372] [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c

2024-08-25 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|

[Bug rtl-optimization/116372] [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c

2024-08-20 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372 --- Comment #9 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- FYI: bootstrap is restored with the patch. Thanks!

[Bug rtl-optimization/116372] [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c

2024-08-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
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.

[Bug rtl-optimization/116372] [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c

2024-08-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
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

[Bug rtl-optimization/116372] [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c

2024-08-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
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

[Bug rtl-optimization/116372] [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c

2024-08-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
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 -

[Bug rtl-optimization/116372] New: [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c

2024-08-14 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372 Bug ID: 116372 Summary: [15 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure ada/gcc-interface/trans.cc:6423 since r15-2890-g72c9b5f438f22c Product: gcc Version: 15.0

[Bug middle-end/111821] [12/13/14 Regression] OOM with packed struct and stack variable with copy

2024-08-06 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111821 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stefansf at gcc dot gnu.or

[Bug target/116245] [15 regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr116037.c fails on s390x

2024-08-06 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I gave it a quick try on s390 and test passes, now. Thanks!

[Bug target/116245] [15 regression] gcc.dg/torture/pr116037.c fails on s390x

2024-08-06 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116245 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Thanks for the ping. The test is skipped for -m31 and fails for -m64. Maybe this is some sort of endianness thingy? typedef __attribute__((__vector_size__ (64))) unsigned __int128 VV; __at

[Bug modula2/115823] Wrong expansion of isnormal optab

2024-07-28 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115823 --- Comment #11 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I gave the new patch a try and can confirm that it works, now. Thanks for taking care of this!

[Bug modula2/115823] Wrong expansion of isnormal optab

2024-07-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115823 --- Comment #9 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Argh I forgot to add the isnormal optab for this PR. Just attached it. With this I get for an unoptimized run gm2 testisnormal.mod -O0 -S -c -fdump-tree-optimized grep brasl testisnormal.s

[Bug modula2/115823] Wrong expansion of isnormal optab

2024-07-16 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115823 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 58689 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58689&action=edit isnormal optab for s390

[Bug plugins/112520] gcc.dg/plugin/cpython-plugin-test-PyList_Append.c -fplugin=./analyzer_cpython_plugin.so ICE (segmentation fault) with Python 3.12+

2024-07-15 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112520 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- As noted by Xi struct layouts have changed in Python 3.12. If I understand the plugin correctly, then it should actually track those values. In order to do so an implementation would need to

[Bug modula2/115823] Wrong expansion of isnormal optab

2024-07-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115823 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I probably missed something but shouldn't FoldBuiltinFunction emit a call to __builtin_isnormal whereas currently after gimplification we end up with: _T50 = isnormal (1.0e+0);

[Bug modula2/115823] Wrong expansion of isnormal optab

2024-07-11 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115823 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |--- Status|RE

[Bug rtl-optimization/115860] New: Register pairs and regrename

2024-07-10 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115860 Bug ID: 115860 Summary: Register pairs and regrename Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/115835] [15 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/s390/section-anchors.c since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-07-09 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115835 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 58615 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58615&action=edit late_combine2

[Bug rtl-optimization/115835] [15 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/s390/section-anchors.c since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-07-09 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115835 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 58614 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58614&action=edit late_combine1

[Bug rtl-optimization/115835] New: [15 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/s390/section-anchors.c since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-07-09 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115835 Bug ID: 115835 Summary: [15 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/s390/section-anchors.c since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e Product: gcc Version: unknown Status:

[Bug modula2/115823] New: Wrong expansion of isnormal optab

2024-07-07 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115823 Bug ID: 115823 Summary: Wrong expansion of isnormal optab Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: modula2

[Bug modula2/115804] ICE during gimplification with new isfinite optab

2024-07-07 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115804 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I did a quick test and with diff --git a/gcc/m2/gm2-gcc/m2builtins.cc b/gcc/m2/gm2-gcc/m2builtins.cc index cfb4751e15a..4263a4e297f 100644 --- a/gcc/m2/gm2-gcc/m2builtins.cc +++ b/gcc/m2/gm2-

[Bug modula2/115804] ICE during gimplification with new isfinite optab

2024-07-06 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115804 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Breakpoint 12, gimplify_stmt (stmt_p=0x3fff76306c0, seq_p=0x3ff7f50) at /devel/src/gcc/gimplify.cc:7590 7590 last = gimple_seq_last (*seq_p); (gdb) call debug(*stmt_p) { a = 1.0e+0;

[Bug modula2/115804] ICE during gimplification with new isfinite optab

2024-07-05 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115804 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 58596 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58596&action=edit New optab isfinitedf2 for s390

[Bug modula2/115804] New: ICE during gimplification with new isfinite optab

2024-07-05 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115804 Bug ID: 115804 Summary: ICE during gimplification with new isfinite optab Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug target/115634] [15 regression] s390 bootstrap failure since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-06-27 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115634 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|

[Bug target/115634] [15 regression] s390 bootstrap failure since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-06-26 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115634 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Sent a slightly adapted patch https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/655705.html Thanks for your quick help in fixing this. Very much appreciated!

[Bug target/115634] [15 regression] s390 bootstrap failure since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-06-26 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115634 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I gave if (op && (!REG_P (op) || (reload_completed && HARD_REGISTER_P (op) && REGNO_REG_CLASS (REGNO (op)) != ADDR_REGS))) return false; a quick tr

[Bug rtl-optimization/115634] New: s390 bootstrap failure since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e

2024-06-25 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115634 Bug ID: 115634 Summary: s390 bootstrap failure since r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Co

[Bug target/115519] s390 fallout from removing vcond{,u,eq} patterns

2024-06-24 Thread stefansf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115519 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- The failing autovec-long-double-signaling-*.c tests stem from the fact that vcond_mask_mn is not implemented for V1TF which can be easily done by simply switching to VT mode iterator and exten

  1   2   >