https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103995
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-13
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103997
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103998
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
The issue is likely the same as in PR103997, I've commented there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103999
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||53947
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
for patt_42 = () patt_40;
vectype_in (QImode:nunits 4)
unit-size
align:8 warn_if_not_align:0 symtab:0 alias-set -1 canonical-type
0x7fffea18ddc8 precision:1 min max >
QI size unit-si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3)
> for patt_42 = () patt_40;
>
> vectype_in (QImode:nunits 4)
>
> type size
> unit-size
> align:8 warn_if_not_align:0 symtab:0 alias
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
> And GCC vectorizer only handle 2X elements, but not 4X,8X,...
>
> /* For scalar masks we may have different boolean
>vector types having the same QImode. Thus we
>add additional chec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103995
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103997
avieira at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||avieira at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104001
Bug ID: 104001
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769
since
r12-6538-g5f19303ada7db92c155332e7ba317233ca05946b
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104002
Bug ID: 104002
Summary: ICE ‘verify_gimple’ failed since
r12-1128-gef8176e0fac935c0
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104003
Bug ID: 104003
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769
since r12-6488-g820ac79e8448ad6c
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100280
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9b32c1669aad5459dd053424f9967011348add83
commit r12-6542-g9b32c1669aad5459dd053424f9967011348add83
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Forcing the pattern to not trigger produces the expected
t.c:8:6: missed: not vectorized: relevant stmt not supported: iftmp.0_21 =
x.1_14 > 255 ? iftmp.0_19 : iftmp.0_20;
since condition vectorization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103995
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #8 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Forcing the pattern to not trigger produces the expected
>
> t.c:8:6: missed: not vectorized: relevant stmt not supported: iftmp.0_21 =
> x.1_14 > 255 ? iftmp.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> I think that is what we need to add. We also don't have a good
> representation
> for "packing" of masks.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-patter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103997
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, avieira at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103997
>
> avieira at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104003
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104002
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104001
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu ---
with
@@ -12120,7 +12120,8 @@ supportable_narrowing_operation (enum tree_code code,
c1 = VEC_PACK_TRUNC_EXPR;
if (VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P (narrow_vectype)
&& VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P (vectyp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104002
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Somewhat related to the recently fixed issue. At -O0 we have invalid
_1 = VEC_PERM_EXPR ;
_3 = BIT_FIELD_REF <_1, 64, 0>;
_5 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(_3)[i_4(D)];
while with -O update_address_taken is r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104004
Bug ID: 104004
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769
(error: unrecognizable insn)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104003
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103997
--- Comment #7 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmm thinking out loud here. As vector sizes (or ISAs) change vectorization
strategies could indeed change. Best that I can think of is things like
rounding, where you might need to do operations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #11 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #10)
> with
> @@ -12120,7 +12120,8 @@ supportable_narrowing_operation (enum tree_code code,
>c1 = VEC_PACK_TRUNC_EXPR;
>if (VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P (narrow_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
>
> --- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu ---
> with
> @@ -12120,7 +12120,8 @@ supportabl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
>
> --- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> (In reply to Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #14 from Hongtao.liu ---
>
> But still not as good as before, since original version we only need to pack
> data which is produced by vec_cond_expr, but now need to extraly pack mask.
>
>
Also for non-avx512 target, it looks like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102192
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2edbcaed95b8d8cbb05a6af486179db0da6e3245
commit r12-6547-g2edbcaed95b8d8cbb05a6af486179db0da6e3245
Author: Thomas Schwinge
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101615
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f49f50f756c06f4093358ff77c11152777fff1c
commit r11-9458-g7f49f50f756c06f4093358ff77c11152777fff1c
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103995
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f49f50f756c06f4093358ff77c11152777fff1c
commit r11-9458-g7f49f50f756c06f4093358ff77c11152777fff1c
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103995
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 103995, which changed state.
Bug 103995 Summary: [11/12 Regression] conj() ignored with tree loop vectorizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103995
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104003
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(define_insn "*xop_pcmov_"
- [(set (match_operand:VI_32 0 "register_operand" "=x")
-(if_then_else:VI_32
- (match_operand:VI_32 3 "register_operand" "x")
- (match_operand:VI_32 1 "re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104004
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The reason we warn is that at -Og we don't optimize away the dead code. In
uninit2 we have:
MEM[(struct _Optional_payload_base *)&D.34851]._M_engaged = 0;
...
_27 = MEM[(const struct _Optional_payload_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100280
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jules at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103996
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104005
Bug ID: 104005
Summary: Regression on arm+sve with -O2 -fPIC
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104001
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #1 f
> --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
> Honza, -Og was supposed to not do so much work, I intended to disable IPA
> inlining but there's no knob for that. I wonder where to best put such
> guard? I set flag_inline_small_functions to zero for -Og but we still
> run inline_small_functions ().
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #7 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
> Honza, -Og was supposed to not do so much work, I intended to disable IPA
> inlining but there's no knob for that. I wonder where to best put such
> You can not disable an IPA pass becasuse then we will mishandle
> optimize attributes. I think you simply want to set
>
> flag_inline_small_functions = 0
> flag_inline_functions_called_once = 0
Actually I forgot, we have flag_no_inline which makes
tree_inlinable_function_p to return false for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #8 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> You can not disable an IPA pass becasuse then we will mishandle
> optimize attributes. I think you simply want to set
>
> flag_inline_small_functions = 0
> flag_inline_functions_called_on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100280
--- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #2)
> Thanks for the report, now fixed in master branch. Not planning on
> backporting OpenACC 'kernels' decomposition changes to release branches --
> unless that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104004
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95737
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
> Seems cmp+isel on P9 is sub-optimal.
