https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103855
--- Comment #5 from Zhao Wei Liew ---
Thanks for your guidance. I'm looking into adding a fix in expmed.c, but I
can't figure out how to get the range of op1 and op0 from within
expand_divmod().
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103855
--- Comment #6 from Zhao Wei Liew ---
I see that the vect_get_range_info(tree, wide_int*, wide_int*) function returns
the range of a tree type, but in expand_divmod(), the operands are of rtx type.
Is there still a way to extract the range infor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103855
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103853
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-29
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103853
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The new test should also check the overload taking a comparison function.
And if we do want to add the check for the rvalue overloads (which isn't
required, but might be more user friendly, with a small o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93645
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
Note -fuse-ld=mold was added in: g:ad964f7eaef9c03ce68a01cfdd7fde9d56524868
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103854
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103856
Bug ID: 103856
Summary: ICE during GIMPLE pass: hardcmp since
r12-4759-g95bb87b2458bfab4
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103770
--- Comment #3 from Martin Uecker ---
Here is another example which fails on armel
extern _Complex float g(int N, int dims[N]);
void f(void)
{
int dims[1];
_Complex float val = g(1, dims);
}
during RTL pass: expand
BUG.c: In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857
Bug ID: 103857
Summary: implement ternary without jump (and comparison)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103858
Bug ID: 103858
Summary: [12 Regression] strlen() implementation is optimized
into a call to strlen() at -O2, causing infinite
recursion
Product: gcc
Version: 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103858
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102725
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dani at danielbertalan dot dev
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Drepper ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> I don't think that's equivalent.
You're right, I tried to generalize the code and failed. I my actual case this
was a single variable the compiler saw the ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57042
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82207
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89971
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91690
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103859
Bug ID: 103859
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE when functional declaration
parameter list contains sized arrays
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102923
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Isn't this fixed by r12-4693-g90205f67e465ae7dfcf733c2b2b177ca7ff68da0 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Created attachment 52083 [details]
> gcc12-pr103639.patch
>
> Untested fix. I'll defer the testcase for the testsuite to somebody who
> speaks ObjC.
thanks. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82968
--- Comment #3 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Created attachment 52084
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52084&action=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82968
--- Comment #4 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Specifying specific alignment in Fortran code is not directly possibly, sadly.
The only way I see how of this is to make that variable an integer, instead of
char array.
Eric, could you kindly test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Bug ID: 103860
Summary: wrong code at -O3 with -fPIC on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Likely, but with something that will easily detect miscompilation at runtime
(checking dg-output is too ugly) and I don't have much experience with objc.dg/
dg- directives etc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103859
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94276
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> @Jakub: Will you cook a patch?
No, I have tried multiple times and I don't really have a good solution for the
statement frontiers parsing differences.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103859
--- Comment #2 from Doug Torrance ---
Created attachment 52085
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52085&action=edit
preprocessed source for bug 103859
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103676
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103676
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
BTW, I needed -mcpu=cortex-m7 -mthumb -O2 to reproduce the ICE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-29
Summary|wrong cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89639
--- Comment #10 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Created attachment 52086
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52086&action=edit
adjust testcase
David, could you kindly test the attached patch, to see if it fixes things?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This seems to be clearly a shrink-wrapping bug.
Before pro_and_epilogue we have in RTL:
(note 4 1 2 2 [bb 2] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(note 2 4 3 2 NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG)
(insn 3 2 34 2 (set (reg/v:QI 0 ax [o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89639
--- Comment #11 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2021-12-29 12:26 p.m., fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> David, could you kindly test the attached patch, to see if it fixes things?
Added patch to my build tree.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103861
Bug ID: 103861
Summary: [i386] vectorize v2qi vectors
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In the:
while (!vec.is_empty () && pro != entry)
{
while (pro != entry && !can_get_prologue (pro, prologue_clobbered))
{
pro = get_immediate_dominator (CDI_DOMINATORS, pro);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103861
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Also:
char r[2], a[2], b[2];
void foo (void)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
r[i] = a[i] + b[i];
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103861
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 52087
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52087&action=edit
Protorypw patch to vectorize with v2qi vectors
Patch that implmenents V2QI moves, logic and basic arithmetic ope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102332
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d8f6c48ccb85ecc0d97a84c32b7a1b8f43c64fe4
commit r12-6143-gd8f6c48ccb85ecc0d97a84c32b7a1b8f43c64fe4
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103861
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The patched compiler compiles the testcase from Comment #0 on x86_64 with -O2
to:
plus:
movl%edi, %edx
movl%esi, %eax
addb%sil, %dl
addb%ah, %dh
movl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103823
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47334
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103822
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
That looks good. But can you always set maybe_check_pro to true (and then
optimise it away of course)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102923
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52088|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
--- Comment #13 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 52090
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52090&action=edit
patch with test case
this is what I'm going to test (it passes for NeXT and GNU runtimes on
x86_64-darwin18, bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103859
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think there is a dup of this bug already and was already fixed for gcc
11.3.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103859
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103770
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dtorrance at piedmont dot edu
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Reduced testcase:
> int f(int a, int b, int c)
> {
> if (a != b && a != c) __builtin_unreachable();
> return a == b ? b : c;
> }
>
> This should just transl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
--- Comment #14 from Iain Sandoe ---
I suppose
+check += 1;
+printf ("foo\n");
+ }
+
+ if (check != 2)
would be a more picky test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103860
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> Created attachment 52089 [details]
> gcc12-pr103860.patch
>
> Not sure I understand what you'd like to see.
