https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93433
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Roland Illig from comment #4)
> Reported as https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93433
>
Hello.
You probably posted a wrong link. I would expect one to LLVM bugzilla.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93444
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93369
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Even the git gcc-descr --full output can be shortened, use fewer sha digits if
you want, and the non---full output is something meant for the subjects,
r10-1234 is unique, will be redirected to the right comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93451
Bug ID: 93451
Summary: ICE: qsort checking failed (error: qsort comparator
non-negative on sorted output: 0)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93369
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Even the git gcc-descr --full output can be shortened, use fewer sha digits
I will then shorten it.
> if you want, and the non---full output is something meant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93444
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> With -O3 -ftree-vectorize -ftree-loop-vectorize I see it started is
> somewhere in between:
>
> r6-3810-g170f473b525d0af69dc4577186762a3519b952a4
> and
> r6-3731-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93219
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93369
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #10)
> > if you want, and the non---full output is something meant for the subjects,
> > r10-1234 is unique,
>
> ... but not a git approach (the hash is missing and on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93450
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85781
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:86075aa5dd0b1ed3f6c9c67d0d3058c6c5c19d65
commit r10-6240-g86075aa5dd0b1ed3f6c9c67d0d3058c6c5c19d65
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71727
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93397
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Guenther :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1442bc31da61a7f6c7d7c526e0449cfd9a917cd5
commit r10-6241-g1442bc31da61a7f6c7d7c526e0449cfd9a917cd5
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93397
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91927
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93442
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93442
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92924
--- Comment #18 from Martin Liška ---
I've got more detailed stats for current GCC master with 4 TOPN counters
(default) and 8 TOPN counters:
$ gcov-dump-analysis.py gcc-4 4
== Stats for gcc-4 ==
stats for indirect_call:
total: 9210 freq: 5945
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92822
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93274
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2bd2b4664be8b73f8fd58a64dec1e93871797cc
commit r10-6242-gc2bd2b4664be8b73f8fd58a64dec1e93871797cc
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93274
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, ch3root at openwall dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
>
> --- Comment #4 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, ch3root at openwall dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
>
> --- Comment #5 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93439
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
>
> Alexander Monakov changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93439
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.4
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91220
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e97a3063fb1936d6c36eeea720134d5675f73091
commit r10-6244-ge97a3063fb1936d6c36eeea720134d5675f73091
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92822
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #5)
> I think this is mostly a target problem. We weren't providing
> patterns to extract a 64-bit vector from a 128-bit vector,
> despite that being very much
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93451
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93450
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91220
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93438
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93446
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93435
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93445
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93435
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93435
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alan.lawrence at arm dot com
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93401
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Component|tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93402
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93435
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I guess the main problem is that SRA turns those ~ 100 statements into ~35
statements and e.g. tree DSE then hangs on that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93380
--- Comment #2 from Robert Dumitru
---
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for your pointing out that. I will report the issue to ARM as well.
However, regarding 1 and 2:
1. I understand this looks like a gdb bug, but my investigation pointed me to
conside
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93426
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86487
--- Comment #15 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Jeff seems to have backported this to gcc-8 already, so I guess we can close
this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87763
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93434
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93404
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93407
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93409
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||gcn
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93411
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93416
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92989
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e648e57efca6ce6d751ef8c2038608817b514fb4
commit r10-6247-ge648e57efca6ce6d751ef8c2038608817b514fb4
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93170
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:150760dd6dd1899705790183d646fa5fc004554e
commit r10-6246-g150760dd6dd1899705790183d646fa5fc004554e
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93426
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:389cd88ce797e2a4345eab8db478a3b8eba798e8
commit r10-6248-g389cd88ce797e2a4345eab8db478a3b8eba798e8
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93439
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'd say the bug is that we parallelize a loop (loop 7) which has two inner
loops (loop 10 and loop 8) and then have some code to avoid trying to
parallelize inner loops of the already parallelized loop, but t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93426
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93418
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93418
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'll have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93428
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93432
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93431
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93429
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93428
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93432
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
The one involving constants and PHIs. The (late) uninit warning is too late to
catch this since we optimized the uninit use away. We probably diagnose
it if you initialize z from a function parameter rathe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93427
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93425
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93424
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93423
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93422
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93420
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93435
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93409
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93407
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93416
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93436
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93404
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93327
--- Comment #2 from Chen Ming ---
Sorry for my late response. I'll confirm and update the compiler options here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93439
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93452
Bug ID: 93452
Summary: [10 Regression] __has_include changes broke
compilation of -fdirectives-only preprocessed sources
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93440
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93426
--- Comment #4 from merukun1125 at docomo dot ne.jp ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93444
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93432
--- Comment #3 from Sven ---
I'm not sure how you optimize the uninit use away. When running the example,
the first printf typically yields a random value. So the uninitialized value is
certainly used as a return value.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93452
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93325
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
In general we can't use link tests in configure, for reasons related to
cross-compilers that I don't understand. But I think link tests should always
work for linux* targets, and to be extra cautious we can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93452
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r10-6092-gad1a3914ae8d67c94b0d2428e3f9672e7db491a1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93325
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> In general we can't use link tests in configure, for reasons related to
> cross-compilers that I don't understand.
As far as I can tell, that's only relevant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93444
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
The problem is lifting a conditional access. We don't have an example where
lifting an invariant from an always-executed block in a loop to its preheader
poses a problem.
LLVM adopted an approach where h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93453
Bug ID: 93453
Summary: PPC: rldimi not taken into account to avoid shift+or
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92692
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a708cb25d9284e9234b6457f8260bfc79f09043e
commit r9-8180-ga708cb25d9284e9234b6457f8260bfc79f09043e
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93444
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020, amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93444
>
> --- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
> The problem is lifting a conditional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89215
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91118
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91117
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91028
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91023
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93272
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47656|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91037
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91013
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91015
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91018
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 291 matches
Mail list logo