https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115723
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=115723
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
sum_38 = .COND_ADD (_72, _36, sum_53, 1.0e+20);
so the else value is not equal to the reduction chain op (sum_53). I'm
reducing now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115723
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.3.0
Summary|SPEC CPU2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115722
--- Comment #13 from Jason Liam ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)
> Right, and there is only one definition of the lambda in the original
> testcase of the default argument. But it is evulated twice.
Yes, so it should be made cl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> I think the inversion code wants to check invert_tree_comparison and see if
> the inverted compare is supported and only if not fall back to inverting the
> compar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115723
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
double foo (double *x, double *y, int n)
{
double res = 0.;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
if (y[i] > 1.)
res += x[i];
else
res = 1e20;
return res;
}
ICEs with -march=x86-64-v4 -Ofa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115713
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #2)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #0)
> > As Peter found in the PR115688, there isn't a warning for:
> >
> > long __attribute__ ((target ("no-altivec,vsx")))
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
Bug ID: 115725
Summary: RISC-V: Use wrong AVL for rv64gcv_zfh_zvl512b
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115502
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:37bbd2c1667c70387f5fa6b52f461d57a204229d
commit r14-10366-g37bbd2c1667c70387f5fa6b52f461d57a204229d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114930
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:37bbd2c1667c70387f5fa6b52f461d57a204229d
commit r14-10366-g37bbd2c1667c70387f5fa6b52f461d57a204229d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #1 from JuzheZhong ---
It seems that we should use TU instead of TA?
Robin ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #2 from Kito Cheng ---
TU may not help for this case since we can't guarantee it's use v1 outside, I
mean the argument is passed via a1 (pointer) rather than passed via v1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88545
--- Comment #11 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-June/653731.html
>
> Rerunning benchmarks with this patch would be very welcome.
OK, I have te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115712
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
[expr.new] p14:
An implementation is allowed to omit a call to a replaceable global
allocation
function (17.6.3.2, 17.6.3.3). When it does so, the storage is instead
provided
by the implementation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
Bug ID: 115726
Summary: [avr] Wrong code with __memx and local register
variables
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115664
--- Comment #9 from Pierre Ossman ---
Thank you! That worked nicely!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115727
Bug ID: 115727
Summary: gcc allows implicit usage of explicit constructor in
"std::initializer_list"
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115712
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115723
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:286cda3461d6f5ce7d911d3f26bd4975ea7ea11d
commit r15-1745-g286cda3461d6f5ce7d911d3f26bd4975ea7ea11d
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115723
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 Regression] SPEC |[14 Regression] SPEC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
It seems to work on x86_64 for
__attribute__((noinline, noclone))
char xload8_r30 (const __seg_gs char *pc)
{
register char c __asm ("rax");
c = *pc;
__asm (";;" : "+r" (c));
return c;
}
resulting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115681
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:61aa380bad45fb070379f259f7abc5e5f50c9009
commit r15-1746-g61aa380bad45fb070379f259f7abc5e5f50c9009
Author: Rainer Orth
Date: Mon J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115681
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115706
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Dev Dude from comment #0)
> Unrelated, is this problem going to be fixed?
> import std;
> #include // or any other standard library header
I think that's PR 114990
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115720
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114990
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||unlvsur at live dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 115720, which changed state.
Bug 115720 Summary: module symbol collision
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115720
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #3 from Li Pan ---
Both qemu and spike cannot reproduce the failure as mentioned "hecking (res[1]
!= 1) will get abort()".
But I bet you mean that we have an additional and unnecessary store here,
right?
zvl128b => GOOD.
vec_set_v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115629
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> So we now tail-merge the two b[i] loading blocks. Can you check SVE
> code-gen with this? If that fixes the PR consider adding a SVE testcase.
