http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist 2012-05-18 06:43:08
UTC ---
AFAICS, this is an intentional change in behavior. When I proposed making
backtracing enabled by default, there was some objections to the initial patch
on the grounds that the backt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-05-18
07:35:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> AFAICS, this is an intentional change in behavior. When I proposed making
> backtracing enabled by default, there was some objections to the initial patch
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53389
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
=/usr/local/lib64 CFLAGS='-O2
-ftree-vectorize -fPIC' CXXFLAGS='-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize
-fvisibility-inlines-hidden -march=native' -enable-libitm -disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) [trunk revision 187647] (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53391
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-18
08:24:40 UTC ---
So I think you could do:
case 'W':
/* MB value for a PowerPC64 rldic operand. */
i = clz_hwi (GET_CODE (x) == CONST_INT
? INTVAL (x) : CONST_DOUBLE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53352
--- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-18 09:04:47 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri May 18 09:04:38 2012
New Revision: 187648
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187648
Log:
gcc/
2012-05-15 Meador Inge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53378
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49616
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |target
--- Comment #11 from Richard Gu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53394
Bug #: 53394
Summary: Stage2 does not pass CFLAGS or LDFLAGS
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53383
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53396
Bug #: 53396
Summary: [4.8 Regression] revision 187631 breaks bootstrap on
x86_64-apple-darwin10
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53381
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53390
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86-32 |i?86-*-*
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
Bug #: 53395
Summary: [4.8 Regression] The LAPACK functions i(d|s)amax are
more than two times slower after revision 187183
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53381
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53393
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53373
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53366
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-18
10:36:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Indeed,
>
> --- gcc/tree-vect-slp.c.jj2012-04-19 11:09:13.0 +0200
> +++ gcc/tree-vect-slp.c2012-05-17 10:47:30.124290361 +0200
> @@ -1199
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53396
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53373
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincenzo.innocente at cern
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53396
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-05-18
11:24:06 UTC ---
The assembly code for -O3 is almost the same for revisions 187182 and 187183.
However with '-O3 -ffast-math', revision 187182 gives for the loop
L12:
movapd%xmm2, %xmm1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53383
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53397
Bug #: 53397
Summary: Scimark performance drops by 10x times when compiled
-O3 -march=amdfam10 due to generation more prefecthes
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53397
Venkataramanan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53390
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-18
12:09:55 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 18 12:09:49 2012
New Revision: 187653
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187653
Log:
2012-05-18 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53390
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53397
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53378
--- Comment #4 from rbmj at verizon dot net 2012-05-18 12:16:29 UTC ---
The issue is that this is affecting a system header (ioLib.h) which is included
from other, standard header files.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53355
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-18
12:32:11 UTC ---
The following testcase (extracted from PR53346, which stores zero though) shows
another case of slowness
void foo (int *p, int n)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < n; ++i)
p[i] = 1;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53399
Bug #: 53399
Summary: "*ffs" pattern generates wrong code with BMI enabled
(for corner cases)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53399
--- Comment #1 from Yukhin Kirill 2012-05-18
13:58:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> It also seems to fail gcc.c-torture/execute/builtin-bitops-1.c
It fails on BMI-capable CPU
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #19 from jimis 2012-05-18 12:46:43 UTC ---
Defining _GTHREAD_USE_MUTEX_INIT_FUNC in os/gnu-linx/os_defines.h didn't help.
See attached files for new error message and preprocessed source.
Also keep in mind that gcc61 shows some stran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53396
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #21 from jimis 2012-05-18 12:48:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 27432
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27432
preprocessed source after defining _GTHREAD_USE_MUTEX_INIT_FUNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53373
--- Comment #5 from Stupachenko Evgeny 2012-05-18
13:56:56 UTC ---
14 spec2006 tests also fail after the commit 187459,
(compiled with -O2 -march=corei7 -mtune=corei7 -mavx -m64)
However without -mavx they pass.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
--- Comment #12 from William J. Schmidt
2012-05-18 14:05:06 UTC ---
Created attachment 27433
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27433
Tentative patch
Tentative patch following Jakub's suggestion. This fixes bootstrap. Pending
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53398
Bug #: 53398
Summary: feature request: option for overloaded methods order
in vtable compatibility with msc
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #20 from jimis 2012-05-18 12:48:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 27431
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27431
guard.cc error after defining _GTHREAD_USE_MUTEX_INIT_FUNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53352
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-18 14:16:46
UTC ---
The test fails on Linux/x86 and Linux/x86-64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53399
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-18 14:28:40
UTC ---
This should be ok since the 0 input operand is ignored.
