https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 50837
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50837&action=edit
Proposed patch
This patch fixes the problem for eSi-RISC and bootstraps on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
, with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> Btw, we already disable the floating-point to_chars on targets without a
> binary64 double. So is our test for detecting binary64 not accurate enough,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50837|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
--- Comment #8 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111020
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
riscv-v.cc:legitimize_move has:
if (MEM_P (dest) && !REG_P (src))
src = force_reg (mode, src);
return false;
since src is passed by value, this is pointless. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Also, the GET_MODE_BITSIZE (mode).to_constant () <= MAX_BITS_PER_WORD
in the *mov_mem_to_mem splitter can generate unaligned accesses, yet it
is not guarded by a check that the target supports them.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
I had a look at riscv_legitimize_move. It doesn't seem to suffer from quite
the same problem as legitimize_move does, but it could if another problem was
fixed: riscv_legitimize_move changes the rt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110951
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111658
Bug ID: 111658
Summary: test-function-bodies fails to find functions with
single-letter names
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115278
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116271
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
I have overlooked that, in the inner loop of s176, the array index i+m-j-1
turns negativeat for higher iterations of the middle loop for small m.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116271
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 58861
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58861&action=edit
proposed patch
Does this patch work for you?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #10 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Even if you add support for V2HI bswap, it won't help vectorization without
support for V4QI vectors and permutations, because vectorizable_bswap won't
recognize the bswap capability of the target a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #12 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
But the condition I quoted rejects the recognition of a bswap16 with
non-promoted
arguments.
vectorizable_bswap doesn't do anything for processors that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108357
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30957
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116340
Bug ID: 116340
Summary: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/abs-4.c is a mess
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116340
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
The test should be broken up into separate tests for single and double
precision.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116340
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 58907
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58907&action=edit
patch to split up test
effective_target_hard_float configurations of esirisc can do the optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111298
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112537
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112537
--- Comment #13 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Before we can consider any costs, we first have to know what they are. Is
there any manual for a hardware implementation that specifies costs?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112651
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112728
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> The gcc.dg/scantest-lto.c FAILs on quite a number of targets:
...
> * On Darwin, the __TEXT,__eh_frame contains .ascii because the assembler
> lacks su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98289
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116022
Bug ID: 116022
Summary: complete (early) unrolling foils vectorizer for vector
initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98289
--- Comment #7 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 58719
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58719&action=edit
patch to fix internal compiler errors in shrink-wrap.cc on EDGE_CROSSING edges
I'm currently using thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44566
--- Comment #14 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Shouldn't that be WONTFIX instead of FIXED?
Or do you count changes in hardware architecture trends as a 'fix',
as we see multi-core systems that use the same instruction set architecture
for a num
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121041
Bug ID: 121041
Summary: Missed tail calls for sjlj targets with empty
exception handling code
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121041
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 61845
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61845&action=edit
Patch to make tail call w/ empty exception code optimization apply to sjlj
targets
This patch allows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121042
Bug ID: 121042
Summary: testsuite/g++.dg/opt/musttail4.C fails for sjlj
targets
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119491
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119376
Bug 119376 depends on bug 119491, which changed state.
Bug 119491 Summary: missed tail call due to exceptions which is empty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119491
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119491
--- Comment #11 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 61844
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61844&action=edit
Patch to make optimization apply to sjlj targets
This patch allows musttail3.C and musttail5.C to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121036
Bug ID: 121036
Summary: bogus -Warray-bounds with cse-able conditions
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120846
--- Comment #6 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
One alternative preventing from counts being mixed up between functions is to
make the pattern include the linenumber of the loop in which the pattern is
detected. Although that makes the tests a b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120846
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
I think the test should be split up into separate tests, one for each function,
so you can simply demand that the vect_recog_dot_prod_pattern is detected,
without specifying a number. That would al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120846
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> I guess the testcase assumes that the qi->si case gets an intermediate
> qi->hi promotion and then dotprod_hisi being used. But it fails to check
> fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120846
Bug ID: 120846
Summary: vect_dotprod_hisi is used inconsistently with
documentation and name in Test of autovectorization of
different dot-prod modes
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121041
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 61931
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61931&action=edit
older patch for illustrative purposes
For the record, I started out with this simpler patch, which ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121042
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 61930
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61930&action=edit
patch
Sorry, regression tests took a while because of a newlib issue.
45 matches
Mail list logo
