https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51515
SztfG at yandex dot ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||SztfG at yandex dot ru
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81514
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
> Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01858.html
I've included the patch in this weekend's Solaris bootstraps and the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81614
Bug ID: 81614
Summary: x86 optimizer combines results of comparisons in a way
that risks partial register stalls
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80929
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 41861
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41861&action=edit
time-i.c: C test case
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Fixed?
No. The attached test case
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71870
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80929
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78449
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71996
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70502
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55976
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81570
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Sun Jul 30 14:10:32 2017
New Revision: 250721
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250721&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Update INCOMING_FRAME_SP_OFFSET for exception handler
Since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79793
--- Comment #19 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Sun Jul 30 14:10:32 2017
New Revision: 250721
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250721&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Update INCOMING_FRAME_SP_OFFSET for exception handler
Since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79793
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77328
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81614
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
Bug ID: 81615
Summary: save-temps and gfortran produces *.f90 files instead
of *.i or *i90 files
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79964
--- Comment #5 from PeteVine ---
Turns out the GCC 8 regression is caused by the +crc switch in
-march=armv8-a+crc. Interesting, eh?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
Bug ID: 81616
Summary: Update -mtune=generic for the current Intel and AMD
processors
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69389
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
%edx, %edi
sete%al
cmpl%esi, %edx
sete%dl
orb %dl, %al
movzbl %al, %eax
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE1:
.size bar, .-bar
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 8.0.0 20170730 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cody at codygray dot com
--- Comment #1 from H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64619
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81354
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
This is likely the same as another problem that recently came up (not yet filed
as the source is sensitive). SLSR is sensitive to addresses of PHI
instructions remaining the same throughout the pass, but gimp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81617
Bug ID: 81617
Summary: mksigtab.sh fails to resolve NSIG with glibc 2.26
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81614
--- Comment #3 from Cody Gray ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #1)
> Partial register stalls were discussed many times in the past, but
> apparently the compiler still produces fastest code when partial register
> stalls are enabled on l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 41862
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41862&action=edit
Patch that implements naked attribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81618
Bug ID: 81618
Summary: Warn for unused functions declared in local scope
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
--- Comment #14 from Uroš Bizjak ---
I'm testing the above patch. Using the patched compiler, the testcase that is
mentioned by Daniel in Comment #12 can be changed to:
Index: testsuite/gcc.target/x86_64/abi/ms-sysv/ms-sysv.c
===
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81587
--- Comment #5 from Jonny Grant ---
Thank you Martin, I raised Bug #81618
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81354
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt ---
OK, I've now confirmed this is the problem. I have a rough patch for trunk,
and backporting it to GCC 5 r236439 verifies that this fixes it. Still
verifying bootstrap/regression on trunk, and need to do some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
So what's the right way to fix this? To move optimize_bit_field_compare() from
fold_binary to match.pd so that the conditions on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81601
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #5)
> So what's the right way to fix this? To move optimize_bit_field_compare()
> from fold_binary to match.pd so that the conditions on
... so that conditions on tp-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
--- Comment #15 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Please also note this description from the gcc docs:
'naked'
This attribute allows the compiler to construct the requisite
function declaration, while allowing the body of the function to be
as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79964
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to PeteVine from comment #5)
> Turns out the GCC 8 regression is caused by the +crc switch in
> -march=armv8-a+crc. Interesting, eh?
+crc should not cause any code generation difference ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81614
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81614
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Cody Gray from comment #3)
> > Also, it is hard to confirm tuning PRs without hard benchmark data.
>
> No, it really isn't. I know that's a canned response, likely brought about
> by hard-won exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61939
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81619
Bug ID: 81619
Summary: pairs of mmap/munmap do not reset asan's
user-poisoning flags, leading to invalid error reports
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81619
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Villeneuve ---
Created attachment 41864
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41864&action=edit
Makefile to build program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81619
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Villeneuve ---
Created attachment 41865
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41865&action=edit
shell script to invoke program in different configurations
--disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.0 20170730 (experimental) [trunk revision 250721] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
during GIMPLE pass: pcom
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:3:5: internal compiler error: in is_inv_store_elimination_chain, at
tree-predcom.c:1651
int main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81619
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
This might be a bug in the upstream sources too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81619
Daniel Villeneuve changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41863|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81620
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43887
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79964
--- Comment #7 from PeteVine ---
Thanks for pointing that out! I was using my bash history to change the CFLAGS
and when I was flipping the crc switch I didn't notice I'd picked a version
without -frename-registers, hence this wrong conclusion :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81602
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Christoph Diegelmann from comment #0)
> GCC misses an optimization on this:
>
> #include
> #include "immintrin.h"
>
> void test(std::uint16_t* mask, std::uint16_t* data) {
> for (int i = 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63710
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78155
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81340
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Black ---
Thankyou Martin.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79010
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70257
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79320
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30552
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2008-12-29 14:22:53 |2017-7-30
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61342
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64042
--- Comment #13 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #12)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #11)
> > Reported upstream here:
> > https://lists.opendylan.org/pipermail/bdwgc/2015-January/006071.html
>
> This link d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64042
--- Comment #14 from Tom de Vries ---
Subject: boehm-gc.c/gctest.c spurious failure
From: tom_devr...@mentor.com
To: bd...@lists.opendylan.org
Date: 01/19/2015 10:09 AM
Hi,
FYI, with gcc trunk on x86_64 Linux, I ran into PR64042: 'FAIL:
boehm-g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64042
--- Comment #15 from Tom de Vries ---
Subject: Re: [Gc] boehm-gc.c/gctest.c spurious failure
From: bo...@acm.org
To: tom_devr...@mentor.com
CC: bd...@lists.opendylan.org
Date: 01/21/2015 09:11 PM
I haven't had a chance to look at this carefully.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81612
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81620
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79586
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81621
Bug ID: 81621
Summary: ICE in delete_insn, at cfgrtl.c:167 with s390x cross
compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
64 matches
Mail list logo
