https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #15 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Wed Sep 13 17:25:49 2017
New Revision: 252557
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252557&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/81931
* tree-ssanames.c (get_nonzero_bits)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #12 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Thu Aug 24 11:42:24 2017
New Revision: 251329
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251329&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Port from mainline:
2017-08-24 Aldy Hernandez
PR middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Thu Aug 24 11:40:55 2017
New Revision: 251328
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251328&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/81931
* tree-ssanames.c (get_nonzero_bits)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #9)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Fixes testcase. Untested otherwise.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssanames.c b/gcc/tree-ssanames.c
> index 676
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> I suppose the idea was to make nonzero_bits foolproof. And -1 being
> sign-extended should be fine... unless precision is 0 ;)
>
> So, in nonzero_bits use TY
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
FWIW, the reason a cross x86-64 to ppc64 doesn't exhibit the problem may be
because
wi::shwi (-1, precision) calls sext_hwi() which eventually shifts left by 64
bits:
int shift = HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #6)
> The problem here is that get_nonzero_bits() is being called with an SSA
> whose precision is 0 (_Complex float). This is causing this code in
> get_nonzero_bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
The problem here is that get_nonzero_bits() is being called with an SSA whose
precision is 0 (_Complex float). This is causing this code in
get_nonzero_bits():
range_info_def *ri = SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO (n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Confirmed with that testcase, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez ---
On gcc110.fsffrance.org, I see gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-1.c failing with
an execution error with a simple stage1 compiler. Perhaps this is a different
problem, but it can be distilled to:
int
main (vo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|other
14 matches
Mail list logo
