https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103623
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104576
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5fbcbcaff7248604e04b39464f4fbd64fbf6e43b
commit r12-7270-g5fbcbcaff7248604e04b39464f4fbd64fbf6e43b
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63311
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5fbcbcaff7248604e04b39464f4fbd64fbf6e43b
commit r12-7270-g5fbcbcaff7248604e04b39464f4fbd64fbf6e43b
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104577
Bug ID: 104577
Summary: needs copy constructor to call method of class
non-type template parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104578
Bug ID: 104578
Summary: [12 Regression] accepts invalid partial template
specialization, non-type template argument depends on
a template parameter
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104578
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104539
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> the explicit instantiation lacks COMDAT (but has comdat_group) and it
> has forced_by_abi.
>
> I'm not sure the C++ standard calls out any semantic difference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104180
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva ---
I've recommended before that, without any plan to implement consumers for this
debug information, keeping it in place is mostly wasteful. AFAICT other debug
stmts issued by front-ends could hit the same i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103628
--- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha ---
Indeed. Sorry.
So could you cd flang/test/f90_correct/src and than invoke gfortran the
following way instead:
% powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu-gfortran-12.0.1 -w -c check_mod.f90 qp54.f08
f951: internal compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
Bug ID: 104579
Summary: vectorizer failed to reduce max & index search
together
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
cut
/* Function vect_is_simple_reduction
(1) Detect a cross-iteration def-use cycle that represents a simple
reduction computation. We look for the following pattern:
loop_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 52456
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52456&action=edit
Tentative patch, introducing -minit-regs=<0|1|2>
This patch fixes the problem, and survived a standalone build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102276
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022, qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102276
>
> --- Comment #11 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to rguent...@sus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
One possible way is sink maxInt = src[i] out of loop, when there's synchronised
index search in the loop, just like below.
int max (int *src, int n, int *position)
{
int maxInt;
int maxIndex;
int i;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1)
> Tentative patch that fixes example:
> ...
> diff --git a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.cc b/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.cc
> index 5b26c0f4c7dd..4dc154434853 100644
> --- a/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022, qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
>
> --- Comment #7 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
--- Comment #10 from Tom de Vries ---
A good thing to note at this point: why doesn't init-regs work here?
The pass works per insn, and when hitting the insn with the problematic use:
...
(gdb) call debug_rtx (insn)
(insn 18 17 19 4 (set (reg/v
101 - 117 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
