[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-27 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Jan 27 11:40:04 2016 New Revision: 232869 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232869&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/69399 * wide-int.h (wi::lrshift): Fo

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-26 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.4

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-26 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|DUPLICATE

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-25 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 --- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu --- A patch is posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01780.html

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-25 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 --- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5) > wide-int.h has > if (STATIC_CONSTANT_P (xi.precision > HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) > ^^^ > > This is misco

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-21 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-21 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #6) > HJL, wrong duplicate? I don't think so.

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-21 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-21 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-21 Thread trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128

2016-01-21 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128 (due to ccp?)

2016-01-21 Thread zsojka at seznam dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 --- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1) > It works fine with x32 on trunk: > > [hjl@gnu-6 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./ -O /tmp/x.c > [hjl@gnu-6 gcc]$ ./a.out > [hjl@gnu-6 gcc]$ file ./a.out > ./a.out: ELF 32-bit LSB exe

[Bug tree-optimization/69399] [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O and int128 (due to ccp?)

2016-01-20 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69399 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|