Hi!
The wide-int.h templates expect that when an int/long etc. operand is used
it will be sign-extended based on the types precision.
wi_fold_in_parts passes 3 such non-zero constants to wi::lt_p, wi::gt_p
and wi::eq_p - 1, 3 and 4, which means it was doing weird things if either
some of 1, 3 or 4
On Thu, 3 Feb 2022, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Since I didn't see anyone responding to this problem, I filed PR
> > 104356 to record the regression.
> > And yes this should be handled correctly.
>
> Thanks. Note that we have an example of this in libgcc/libgcc2.c too.
I assumed this was handled b
The patch for PR55227 changed the minimal init-list handling in
cp_complete_array_type to a call to reshape_init, which broke on the dependent
initializer. It occurred to me that trying to deduce the array size from a
dependent init-list is wrong in general, as we can see with the second
testcase,
Expressions of the form "X + CST < Y + CST" where:
* CST is an unsigned integer constant with only the MSB set, and
* X and Y's types have integer conversion ranks <= CST's
can be simplified to "(signed) X < (signed) Y".
This is because, assuming a 32-bit signed numbers,
(unsigned) INT_MIN + 0x8
I committed r12-7009 to fix a couple of typos in the description
of the option.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2022-February/360083.html
Martin
This is on top of Martin's changes. Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/gcc-4.5/changes.html | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-4.5/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-4.5/changes.html
index c141a4d9..5181bae8 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-4.5/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-4.5/c
The third patch in the series adds a pointer_query instance to the wrestrict
pass and uses it for each invocation to check a function.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.cc (class pass_wrestrict): Outline ctor.
(pass_wrestrict::m_ptr_qry): New member.
(wrestrict_wal
The second patch in the series adds a pointer_query instance to the array
bounds checker object and uses it for each invocation to check a function.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* gimple-array-bounds.cc (array_bounds_checker::array_bounds_checker):
Define ctor.
(array_bounds_checker::ge
The first patch in the series make the pointer_query cache a private
member of the class and removes the ability to create an object of it
without one, or one with an external cache. It also simplifies existing
clients of the class that provide an external cache to avoid doing so.
gcc/ChangeLog:
Richard, as we discussed(*), this patch series enables the pointer_query
cache in the remaining two passes where it's currently disabled. Since
not using the cache is not an option anymore, the first patch in
the series makes it a private member of the pointer_query class and its
use unconditional
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:24AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> The -m[no-]fold-gimple flag was really intended primarily for internal
> testing while implementing GIMPLE folding for rs6000 vector built-in
> functions. It ended up leaking into other places, causing problems such
> as PR103686 iden
> Since I didn't see anyone responding to this problem, I filed PR
> 104356 to record the regression.
> And yes this should be handled correctly.
Thanks. Note that we have an example of this in libgcc/libgcc2.c too.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 12:17 AM Eric Botcazou via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately this breaks quite a lot of things.
>
> Right, for example in Ada where we now happily turn a division by zero, which
> should raise an exception with -gnatp, into nonsense. Do we really need this
> rather us
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 1:46 PM Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021, Martin Liška wrote:
> > I replaced and verified http:// links for various domains.
>
> Thank you, and apologies for not acking this right away back then.
>
> (Did you ping, and I missed that? Not that you should have to,
On Wed, 2022-02-02 at 17:14 +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> Hi, David,
>
> Thank you for fixing this issue!
>
> > On Feb 2, 2022, at 9:06 AM, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches <
> > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > GCC 12 has gained two features for dealing with uninitialized
> > variables:
> >
>
On Wed, 22 Dec 2021, Martin Liška wrote:
> I replaced and verified http:// links for various domains.
Thank you, and apologies for not acking this right away back then.
(Did you ping, and I missed that? Not that you should have to, just
missing a ping would be even worse.)
In any case this is a
On Tue, 1 Feb 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
> As the minimal GCC version that can build the current master is 4.8, it
> does not make sense mentioning something for older versions.
>
> Ready to be installed?
Yep, looks good.
Thank you,
Gerald
>+ inline void
>+ atomic_flag_wait_explicit(const atomic_flag* __a, bool __old,
>+ std::memory_order __m) noexcept
No need for the std:: qualification, and check the indentation.
> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>
>PR103934
This needs to include the component: PR libstdc++/103934
On 2/2/22 13:21, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022, Patrick Palka wrote:
Here we're crashing during satisfaction of the lambda's placeholder type
constraints because the constraints depend on the template arguments
from the enclosing scope, which aren't a part of the lambda's
DECL_TI_ARGS
On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 at 22:00, Jonathan Wakely via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> Tested powerpc64le-linux, pushed to trunk.
>
>
> The standard requires directory iterators to become equal to the end
> iterator value if they report an error. Some members functions of
> filesystem::recursive_directory_iterator
On 2/2/22 12:09, Patrick Palka wrote:
The satisfaction cache needs to look through ARGUMENT_PACK_SELECT
template arguments before calling iterative_hash_template_arg and
template_args_equal, which would otherwise crash.
Maybe we should handle ARGUMENT_PACK_SELECT in
iterative_hash_template_arg
On 2/1/2022 7:45 AM, Robin Dapp wrote:
Hi,
this is a bugfix for aa8cfe785953a0e87d2472311e1260cd98c605c0 which
broke an or1k test case (PR104153) as well as SPARC bootstrap (PR104198).
cond_exec_get_condition () returns the jump condition directly and we
now it to the backend. The or1k back
On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 01:23:44PM -0700, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Note that I think something similar may be needed to mark EOL for the
> pointer passed to realloc to fix a related set of false positives for code
> like this
>
> bool something = p != q;
> whatever = realloc (p, newsi
Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}. Committed.
Segher
2022-02-02 Segher Boessenkool
gcc/testsuite/
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_powerpc_altivec_ok):
Return 0 if the target is not Power. Restructure and add some comments.
---
gcc/testsuite/lib/targe
On 2/2/2022 7:42 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
This adds a flag to CONSTRUCTOR nodes indicating that for
clobbers this marks the end-of-life of storage as opposed to
just ending the lifetime of the object that occupied it.
The dangling pointer diagnostics uses CLOBBERs but is confu
Hi Mikael,
Am 29.01.22 um 15:24 schrieb Mikael Morin:
Hello,
the attached patch is a fix for PR104228.
Even if simple, I wouldn’t call it obvious, as it’s involving character
length and associate, so I don’t mind some extra review eyes.
I am probably not experienced enough to review this. Pa
On 2/2/22 09:35, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
this fixes the s390 bootstrap errors caused by -Werror=format-diag. It
simply splits the problematic format strings.
Either this:
error ("% is unknown", orig_p);
or this would be better:
error ("attribute % is unknown", orig_p);
T
Hi!
On 2/1/22 3:48 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 08:49:34AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> I've modified the previous patch to add more explanatory commentary about
>> the number-of-arguments test that was previously confusing, and to convert
>> the switch into an if-then-
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022, Patrick Palka wrote:
> Here we're crashing during satisfaction of the lambda's placeholder type
> constraints because the constraints depend on the template arguments
> from the enclosing scope, which aren't a part of the lambda's
> DECL_TI_ARGS. So when inside a lambda, do_au
On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 06:07:38PM +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 19/01/2022 07:54, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> >>Okay with those changes. Thanks!
> >
> >Thanks for having a look at this. I would like to back port this patch
> >also to the GCC 10 and 11 branches.
>
> The default is to ask for b
Now committed, taking Andrew's comments into account:
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-12/changes.html#amdgcn
Tobias
-
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634
München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas
Heurung, Frank Thü
Tested x86_64-linux, pushed to trunk.
These tests instantiate std::multiset and std::set with a type that has
no operator< so they should use a custom comparison function.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* testsuite/23_containers/multiset/operators/cmp_c++20.cc: Use
custom comparison fu
Tested x86_64-linux and by building x86_64-w64-mingw, pushed to trunk.
The C++98-style concept check for output iterators causes a link
failure on mingw-w64, because the __val() member function isn't defined.
Change it to use a function pointer instead. That pointer is never set
to anything meani
Hi, David,
Thank you for fixing this issue!
