https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68655
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87077
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Just to quote, with the inner loop forced not unrolled we get
[local count: 53687093]:
vect__1.11_14 = MEM [(float *)mtx_12(D)];
vect__2.14_15 = MEM [(float *)vec_13(D)];
vect__3.15_21 = vect__1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101728
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101729
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101730
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101742
Bug ID: 101742
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in expand_mult, at expmed.c:3585
since r12-2666-g29f0e955c97da002
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101742
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-03
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101743
Bug ID: 101743
Summary: [12 Regression] Error: insn does not satisfy its
constraints since r12-2640-gf7bf03cf69ccb7dc
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101743
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79938
--- Comment #5 from postmaster at raasu dot org ---
My brains think it's basically four shuffles and three vector additions. It's
part of vectorized adler32 implementation, so there is real-life use for the
optimization.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101743
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101744
Bug ID: 101744
Summary: [12 regression] hwasan new failures since r12-2424
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101745
Bug ID: 101745
Summary: [12 regression] hwasan new failures since r12-2424
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101701
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101745
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101744
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
*** Bug 101745 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94566
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101696
--- Comment #2 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
What do you mean with "It doesn't work this way"?
Maybe I wasn't clear in my original post; I am not interested in a dispatching
mechanism for the application, I just want to have an mini-application th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94566
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #3)
> I thought we had code to recognize a switch that represents a linear
> function, I was hoping that it would kick in with your hoisting patch...
Yep, we have the cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94566
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101746
Bug ID: 101746
Summary: [12 regression] gcc.dg/tree-prof/20050826-2.c and
gcc.dg/uninit-pred-9_b.c fail since r12-2591
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101746
--- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon ---
In addition on arm:
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C:148:3: warning: 'void*
__builtin_memcp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101746
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101690
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
See discussion upstream on this subject:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/576390.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101746
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #1)
> In addition on arm:
>
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess
> errors)
> Excess errors:
> /gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Ws
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101721
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a830c0636472e47a7503a5ed879725149e2e728
commit r12-2685-g1a830c0636472e47a7503a5ed879725149e2e728
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101744
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101746
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101743
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101721
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101696
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101740
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:759f3854f0fdb4add2961bfafd1ee793f392f70a
commit r12-2686-g759f3854f0fdb4add2961bfafd1ee793f392f70a
Author: Mosè Giordano
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101696
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101741
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101730
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101741
--- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> why is the test-case marked as "invalid"?
It is definitely well-formed syntactically, but I'm not sure how to classify a
case of redefining a standard function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101747
Bug ID: 101747
Summary: Two-argument version of attribute malloc does not
perform overload resolution
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101737
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101726
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101741
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #2)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> > why is the test-case marked as "invalid"?
>
> It is definitely well-formed syntactically, but I'm not sure how to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101685
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Thanks for the fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101748
Bug ID: 101748
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected record_type or union_type or
qual_union_type, have vector_type in digest_init_r, at
cp/typeck2.c:1206
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101670
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101749
Bug ID: 101749
Summary: gcc -static-libasan broken because libasan.a needs
__cxa_guard_release in libstdc++
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101746
--- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon ---
OK, sorry for the duplicates, I tried to find reports about 20050826-2.c, found
none, and forgot to check about the other two.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101744
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matmal01 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101749
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101749
--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao ---
I guess it's fixed in trunk by something in
90e46074e6b3561ae7d8ebd205127f286cc0c6b6:
@@ -166,9 +158,10 @@ bool SupportsColoredOutput(fd_t fd) {
#if !SANITIZER_GO
// TODO(glider): different tools may require
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101690
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101663
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-03
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101750
Bug ID: 101750
Summary: [12 regression] g++.dg/vect/pr99149.cc fails on
aarch64 since r12-2523
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101636
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101750
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101751
Bug ID: 101751
Summary: asan_test.C fails with excess error with glibc-2.34
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101720
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
OK, so there's nothing obvious apart from that we accumulate lots of debug
stmts/insns which, compared to regular stmts, are not "optimized", so they
simply pile up when doing any IL copying like inlining.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101626
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101751
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101750
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101752
Bug ID: 101752
Summary: vectorizer failed due to comilattion tme alias of same
pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101749
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||100114
--- Comment #2 from Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101636
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101636
>
> Martin Liška changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101753
Bug ID: 101753
Summary: ld: Unrecognized argument: --build-id
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libbacktra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101749
--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> This was last changed for PR100114
It's very strange that the fix is only backported to GCC 10 & 9, not 11.
I think just backporting it can resolve this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101752
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101548
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101749
--- Comment #4 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > This was last changed for PR100114
>
> It's very strange that the fix is only backported to GCC 10 & 9, not 11.
>
> I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101636
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
> Please bisect with -fno-vect-cost-model then
Doing that, it starts with r11-1450-g8a9e230f41eb4063.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101742
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
A patc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101754
Bug ID: 101754
Summary: Missed fold for a/b*b
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101663
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101750
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> On x86_64 the testcase is optimized to the following now:
> not sure how we conclude that 'n' is not written to anywhere. The issue
> persists even when I re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org
Depends
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 02:37:40PM +, jb at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632
>
> Janne Blomqvist changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692
--- Comment #8 from Eugene Zhiganov ---
Created attachment 51250
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51250&action=edit
eventDriivenStateMachines in D, working version
attached the file, maybe someone will be interested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692
Eugene Zhiganov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101755
Bug ID: 101755
Summary: [12 regression] gcc.target/arm/reg_equal_test.c fails
on arm since r12-2637
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101755
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101751
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95840
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96160
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||enrico.scholz+bugsgcc@sigma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101756
Bug ID: 101756
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error:
non-trivial conversion in 'ssa_name')
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101756
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #0)
> ea;
Which could be simply !!ea, of course.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101749
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #4)
> Wrong comment, please disregard it (or better "mark it as a spam :)
That would lock your account. I'll tag it as obsolete instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101757
Bug ID: 101757
Summary: Simple integer assigment fails (off-seted by -1) when
compiling with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101757
--- Comment #1 from federico ---
Actually, the results are not "off-seted": whatever was to be set to 0 is
properly set; values that should be set "+1" are given "-1" instead:
itest(1)= 0 itest(2)=-1
test(1)= F test(2)= T
Federico
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91771
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2019-09-16 00:00:00 |2021-8-3
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91771
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The other thing to note is that for "d.do_foo", the front-end decides it is
direct call to Derived::do_foo and IPA is not involved there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89989
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91771
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92802
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101725
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101663
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101757
--- Comment #2 from federico ---
Tested on godbolt.org:
https://godbolt.org/z/sPsdE6Y3W
works on: 5.5, 6.3, all 10, all 11
error on: all 7, all 8, all 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101726
--- Comment #2 from Stefan Kneifel ---
OK, so declaring the default function as local might make gcc assume that the
function body is available in the same translation unit, thus rendering the
relocation locally resolvable.
Thus said, I tried
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92811
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85211
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||4225
Target|
1 - 100 of 241 matches
Mail list logo