If not, please find out why.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-18
13:10:11 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 18 13:10:01 2012
New Revision: 187655
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187655
Log:
2012-05-18 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53399
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-18 14:31:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> It also seems to fail gcc.c-torture/execute/builtin-bitops-1.c
Can you please isolate failing test?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379
--- Comment #4 from Janne Blomqvist 2012-05-18 14:32:54
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > AFAICS, this is an intentional change in behavior. When I proposed making
> > backtracing enabled by default, there was some o
685 0.00 0.00 invima.2045
1.93 21.39 0.43 64 0.01 0.01 cptrf1_
1.17 21.65 0.261 0.2612.36 matsim_
0.99 21.87 0.22 64 0.00 0.00 cmpcpt_
GNU Fortran (GCC) version 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) [trunk revision 187655]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-05-18
14:49:22 UTC ---
> Unfortunately, the loop in original rnflow test still gets vectorized, with no
> change in the runtime:
Confirmed, at revision 187655 I still get
-O2 21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53400
Bug #: 53400
Summary: java build failure with NullPointerException
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379
--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf 2012-05-18 15:02:07
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > FWIW, if it is decided to change this, one could also consider changing
> > runtime_error() and internal_error() in the same way
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51071
pageexec at freemail dot hu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pageexec at freemail dot hu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53384
--- Comment #4 from John T 2012-05-18 15:07:48 UTC
---
This bug was actually two bugs, the checksum error and the erroneous handling
of the gcc used in fixincludes/config.cache
I found another way to trip the error involving config.cache. After
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #10 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-18 15:11:53
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > Fixed.
>
> Unfortunately, the loop in original rnflow test still gets vectorized, with no
> change in the runtime:
With -O2 -ft
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53394
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-18
15:13:05 UTC ---
Use BOOT_CFLAGS and BOOT_LDFLAGS. And Maybe even BOOT_CXXFLAGS and CXXFLAGS.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Component|mi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53383
--- Comment #7 from H. Peter Anvin 2012-05-18 15:23:05
UTC ---
We can't use the SSE parts of the ABI anyway in the kernel, and I sure hope
that -mno-sse (or perhaps -mcmodel=kernel, but that would be ugly) prevents
those from being generated.
Ye
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53401
Bug #: 53401
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault on
infinite argument deduction of constexpr templates
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #11 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-18 16:04:46
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Uneducated guess: is it possible that failed attempts to vectorize may mess up
> further optimizations?
You are right. -ftree-vectorize implies -ftree-loop-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-18
16:31:58 UTC ---
(I'll be back from holiday on tuesday and able to work on this properly then,
including adding a configure check to define the macros automatically when
required)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-18 16:07:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> You are right. -ftree-vectorize implies -ftree-loop-if-convert and this option
> makes all the difference!
>
> -O2 -ftree-vectorize:
>
> real0m24.061s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53389
--- Comment #2 from Stephan Kramer
2012-05-18 15:27:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Confirmed.
>
> Workaround is to use -fno-realloc-lhs
Excellent. Thanks for the suggested workaround. That'll save us a lot of
unnecessary refactoring.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53405
Bug #: 53405
Summary: Enum-dependent class template instantiations not
recognized
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53386
--- Comment #13 from Luis Alves 2012-05-18 17:00:11
UTC ---
I've built gcc with the m68k/linux.h patched for the 68000 but it's not working
as expected.