Thanks, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #12 from Deepthi H ---
As suggested, we made the necessary changes and updated the patch to gcc
community. Please find the link below:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-July/656073.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115485
--- Comment #17 from Gang Peng ---
Dear Andrew，
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15)
> Most likely r7-1945-gb88bd5e0ca1208 introduced/exposed the ICE. It changes
> the behavior of -mno-pic-data-is-text-relative but adding -msingle-pic-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> It seems to work on x86_64 for
It's an AVR issue and how avr.md::mov is expanding loads from 24-bit
address-space.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52641
--- Comment #25 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:90c558ef740d0b98892b6a7811c278eda8adeea3
commit r15-1749-g90c558ef740d0b98892b6a7811c278eda8adeea3
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3d23abd3dd9c8c226ea302203b214b346f4fe8d7
commit r15-1750-g3d23abd3dd9c8c226ea302203b214b346f4fe8d7
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88236
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3d23abd3dd9c8c226ea302203b214b346f4fe8d7
commit r15-1750-g3d23abd3dd9c8c226ea302203b214b346f4fe8d7
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115526
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115526
--- Comment #10 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #9)
> Created attachment 58549 [details]
> Proposed patch
Can someone please regression test the attached patch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #4 from Robin Dapp ---
Sorry, just got back from the RISC-V summit.
IMHO, yes, it should be TU. We have the same thing for the not-element-0 case.
I wonder why it doesn't fail with spike or qemu. Probably qemu doesn't do
anything
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #5 from Robin Dapp ---
> zvl128b => GOOD.
> vec_set_vnx8hi_0:
> vl1re16.v v1,0(a1)
> vsetivlizero,1,e16,m1,ta,ma
> vmv.s.x v1,a2
> vs1r.v v1,0(a0) // Only store 1 element as source code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102464
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:589865a8e4f6bd26c622ea0ee0a38565a0d42e80
commit r15-1752-g589865a8e4f6bd26c622ea0ee0a38565a0d42e80
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #6 from Li Pan ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #5)
> > zvl128b => GOOD.
> > vec_set_vnx8hi_0:
> > vl1re16.v v1,0(a1)
> > vsetivlizero,1,e16,m1,ta,ma
> > vmv.s.x v1,a2
> > vs1r.v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88236
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7249b3cdc16ae85bcfeb63510b6e5cb7f4a43adb
commit r14-10367-g7249b3cdc16ae85bcfeb63510b6e5cb7f4a43adb
Author: Georg-Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7249b3cdc16ae85bcfeb63510b6e5cb7f4a43adb
commit r14-10367-g7249b3cdc16ae85bcfeb63510b6e5cb7f4a43adb
Author: Georg-Johan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88236
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:743575bfc6cfb3520047bddf969f880455d581b1
commit r13-8882-g743575bfc6cfb3520047bddf969f880455d581b1
Author: Georg-Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:743575bfc6cfb3520047bddf969f880455d581b1
commit r13-8882-g743575bfc6cfb3520047bddf969f880455d581b1
Author: Georg-Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88236
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53305588cfbf74604bafcc27902e1eded5677ae6
commit r12-10591-g53305588cfbf74604bafcc27902e1eded5677ae6
Author: Georg-Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53305588cfbf74604bafcc27902e1eded5677ae6
commit r12-10591-g53305588cfbf74604bafcc27902e1eded5677ae6
Author: Georg-Johan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88236
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.2
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115629
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> Am 01.07.2024 um 12:10 schrieb tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
> :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115629
>
> --- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
> (In reply to Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115728
Bug ID: 115728
Summary: Feature Request: inline assembly improvements for C++
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86635
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115726
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||saaadhu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87376
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115729
Bug ID: 115729
Summary: case label does not reduce to an integer constant
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88545
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
I had a bug in the benchmark, I forgot to set taskset,
These are the correct ones:
++---+-+-+
| NEEDLE | scalar 1x | vect| memchr |
++---+-+--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #7 from Robin Dapp ---
I checked. It looks like qemu indeed always implicitly uses TU for vmv.s.x
regardless of the actual setting. This behavior masks the bug here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115730
Bug ID: 115730
Summary: False positive dangling-reference warning
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87376
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
I have no idea how to fix this one.
The problem is that the DImode move is being expanded into 8 x QImode loads
from memx, and there is no way to do stuff similar to PR115726 because we do
not have movdi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115716
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #8 from JuzheZhong ---
I think we should include operands[0] as the "merge/maskoff" operand which we
need to depend on and use TU for vec_set pattern
Take ARM for example:
(define_expand "vec_set"
[(match_operand:VALL_F16 0 "regi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #9 from Robin Dapp ---
We already merge with operand[0], just the TU is missing as far as I can tell.