Exactly what you did :-) Well, I didn't see y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, and probably no need for the printf calls...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103639
--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> Yeah, and probably no need for the printf calls...
indeed.
works for me on x86_64-darwin18 and powerpc-darwin9 (m32, m64, NeXT and GNU
runtimes)
I can cover mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103861
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103742
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e5acfcad98f3fa33e141f4e6bc06f7d7c13496e1
commit r12-6146-ge5acfcad98f3fa33e141f4e6bc06f7d7c13496e1
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103742
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103024
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103856
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-29
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100129
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||GC, ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
Nicolas Noble changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pi...@nobis-crew.org
--- Comment #33 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
--- Comment #34 from Nicolas Noble ---
After some digging, I found out this in the acinclude.m4 file of the
libstdc++-v3 folder:
AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_HOSTED], [
AC_ARG_ENABLE([hosted-libstdcxx],
AC_HELP_STRING([--disable-hosted-libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99245
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 99222 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 99222, which changed state.
Bug 99222 Summary: [modules] system header-unit ICEs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99222
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 99222, which changed state.
Bug 99222 Summary: [modules] system header-unit ICEs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99222
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103862
Bug ID: 103862
Summary: Regression: -Wold-style-cast warns about system macros
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12258
Carlos Galvez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carlosgalvezp at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103862
--- Comment #1 from Carlos Galvez ---
The problem exists also in GCC 9.4.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103862
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #2 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103862
--- Comment #3 from Carlos Galvez ---
Interesting, thanks for the quick reply! In case it helps, if I include the
header as a regular header, I do get the "note" referring to the system header:
# g++-11 -I include -Wold-style-cast main.cpp
In f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103847
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ian Lance Taylor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62c3f75fd29e93054f3aeb8a623fd52c98c3db0b
commit r12-6147-g62c3f75fd29e93054f3aeb8a623fd52c98c3db0b
Author: Ian Lance Taylor
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
--- Comment #35 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Nicolas Noble from comment #34)
> After some digging, I found out this in the acinclude.m4 file of the
> libstdc++-v3 folder:
>
> AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_HOSTED], [
> AC_ARG_ENABLE([hosted-libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
--- Comment #36 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Nicolas Noble from comment #34)
> After some digging, I found out this in the acinclude.m4 file of the
> libstdc++-v3 folder:
>
> AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_HOSTED], [
> AC_ARG_ENABLE([hosted-libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100129
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction |
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
ally.alto.0z at icloud dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ally.alto.0z at icloud do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #13 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ally.alto.0z from comment #12)
> Bill you say you are a “master engineer” and have 25 years of Fortran
> experience and are a principal member of a Fortran committee.
>
> Would it be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103863
Bug ID: 103863
Summary: We need a warning for loss of no-exec stacks
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103863
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103863
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103863
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey Walton ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I think the warning needs to be implemented in the linker rather than in GCC
> because the linker is what decides if there are executable stacks are needed
> or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63281
--- Comment #14 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
For constant like 0x0008411, which is using 5 insns, at 'expand' pass,
it is treated as preferred to save in memory, while at cse1 pass, it was
replaced back to constant.
expand:
7: r119:DI=[unspec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100129
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Add --param=ggc-min-expand=1 we get:
hash table checking failed: equal operator returns true for a pair of values
with a different hash value
In file included from /home/apinski/upstream-gcc/include/c++/12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103864
Bug ID: 103864
Summary: [11/12 Regression] ICE in vect_transform_reduction, at
tree-vect-loop.c:7389
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103864
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103864
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.3.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100129
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
It is Looking tuple/template parameter pack/specialization related.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
--- Comment #1 from Zhao Wei Liew ---
Created attachment 52091
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52091&action=edit
Tested patch for the case of unsigned integer X
I tried to tackle the unsigned integer X case by adding an opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63281
--- Comment #15 from Alan Modra ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #14)
> It would be a way to keep the data in memory(.rodata) through adjusting the
> cost of constant.
Yes, I posted a series of patches that fix this problem and other rtx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100052
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||GC, ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99910
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am reducing a similar bug via PR 100129, I think this is all GC related which
is why header changes and other non-looking changes in the front-end make it
come and go.
97 matches
Mail list logo