As test I've used linux kernel 3.3
Results are compared to the use of gcc-4.2.4 vs gcc-4.6.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53403
Ignacy Gawedzki changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #25 from jimis 2012-05-18 17:17:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 27436
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27436
log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-18
16:30:54 UTC ---
The new error is in the recursive mutex definition. You also need to define
_GTHREAD_USE_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT_FUNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-18
16:03:46 UTC ---
This should fix tree-if-conv.c:
Index: tree-if-conv.c
===
--- tree-if-conv.c(revision 187647)
+++ tree-if-conv.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #26 from jimis 2012-05-18 17:17:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 27437
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27437
preprocessed source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53404
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |preprocessor
--- Comment #1 from Andi Kleen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53270
--- Comment #24 from jimis 2012-05-18 17:16:08 UTC ---
Thanks, I'll leave that to you then since it's no big priority for me.
FYI defining _GTHREAD_USE_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT_FUNC brought other problems. I'm
attaching related info for the sake of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53404
Bug #: 53404
Summary: warning column reported on comment in warning during
bootstrap
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
William J. Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53389
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-05-18
17:05:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> x=filler(filler(y, real(2*i)), real(i))
That line should call "filler" twice, however, it is called trice! There are
two "atmps" - on the second is prop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-05-18
17:41:21 UTC ---
> This should fix tree-if-conv.c:
It does. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53403
Bug #: 53403
Summary: Function template friend denied access to private
types of granting template class.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53402
Bug #: 53402
Summary: [C++11] non-inline namespace can be wrongly re-opened
as inline
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #13 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-18 17:08:08
UTC ---
Created attachment 27435
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27435
slow x86_64 assembly, obtained with -O2 -ftree-loop-if-convert
This is the slow assembly, stay tuned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53395
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53406
Bug #: 53406
Summary: Unit Record not present in header files or in GCOV
output
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53406
--- Comment #1 from Myron Walker 2012-05-18
17:53:18 UTC ---
Created attachment 27438
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27438
Sample GCDA file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53406
--- Comment #2 from Myron Walker 2012-05-18
17:54:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 27439
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27439
Sample GCNO file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-18
17:54:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Compile and execute slow assembly:
> real0m18.170s
> user0m17.907s
> sys 0m0.223s
>
> WTF happened here?!
Are conditional moves that bad on x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53406
--- Comment #3 from Myron Walker 2012-05-18
17:54:49 UTC ---
Added example GCDA and GCNO files
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53406
Myron Walker changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.6.1 |4.2.0
--- Comment #4 from Myron Walker 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53407
Bug #: 53407
Summary: ICE compiling pcre-8.21 in
function_and_variable_visibility, at ipa.c:1002
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #16 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-18 18:24:43
UTC ---
Perf confirms this findings, the first loop:
0.02 : 401e10: movslq %edx,%rbx
5.04 : 401e13: movss -0x4(%rdi,%rbx,4),%xmm0
24.97 : 401
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53391
--- Comment #2 from Keith Thompson
2012-05-18 18:26:31 UTC ---
The cleverness I was referring to was having diagnostics refer to an
appropriate typedef rather than to the original type (e.g., "size_t" rather
than "unsigned int"). I find this cle
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-18 18:27:21
UTC ---
I was told that cmov wins if branch is mispredicted, otherwise
cmov loses. We will investigate if we can improve cmov in GCC.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53403
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres
2012-05-18 18:29:06 UTC ---
> Are conditional moves that bad on x86? The change which uses them more for
> COND_EXPR was mine but really I think this was a latent bug or a way to say
> chose conditional
/gcc-r187663-install
--program-prefix=r187663- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) (GCC)
[regehr@dyson r50]$ current-gcc -Wall -O3 small.c
small.c: In function 'main':
small.c:4:1: internal compiler error: vector VEC(vec_void_p,base) in
-prefix=r187663- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) (GCC)
[regehr@dyson r48]$ current-gcc -c -O3 small.c
small.c: In function 'fn1':
small.c:3:1: internal compiler error: in get_initial_def_for_induction, at
tree-vect-loop.c:3222
fn1 ()
++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) (GCC)
[regehr@dyson r51]$ current-gcc -c -O3 small.c
small.c: In function 'fn1':
small.c:4:1: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1219
fn1 ()
^
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53405
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
