https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95401
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #7)
> How important is it that the test added for this PR be split into two
> separate source files?
>
> I ask because, on targets that support vectors, but the vec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99394
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
This is a loop-carried data dependence which we can't handle (we avoid creating
those from PRE but here it appears in the source itself). I wonder how
LLVM handles this (pre/post vectorization IL).
Specifi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99394
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jwakely.gcc at gmail dot com |
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99395
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-05
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #24 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #22)
> That works to avoid the vpinsrq. I guess the case of a mem operand
> behaves similar to a gpr (plus the load uop), at least I don't have any
> contrary evidenc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99397
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99401
Bug ID: 99401
Summary: GCC11 MinGW-w64 32-bit build fails with undefined
reference to `LC0'
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99345
--- Comment #6 from Matthias Klose ---
now at https://people.debian.org/~doko/tmp/espresso-test.tar.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
Bug ID: 99402
Summary: std::copy creates _GLIBCXX_DEBUG false positive for
attempt to subscript a dereferenceable
(start-of-sequence) iterator
Product: gcc
Versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99345
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Thanks, but I can't see where the missing modules come from:
$ gcc postahc.f90 -c
postahc.f90:21:7:
21 | USE kinds, ONLY : DP
| 1
Fatal Error: Cannot open module file ‘kinds.mod’ for r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98810
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99401
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-05
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99345
--- Comment #8 from Matthias Klose ---
updated the tarball to include the Modules dir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:80cf2facbbdafed159b326d83f7cf3999c3df8d0
commit r11-7519-g80cf2facbbdafed159b326d83f7cf3999c3df8d0
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57871
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:80cf2facbbdafed159b326d83f7cf3999c3df8d0
commit r11-7519-g80cf2facbbdafed159b326d83f7cf3999c3df8d0
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, but __digits is one smaller than we want for signed types.
Plus before C++20 the left shifts of negative values are UB?
Maybe all the rotates should be implemented using the corresponding unsigned
types..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
so
using __unsigned_type = __make_unsigned<_Tp>::__type;
constexpr auto _Nd = __gnu_cxx::__int_traits<__unsigned_type>::__digits;
const auto __r = static_cast(__s);
const auto __y = st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99345
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57871
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99312
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99403
Bug ID: 99403
Summary: Add header fix-it hints for std::this_thread::* and
std::jthread
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99216
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
Right, the problem appears to be to do with the way that overloaded functions
are implemented for the ACLE. Specifically the m_direct_overloads flag in
aarch64_sve::function_builder. If this flag is set, we reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #25 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 5 Mar 2021, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
>
> --- Comment #24 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #22)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99404
Bug ID: 99404
Summary: Diagnostics for undeclared members of a namespace
don't say "namespace"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnost
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48396
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99401
--- Comment #2 from Brecht Sanders
---
Created attachment 50302
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50302&action=edit
gcc -v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99137
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6ddedd3efa3fe482f76a4037521a06b3ac9f2a8b
commit r11-7520-g6ddedd3efa3fe482f76a4037521a06b3ac9f2a8b
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #25)
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2021, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
> >
> > --- Comment #24 from Uroš Bizjak --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
As you noted on IRC, these functions are undefined for anything except unsigned
integral types. Adding that here for observers wondering about comments 7 and
8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99312
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> We intend to deprecate that macro going forward as it's not a useful way for
> testing architecture features in aarch64. It made sense in the pre-Armv7-a
> days, but n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99312
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
ODP is one place where this is used:
https://opendataplane.github.io/odp/structodp__system__info__t.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50303|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50304|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99401
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
> gcc -v
No, what's needed is the output for the *base* compiler, i.e. the compiler you
start from, not the compiler you're building.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99312
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99376
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:28354bc22bd66648891a875ee08ca2b27debf2a2
commit r11-7521-g28354bc22bd66648891a875ee08ca2b27debf2a2
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99264
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:331763de7d4850702a0f67298f36017c73cdb103
commit r11-7523-g331763de7d4850702a0f67298f36017c73cdb103
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99216
--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Alex Coplan from comment #4)
> Right, the problem appears to be to do with the way that overloaded
> functions are implemented for the ACLE. Specifically the m_direct_overloads
> f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99264
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c85c24099b28f7af907466af2c1b73da9455368c
commit r10-9417-gc85c24099b28f7af907466af2c1b73da9455368c
Author: Eric Botcazou
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99264
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5a7cdcaa0c29ee547c41d24f495e9694a6fe7f1
commit r9-9267-ga5a7cdcaa0c29ee547c41d24f495e9694a6fe7f1
Author: Eric Botcazou
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99376
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 99376, which changed state.
Bug 99376 Summary: sanitizer detects undefined behaviour in rtlanal.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99376
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #27 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #26)
> but that doesn't seem to match for some unknown reason.
Try this:
(define_peephole2
[(match_scratch:DI 5 "Yv")
(set (match_operand:DI 0 "sse_reg_operand")
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99264
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> Created attachment 50305 [details]
> gcc11-pr99396.patch
>
> Some further tweaks based on IRC discussions.
shouldn't this be
if constexpr ((_Nd & (_Nd - 1)) == 0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I believe std::__rot{l,r} can be used even in C++14 and if constexpr is only
supported in C++17 and later.
