https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109130
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108722
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108847
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108400
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107946
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114288
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
BTW, the P4 designation is primarily because I suspected this would likely be a
PA specific issue. If it turns out to be a generic problem, it would probably
immediately bump to P1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|law at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114222
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114182
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114085
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |law at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114277
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113433
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112545
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
This looks like a missed case for singletons.
_1 = d.9_28 <= 0;
_2 = (signed short) _1;
_3 = (signed short) d.9_28;
c.a = 0;
if (_2 == _3)
goto ; [0.00%]
else
goto ; [100.00%]
Back su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111864
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111801
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Interestingly enough this is picked up at -O3. Looks like PRE does a better
job and the result is easier to discover the range for first operand of the
controlling conditional.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111799
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I'd hazard a guess we need to first eliminate the ad = &c assignment. That
should in turn allow us to realize ad is unchanging.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111798
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110992
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rzinsly at ventanamicro dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110931
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
One could also look at this as a failure to propagate.
l.0_1 = l;
t_4 = (short int) l.0_1;
if (t_4 == 0)
goto ; [50.00%]
else
goto ; [50.00%]
We ought to be able to propagate l.0_1 into t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110891
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Note that Richi was supportive of the patch and just asked for a few minor
changes. Pinski, if you wanted to take care of Richi's comments we could get
this one off the P2 list.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110538
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Thread references removed edge: Cancelling jump thread: (9, 10) incoming
edge; (10, 8) joiner (8, 6) normal;
Thread references removed edge: Cancelling jump thread: (2, 3) incoming edge;
(3, 9) joine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110503
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
As you note, this feels like a failure to recognize that only one value can
actually satisfy the condition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110327
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Two block copies isn't fatal when the second one is the one with the actual
jump thread. But costing does get more complex.
Basically we copy 8 so that we can isolate its two incoming paths which thread
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113790
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114196
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Summary|[13/14 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114264
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114284
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114284
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113665
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||christoph at muppetnet dot net
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112610
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106315
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103944
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111362
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114288
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Sam, no. That would be a big mistake.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111362
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114288
--- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
The larger point is we don't just disable passes because they have a bug, or
even multiple bugs. We need to do the right thing from an engineering
standpoint, ie, actually debug the problem.
In fact, this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111362
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99987
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102264
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103183
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106363
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] |[13 Regression] [modules]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109247
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109990
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-10
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110279
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114268
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113533
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression] Code|Code generation regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114288
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Aren't we compiling for PA2.0? If so, shouldn't we have a full 14 bit offset
support, even when a load/store hits the FP register file (feel free to correct
me if I'm wrong, it's only been 20 years since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89049
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90204
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression] C |[11 Regression] C code is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90659
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93631
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93930
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94335
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 94335, which changed state.
Bug 94335 Summary: [11/12/13/14 Regression] False positive -Wstringop-overflow
warning with -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94335
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95072
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96564
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97140
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97968
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11 Regression] Unnecessary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97972
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98356
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98662
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99015
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99199
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11 Regression] Very large
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99332
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99469
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99706
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99795
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12 Regression]
|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100533
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100354
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 regression]|[11/12/13 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86689
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12 Regression] Some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86899
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100554
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100623
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100801
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101958
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103725
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104447
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Multiply as a canonical form of a conditional move/zero seems fairly
non-obvious relative to a conditional expression.
But I don't mind going with consensus on a canonical form. After all we just
need to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114310
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84318
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84204
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82894
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80899
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80491
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79534
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12 Regression]
|t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114261
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Yea, there are various limits on the size of various lists the scheduler
maintains. This looks independent of those various clamps.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12 Regression] r217828
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114323
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114322
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114304
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] |libgfortran I/O – bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114304
--- Comment #18 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I don't have an opinion on the Fortran patch -- I think it's up to the Fortran
front-end maintainers to make that decision.
Given there's still a regression here, I'll put the marker back.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112548
--- Comment #25 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Well, at least in theory SPEC isn't supposed to be changing the sources or
validation criteria on us. So while our copy may be old, I would expect it's
still the same as Filip's.
That doesn't resolve any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107138
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 regression] |[12 regression]
|std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106931
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12 Regression]
|-Ws
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106842
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12 Regression] misleading
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106757
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12/13 Regression]
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106342
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
401 - 500 of 1404 matches
Mail list logo