[Bug tree-optimization/118344] [15 regression] Crash at -O3 in ifcombine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118344 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma

[Bug tree-optimization/118206] [15 regression] libdeflate miscompiled by ifcombine since r15-6360-g6d5df5133c5dd8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118206 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma

[Bug tree-optimization/118572] [15 regression] wrong code for expression ((0x80 & c) != 0) && ((0xc0 & c) == 0x80)) since r15-6893

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118572 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/118572] [15 regression] wrong code for expression ((0x80 & c) != 0) && ((0xc0 & c) == 0x80)) since r15-6893

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118572 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/118514] [15 regression] wrong code at -O{1,s,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6360-g6d5df5133c5dd8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118514 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/118456] [15 Regression] wrong code due to ifcombine since r15-6773

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118456 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #60141|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/118409] [15 regression] gas miscompiled by ifcombine ("Unsupported broadcast" assemble failure) since r15-6774-g740c84975ceb74

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118409 --- Comment #25 from Alexandre Oliva --- Created attachment 60132 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60132&action=edit candidate patch Here's what I'm testing.

[Bug tree-optimization/118409] [15 regression] gas miscompiled by ifcombine ("Unsupported broadcast" assemble failure) since r15-6774-g740c84975ceb74

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118409 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/118456] [15 Regression] wrong code due to ifcombine since r15-6773

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118456 --- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva --- Created attachment 60141 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60141&action=edit candidate patch under testing This may be too blunt, and the unrelated robustification may be unwelcome at t

[Bug tree-optimization/118267] Suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118267 --- Comment #3 from Alexandre Oliva --- The blocks are ineligible for ifcombine because the dereferences could trap. Some flow-dependent information could enable us to conclude that only the first dereference could trap, and it would remain in

[Bug tree-optimization/118456] [15 Regression] wrong code due to ifcombine since r15-6773

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118456 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/88443] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overflow warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443 Bug 88443 depends on bug 113026, which changed state. Bug 113026 Summary: Bogus -Wstringop-overflow warning on simple memcpy type loop https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113026 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/118504] New: Bogus -Wstringop-overflow warning on simple memcpy type loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118504 Bug ID: 118504 Summary: Bogus -Wstringop-overflow warning on simple memcpy type loop Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/113026] Bogus -Wstringop-overflow warning on simple memcpy type loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113026 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug tree-optimization/118186] [15 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/field-merge-16.c scan-tree-dump-times ifcombine "optimizing" 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118186 --- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva --- I've just confirmed that that's the fix indeed.

[Bug tree-optimization/118206] [15 regression] libdeflate miscompiled by ifcombine since r15-6360-g6d5df5133c5dd8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118206 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/118025] [15 Regression] gcc.dg/field-merge-9.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118025 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/113506] ICE: RTL check: expected elt 2 type 'B', have '0' (rtx barrier) in BLOCK_FOR_INSN, at rtl.h:1495 with -Os -fno-tree-coalesce-vars -finline-stringops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113506 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/118186] [15 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/field-merge-16.c scan-tree-dump-times ifcombine "optimizing" 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118186 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/118344] [15 regression] Crash at -O3 in ifcombine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118344 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/118514] [15 regression] wrong code at -O{1,s,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6360-g6d5df5133c5dd8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118514 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/118514] [15 regression] wrong code at -O{1,s,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6360-g6d5df5133c5dd8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118514 --- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva --- Interesting. Without ifcombine, we optimize the loop body to the same, but the load from b doesn't get pulled out to the loop header. I suppose ifcombine may need to propagate some annotation that the lo

[Bug tree-optimization/118456] [15 Regression] wrong code due to ifcombine since r15-6773

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118456 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/118805] [15 Regression] wrong code at -O1 with "-fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-forwprop -fno-tree-fre" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6173

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118805 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Alexandr

[Bug target/119629] mismatch between [power9-64] builtins and their instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119629 --- Comment #14 from Alexandre Oliva --- ack, patch combining the patchlets in commits 7 and 9 looking good in gcc-14 ppc-elf test results. I'll point out that this report was not so much about this specific mismatch between ppc builtins and th

[Bug tree-optimization/113524] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr113026-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (test for bogus messages, line 10)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113524 --- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva --- ... and riscv*-elf, powerpc-elf.

[Bug target/119629] mismatch between [power9-64] builtins and their instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119629 --- Comment #10 from Alexandre Oliva --- >> - instructions and expanders for these builtins don't have their conditions >> tested, so they must necessarily follow from the builtin conditions, and >> this case clearly isn't > "They don't have th

[Bug target/119629] mismatch between [power9-64] builtins and their instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119629 --- Comment #11 from Alexandre Oliva --- >> On a powerpc-elf standard build, TARGET_POWERPC64 is enabled, but >> TARGET_64BIT isn't, and so gcc.target/powerpc/byte-in-set-2.c fails >> to compile with an ICE (instruction not recognized) instead o

[Bug target/119629] mismatch between [power9-64] builtins and their instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119629 --- Comment #12 from Alexandre Oliva --- Peter, Segher, thanks for the patches and the feedback. I'll give them a try and report back.