With optimizations enabled (_Nd & (_Nd - 1)) == 0 will optimize into constant
anyway.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97927
--- Comment #10 from Matthias Klose ---
seen again with 20210227
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Could be if _GLIBCXX17_CONSTEXPR (...)
sure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #16 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> Could be if _GLIBCXX17_CONSTEXPR (...)
> sure.
bit header is a new C++20 header. There is no reason the compiler does not
support if constexpr.
If you compile it w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #17 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #16)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> > Could be if _GLIBCXX17_CONSTEXPR (...)
> > sure.
>
> bit header is a new C++20 header. There is no reason the compiler d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99396
--- Comment #18 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #17)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> > > Could be if _GLIBCXX17_CONSTEXPR (...)
> > > sure.
> >
> > bit header is a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99216
--- Comment #6 from Alex Coplan ---
Ok, I'll have a go, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #28 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #27)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #26)
> > but that doesn't seem to match for some unknown reason.
> Try this:
The latency problem with the original testca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #29 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #27)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #26)
> > but that doesn't seem to match for some unknown reason.
>
> Try this:
>
> (define_peephole2
> [(match_scrat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Kip Warner from comment #0)
> // This results in memory corruption, or an abort with STL debugging
I don't see any memory corruption, I think it's just a bug in the Debug Mode
checks, whic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
François, this can't be right:
return std::make_pair(-__seq_dist.first,
__seq_dist.second == __dp_exact
? __dp_sign_max_size : __se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99405
Bug ID: 99405
Summary: Rotate with mask not optimized on x86 for QI/HImode
rotates
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99401
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Summary|GCC11 MinGW-w64 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This causes __valid_range to return {11, __dp_sign_max_size} and then we check
__result._M_can_advance(11) which fails.
We don't want to advance the result by the size of the other sequence, only by
distan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99405
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99401
--- Comment #5 from Brecht Sanders
---
*** Bug 97618 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97618
Brecht Sanders changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #29)
> I suppose the reason is that there's two unrelated insns between the
> xmm0 = cx:DI and the vec_concat. Which would hint that we somehow
> need to not match t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99401
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #31 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #29)
> The simplified variant below works but IMHO matches cases we do not
> want to transform. I can't find any example on how to achieve that
> though.
I think that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #32 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 5 Mar 2021, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
>
> --- Comment #31 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #29)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> You should be using __base_dist.second, no?
No, it's not that simple. I don't understand how this code is meant to work,
but this can't be right:
if (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99405
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Created attachment 50306 [details]
> gcc11-pr99405.patch
>
> Untested fix.
- (match_operand:SI 2 "register_operand" "c")
+ (match_operand:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
#include
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int main()
{
// any container with non-random access iterators:
const set source = { 0, 1 };
vector dest(1);
copy(source.begin(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99405
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50306|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #33 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 50308
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50308&action=edit
patch
I am testing the following.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #34 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #32)
> what about reload_completed? We really only want to do this after RA.
No need for it, this is peephole2 pass that *always* runs after reload.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99389
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4d66685e49d20e0c7a87c5fa0757c7eb63ffcdaa
commit r11-7524-g4d66685e49d20e0c7a87c5fa0757c7eb63ffcdaa
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99406
Bug ID: 99406
Summary: [11 regression] MAP_ANONYMOUS undeclared in libgcov.h
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99389
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99406
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99406
--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> The unconditional use of MAP_ANONYMOUS in libgcov.h broke Mac OS X
> 10.7/Darwin 11
> bootstrap:
>
> In file included from
> /vol/gcc/src/hg/master/darwin/libgcc/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99406
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99406
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
Eve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99406
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 50309
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50309&action=edit
gcc11-pr99406.patch
Like this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97927
--- Comment #11 from Matthias Klose ---
20210227 trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97927
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #10)
> seen again with 20210227
I tried it with the attached file and the build.sh but calling gfortran
directly w/o mpif90 wrapper.
That's with --enable-checking=y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99394
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
testcase is:
typedef float real_t;
#define iterations 10
#define LEN_1D 32000
#define LEN_2D 256
// array definitions
real_t flat_2d_array[LEN_2D*LEN_2D];
real_t x[LEN_1D];
real_t a[LEN_1D],b[LEN_1D],c[
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99407
Bug ID: 99407
Summary: s243 benchmark of TSVC is vectorized by clang and not
by gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98810
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
It probably needs target c++2a instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98092
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Any progress on this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99407
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Here we get:
s243.c:27:18: missed: not vectorized, possible dependence between data-refs
a[i_29] and a[_9]
s243.c:26:27: missed: bad data dependence.
s243.c:26:27: note: * Analysis failed with vector mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99408
Bug ID: 99408
Summary: s3251 benchmark of TSVC vectorized by clang runs about
7 times faster compared to gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99409
Bug ID: 99409
Summary: s252 benchmark of TSVC is vectorized by clang and not
by gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122
--- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a patch for the IPA-CP part on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/566333.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99411
Bug ID: 99411
Summary: s311 benchmark of TSVC is vectorized by clang better
than by gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99410
Bug ID: 99410
Summary: Nios II Error: branch offset out of range
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98856
--- Comment #35 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #33)
> Created attachment 50308 [details]
> patch
>
> I am testing the following.
It FAILs
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512dq-concatv2di-1.c scan-assembler
vpinsrq[^\
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99411
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|s311 benchmark of TSVC is |s311 and s3 benchmark
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99411
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|s311 and s3 benchmark |s311, s312 and s3
|o
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
