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
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.
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
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
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
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117725
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resoluti
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
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
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117095
--- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Bootstrap and regtest are successful on s390.
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
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112274
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resoluti
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
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115860
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resoluti
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
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
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
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]))
(
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
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
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
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 :)
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
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
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
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
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113953
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resoluti
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #9 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
FYI: bootstrap is restored with the patch. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
(In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #3)
> Created attachment 58936 [details]
> Dump from r15-2890
Ups, I actually meant "Dump from r15-2889" of course.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Created attachment 58937
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58937&action=edit
Dump from r15-2890 with r15-2903
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Created attachment 58936
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58936&action=edit
Dump from r15-2890
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
--- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Finally a more manageable reproducer:
long x = -0x7fff - 1;
int main (void)
{
long y = x % (-0xf - 1);
if (-0x7fff - 1 + y == x == 0)
__builtin_abort ();
}
If compiled with -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111821
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stefansf at gcc dot gnu.or
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!
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
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!
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
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
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
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);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115823
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RE
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
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
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
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:
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
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-
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;
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
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115634
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|
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!
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
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
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115519
--- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Just saw on the ML that a match.pd fix already exists
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/655484.html
A quick test shows that this fixes vcond-shift.c where we now emit
((i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115261
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115519
--- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
For example, for function vesrlf_ge from vcond-shift.c we do not end up with
vl %v2,0(%r2),3
vl %v0,16(%r2),3
lgr %r1,%r2
vesrlf %v4,%v2,31
vesrlf %v6,%v0,31
vst %v4,0(%r1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115519
Bug ID: 115519
Summary: s390 fallout from removing vcond{,u,eq} patterns
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85559
Bug 85559 depends on bug 109549, which changed state.
Bug 109549 Summary: [14/15 Regression] Conditional move regressions after
r14-53-g675b1a7f113adb1d737adaf78b4fd90be7a0ed1a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
--- Comment #21 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Fixed for GCC 14 and 15 for s390.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115261
--- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Thanks for the pointer. Indeed, adding an extendv2siv2di pattern solves this
and the code looks optimal then. I will come up with a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115261
Bug ID: 115261
Summary: FAIL: gcc.target/s390/vector/vec-abi-vararg-1.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110490
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110490
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stefansf at gcc dot gnu.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114432
--- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Ignore the previous comment. With -fstack-check and -mbackchain we have for
trace 2 an incoming edge from trace 1 (fallthrough) where
cur_trace->end_true_args_size == 48 and from further inco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114802
Bug ID: 114802
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-40.c and forwprop-41.c
on s390
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114432
--- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Created attachment 57971
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57971&action=edit
dwarf2cfi dump for alog-active_logger.adb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114432
--- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Fails for function alog.active_logger.logging_taskT and trace 2 whose heads are
(gdb) call debug(ti->head)
(code_label 48 573 49 152 (nil) [2 uses])
(gdb) call debug(ti->eh_head)
(insn 57 76
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114432
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-4-17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678
--- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Ok, done in https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-April/649367.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678
--- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
Thanks for the pointer. I can confirm that the patch fixes this PR and also
fixes
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp-float-abs-1.c scan-tree-dump-not evrp "link_error"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114678
Bug ID: 114678
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/range-sincos.c
scan-tree-dump-not evrp "link_error" on s390
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |stefansf at gcc dot
82 matches
Mail list logo