For this particular test, perhaps. But it is better overall, at least some
years ago. It was benchmarked (with spec), on p9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to hubicka from comment #8)
> > You can not disable an IPA pass becasuse then we will mishandle
> > optimize attributes. I think you simply want to set
> >
> > flag_inline_small_functions = 0
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99445
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There's a report of a regression caused by this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-help/2022-January/141127.html
I'll ask for it to be reported to bugzilla.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
Bug ID: 104006
Summary: [12 regression] power-ieee128 merge breaks Solaris
build
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #15 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12)
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
> >
> > --- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104001
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
I'm testing
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
gcc/config/i386/i386.md | 6 +++---
modified gcc/config/i386/i386.md
@@ -10455,7 +10455,7 @@ (define_insn_and_split "*xordi_1_btc"
;; PR target/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-13
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Sorry, only added kinds.inc dependencies and not kinds.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #10 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> And I'm intentionally not doing this because -Og should still remove
> abstraction during early inlining (for functions marked 'inline'), we
> just don't want to spend the extra compile ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
>
> --- Comment #15 from Hongtao.liu ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78655
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Macleod ---
Probably. rangers nonnull processing also invokes infer_nonnull_range () on
the statement, so should also be picking it up.
The latter test case is really about recomputation then
x_2 = a_1(D) == 0B;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 52176
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52176&action=edit
> gcc12-pr104006.patch
The patch lists gcc a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
>
> --- Comment #10 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> > And I'm intentio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #12 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> Yeah, and since we inline all always inline and also flatten during
> early inline the IPA inliner should really do nothing.
OK, can_inline_edge_p will do that but we will still walk the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to hubicka from comment #12)
> > Yeah, and since we inline all always inline and also flatten during
> > early inline the IPA inliner should really do nothing.
>
> OK, can_inline_edge_p will do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52176|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #3)
> Really strange. If kinds.h were missing completely at that point, I'd
> expect gcc message to that effect, that's why I suspected the header
> b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97909
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod ---
This functionality was added with fc4076752067fb400b43adbd629081df658da246
Commentary here
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-November/583216.html
All one needs is an active ranger via the enab
>
> Sure - I just remember (falsely?) that we finally decided to do it :)
I do not recall this, but I may have forgotten :))
> If we don't run IPA inline we don't figure we failed to inline the
> always_inline either ;) And IPA inline can expose more indirect
> alywas-inlines we only discover a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #14 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
>
> Sure - I just remember (falsely?) that we finally decided to do it :)
I do not recall this, but I may have forgotten :))
> If we don't run IPA inline we don't figure we failed to inli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104007
Bug ID: 104007
Summary: new (std::nothrow) S[n] always calls ~S
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104007
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|new (std::nothrow) S[n] |[12 Regression] new
|a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104007
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104008
Bug ID: 104008
Summary: New g++ folly compile error with gcc 11.x. Bisected to
PR99445 c++: Alias template in pack expansion
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101941
--- Comment #26 from Martin Liška ---
I've just rebuilt kernel-default package from openSUSE:Factory with the
following config:
https://gist.githubusercontent.com/marxin/d5373a0dd6ab35233a47a25337e73dc5/raw/d2c810d2d32104619b57b6f1d118d052302c51
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101941
--- Comment #27 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 52179
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52179&action=edit
not reduced test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 52177
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52177&action=edit
> gcc12-pr104006.patch
>
> Updated patch.
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101941
--- Comment #28 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #26)
> that started with r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1.
Please file that bug separately and it might be related to PR 103961 which was
just fixed too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #3)
>> Really strange. If kinds.h were missing completely at that point, I'd
>> expect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104001
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
libgfortran/ieee/ieee_arithmetic.F90:#include "fpu-target.inc"
libgfortran/ieee/ieee_exceptions.F90:#include "fpu-target.inc"
libgfortran/intrinsics/selected_int_kind.f90: include "selected_int_kind.inc"
li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #17 from Hongtao.liu ---
> As said, the scalar conversion does not make any sense...
Agree.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52177|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104008
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53ead5787921be799593232cfc9931f916b79002
commit r12-6550-g53ead5787921be799593232cfc9931f916b79002
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101941
--- Comment #29 from Siddhesh Poyarekar ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #28)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #26)
> > that started with r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1.
>
> Please file that bug separately and it might be related
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 52180
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52180&action=edit
> gcc12-pr104006.patch
>
> So yet another ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Perhaps if we punt for -Og caller (and maybe -Og callees) on IPA inlining
except for always_inline, we could set some flag if IPA inlining happened and
schedule some extra cleanup passes just for those rare
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That is weird.
We have:
ieee_arithmetic.lo: ieee/ieee_arithmetic.F90 ieee_exceptions.lo
dependency and ieee_exceptions.mod is created when compiling
ieee_exceptions.lo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104002
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f45a2232bc8d6b88f52859cac502611395f3caf5
commit r12-6551-gf45a2232bc8d6b88f52859cac502611395f3caf5
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104002
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989
>
> --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Perhaps if we punt for -Og caller (and m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104006
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> That is weird.
> We have:
> ieee_arithmetic.lo: ieee/ieee_arithmetic.F90 ieee_exceptions.lo
> dependency and ieee_exceptions.mod is created w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104009
Bug ID: 104009
Summary: r12-6030-g422f9eb7011b76c1 breaks kernel build
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104009
Siddhesh Poyarekar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |siddhesh at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103672
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104009
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104010
Bug ID: 104010
Summary: [12 regression] short loop no longer vectorized with
Neon after r12-6513
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104010
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think you have the wrong revision in there as that commit only adds a
testcase.
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