I'm seeing the following output with my patch:
vsetivlizero,8,e16,mf4,tu,ma
vle16.v v1,0(a1)
vmv.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #10 from JuzheZhong ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #9)
> We already merge with operand[0], just the TU is missing as far as I can
> tell.
>
> I'm seeing the following output with my patch:
>
> vsetivlizero,8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115725
--- Comment #11 from Robin Dapp ---
> I believe it is VSETVL PASS doing the fusion, fuse all "vsetvl" according
> their
> demand field into a single "vsetvli" and put them since beginning.
Yes, and the vsetvl fusion is very useful here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115729
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
Resol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115728
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115731
Bug ID: 115731
Summary: Coroutine lambda type is incomplete when selecting
promise constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 11.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: C++-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114990
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> I reckon it's not something we can fix/implement in a point release of GCC
> 14, but hopefully for 15...
Is this a C++ standard defect? There is no inline definition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115728
--- Comment #2 from eric-bugs at omnifarious dot org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> I think there's (pending?) support to allow the asm text to be generated by
> constexpr evaluation. Not sure if that will help.
I would have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115730
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58552
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58552&action=edit
testcase
Next time please either put the testcase inline or attach it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115730
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109642
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||igor_anferov at icloud dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115727
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66564
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.5
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115730
--- Comment #3 from Igor Anferov ---
Thank you Andrew! Thank you for providing the attribute name, I was trying to
find something similar, but failed to find
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C_002b_002b-Attributes.html page
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115728
ak at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115728
--- Comment #4 from eric-bugs at omnifarious dot org ---
(In reply to ak from comment #3)
> The constexpr asm support is in trunk. It supports templates.
>
>
> >The second is I want finer grain control over marking memory regions as
> >needing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66564
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Patch submission for r0-123991:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2013-June/365035.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115732
Bug ID: 115732
Summary: Arm32 architecture definitions for v8+ appear to have
wrong FPU/SIMD defaults
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115732
Alex Rønne Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |driver
--- Comment #1 from Alex R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115732
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alex Rønne Petersen from comment #1)
> While here, I also noticed that GCC is missing a fair amount of post-v8
> architecture definitions that LLVM has:
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/bl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115732
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note many (if not most these days), armv8.x-a and armv9-a SoCs don't have
aarch32 (and thumb) support even in EL0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99000
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nathan at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114990
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105477
--- Comment #3 from Dimitar Dimitrov ---
Commit r15-1579-g792f97b44ffc5e improves the generated code:
test:
bne a2,zero,.L2
mv a1,a0
.L2:
mv a0,a1
ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94058
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52d71b6b1f0f465a6cf064f61b22fc99453ec132
commit r15-1758-g52d71b6b1f0f465a6cf064f61b22fc99453ec132
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104392
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52d71b6b1f0f465a6cf064f61b22fc99453ec132
commit r15-1758-g52d71b6b1f0f465a6cf064f61b22fc99453ec132
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94058
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82450
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
If you're looking at this, could you also look at Fortran's way
of handling things, for example the test cases
subroutine foo(a)
implicit none
real, dimension(:,:), contiguous, intent(out) :: a
a = a +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104392
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82450
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #7)
> If you're looking at this, could you also look at Fortran's way
> of handling things, for example the test cases
That was my intention to make sure fortran testc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115430
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c847dcf94499da62e5a28921b404e6e561645d99
commit r15-1759-gc847dcf94499da62e5a28921b404e6e561645d99
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115430
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed on trunk. I think I'll backport the fix to 14 as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115733
Bug ID: 115733
Summary: [avr] Improve __memx address handling
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115629
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5)
> > In this case, the second load is conditional on the first load mask, which
> > means it's already done an AND.
> > And crucially inverting it means you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115733
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115734
Bug ID: 115734
Summary: Missed optimization: carry chains with __builtin_addc
missed except on x86
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115716
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I suppose the problem is that we do not detect too many template parameters
here:
template
struct S {
template
struct N { };
};
template<>
template // bad
struct S::N { };
while clang++ says:
q.C:8:1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115700
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