[Bug target/118182] RISC-V: Miscompile for 410.bwaves, 416.gamess and 465.tonto from spec2006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118182 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/118182] RISC-V: Miscompile for 410.bwaves, 416.gamess and 465.tonto from spec2006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118182 --- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva --- bisection with this PR's patch led me to the patch that added the late-combine pass as the one that enables the intended result. That's all I know so far.

[Bug target/118182] RISC-V: Miscompile for 410.bwaves, 416.gamess and 465.tonto from spec2006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118182 --- Comment #8 from Alexandre Oliva --- The problem is that the @pred_broadcast pattern expands to _zvfh insns even when _zero or _imm would do. The scalar constant gets allocated to a register, and vec_duplicated in the pred_broadcast insn, on

[Bug target/118182] RISC-V: Miscompile for 410.bwaves, 416.gamess and 465.tonto from spec2006

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118182 --- Comment #9 from Alexandre Oliva --- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/680824.html

[Bug tree-optimization/118805] [15 Regression] wrong code at -O1 with "-fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-forwprop -fno-tree-fre" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6173

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118805 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/119629] New: mismatch between [power9-64] builtins and their instructions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119629 Bug ID: 119629 Summary: mismatch between [power9-64] builtins and their instructions Product: gcc Version: 14.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/119609] New: [powerpc-elf] load_toc_v4_pic_si may clobber r12 and crt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119609 Bug ID: 119609 Summary: [powerpc-elf] load_toc_v4_pic_si may clobber r12 and crt Product: gcc Version: 14.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug target/120424] [arm] -fnon-call-exceptions -fstack-clash-protection triggers lra-eliminations bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120424 --- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva --- Created attachment 61516 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61516&action=edit candidate patch This patch likely fixes bug 118929 as well.

[Bug middle-end/118939] [14/15/16 Regression] ada: executable segfaults on arm-linux-gnueabi when assigning an access to controlled type since r14-2653-g2971ff7b1d564a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118939 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/120424] [arm] -fnon-call-exceptions -fstack-clash-protection triggers lra-eliminations bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120424 --- Comment #3 from Alexandre Oliva --- err, make that PR118939

[Bug target/120424] New: [arm] -fnon-call-exceptions -fstack-clash-protection triggers lra-eliminations bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120424 Bug ID: 120424 Summary: [arm] -fnon-call-exceptions -fstack-clash-protection triggers lra-eliminations bug Product: gcc Version: 14.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sev

[Bug middle-end/118939] [14/15 Regression] ada: executable segfaults on arm-linux-gnueabi when assigning an access to controlled type since r14-2653-g2971ff7b1d564a

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118939 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[14/15/16 Regression] ada: |[14/15 Regression] ada:

[Bug target/120424] [arm] -fnon-call-exceptions -fstack-clash-protection triggers lra-eliminations bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120424 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Ever confirmed|0

[Bug rtl-optimization/120424] [14/15 regression] lra-elimination issues when fp2sp elimination is disabled part-way through lra

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120424 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Component|target |rtl-optimization Ever confirmed|1

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #15 from Alexandre Oliva --- -mlong-calls isn't enough, because with !flag_reorder_blocks_and_partition arm_long_call_p overrides it to false when functions share the same section. But with -ffunction-sections I got all the gnat1 so

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #16 from Alexandre Oliva --- Created attachment 61826 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61826&action=edit candidate fix

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #19 from Alexandre Oliva --- --with-specs are quite useful to change compiler defaults, but I don't suppose you'll want to change them. I'd have added the options to BOOT_CFLAGS if that was as easy as --with-specs for a test build ;

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #17 from Alexandre Oliva --- FWIW, with the candidate fix, and --with-specs='%{!mno-long-calls:-mlong-calls} %{!fno-function-sections:-ffunction-sections}' on top of the earlier configure and make flags, I've completed a profiledboot

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #13 from Alexandre Oliva --- I'm not sure how to tell, but the fact that it has an lto-related symbolic name suggested to me it was generated by the compiler rather than by the linker: __sinput__get_source_file_index__assertions.0.lt

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #9 from Alexandre Oliva --- I'm not sure I've run into the same problem, but the one I'm looking at is in the training stage, in ali.o, one of many that raise an assertion failure from SInput.Get_Source_File_Index.Assertions. Intere

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #10 from Alexandre Oliva --- Sorry, I'd missed the build scripts, that presumably would have enabled me to trigger the problem more readily. Anyhow, this explains why lto and PIE are both needed to trigger the problem. As for a sol

[Bug bootstrap/119430] profiledbootstrap fails on armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabhif (crashes in elists__append_elmt during stagefeedback)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119430 --- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva --- I've just tried and failed to duplicate this with r16-1756. ../configure -C armv7a-linux-gnueabihf --with-arch=armv7-a --with-float=hard --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16 --enable-bootstrap --prefix=$HOME/arm-linux-gn

[Bug target/120424] [14/15 regression] lra-elimination issues when fp2sp elimination is disabled part-way through lra

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120424 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|14.4

[Bug target/120424] [14/15 regression] lra-elimination issues when fp2sp elimination is disabled part-way through lra

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120424 Alexandre Oliva changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug rtl-optimization/120838] New: lra-eliminations: sp offsets are not reversible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120838 Bug ID: 120838 Summary: lra-eliminations: sp offsets are not reversible Product: gcc Version: 16.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

<    1   2   3