> On Feb 2, 2022, at 9:06 AM, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
> GCC 12 has gained two features for dealing with uninitialized variables:
>
> (a) a new -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value warning within -fanalyzer
> for interprocedural pat
The satisfaction cache needs to look through ARGUMENT_PACK_SELECT
template arguments before calling iterative_hash_template_arg and
template_args_equal, which would otherwise crash.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK
for trunk and perhaps 11?
PR c++/10370
Here we're crashing during satisfaction of the lambda's placeholder type
constraints because the constraints depend on the template arguments
from the enclosing scope, which aren't a part of the lambda's
DECL_TI_ARGS. So when inside a lambda, do_auto_deduction needs to add
the "regenerating" templ
On 19/01/2022 07:54, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Okay with those changes. Thanks!
Thanks for having a look at this. I would like to back port this patch
also to the GCC 10 and 11 branches.
The default is to ask for back ports after a break. Can I back port the
patch (with the default: break)
On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 4:42 AM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Christophe Lyon via Gcc-patches writes:
> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 7:01 PM Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches <
> > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry for the slow response, was out last week.
> >>
> >> Christophe Lyon via Gcc
Hello,
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> This adds a flag to CONSTRUCTOR nodes indicating that for clobbers this
> marks the end-of-life of storage as opposed to just ending the lifetime
> of the object that occupied it. The dangling pointer diagnostics uses
> CLOBBER
Hi,
this fixes the s390 bootstrap errors caused by -Werror=format-diag. It
simply splits the problematic format strings.
Bootstrapped and regtested with -march=z15.
Is it OK?
Regards
Robin
--
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/s390/s390.cc (s390_valid_target_attribute_inner_p): Split
On 02/02/2022 15:39, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 09.08.21 15:55, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Now that the GCN/OpenACC patches for this have been committed today,
I think it makes sense to add it to the documentation.
(I was told that some follow-up items are still pending, but as
the feature does work ...)
Hi Richard,
> Oh, I see - that's very special then and the pattern in the comment
> does not include this conversion. I think you can simplify the checking
> done by requiring types_match (TREE_TYPE (@1), TREE_TYPE (@3))
> and by noting that the types of @0, @2 and @4 are the same
> (you don't se
On 09.08.21 15:55, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Now that the GCN/OpenACC patches for this have been committed today,
I think it makes sense to add it to the documentation.
(I was told that some follow-up items are still pending, but as
the feature does work ...)
I think the follow-up patches have now b
When moving the -fanalyzer tests for -ftrivial-auto-var-init to the
"torture" subdirectory of gcc.dg/analyzer I noticed that -fanalyzer
wasn't always properly checking for initialization of return values.
The issue was that some "return" handling was using
region_model::copy_region to copy to the
Successfully bootstrapped & regrtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
I'm taking a liberty by committing this cleanup in stage 4, but it's
confined to the analyzer and seems low-risk.
Pushed to trunk as r12-6999-gea3e1915954371.
gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
* region.cc (region::calc_offset): Consoli
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Hans-Peter Nilsson writes:
>>> From: Richard Sandiford
>>> Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches writes:
>>> > The mystery isn't so much that there's code mismatching comments or
>>> > intent, but that this code has been there "forever". There has been a
>>> > function
Hans-Peter Nilsson writes:
>> From: Richard Sandiford
>> Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches writes:
>> > The mystery isn't so much that there's code mismatching comments or
>> > intent, but that this code has been there "forever". There has been a
>> > function reg_classes_intersect_p, in gcc s
GCC 12 has gained -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value, and I'm
seeing various false positives from it due to region_model::get_lvalue
not properly handling BIT_FIELD_REF, and falling back to
using an UNKNOWN_REGION for them.
This patch fixes these false positives by implementing a new
bit_range_
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 03:42:48PM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > This adds a flag to CONSTRUCTOR nodes indicating that for
> > clobbers this marks the end-of-life of storage as opposed to
> > just ending the lifetime of the object th
GCC 12 has gained two features for dealing with uninitialized variables:
(a) a new -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value warning within -fanalyzer
for interprocedural path-sensitive detection of ununit uses, and
(b) a new -ftrivial-auto-var-init option for mitigating some uses of
uninit variables
The macro is unused.
I'm going to push the patch.
Martin
gcc/ChangeLog:
* dwarf2out.cc (TEXT_SECTION_NAME): Remove unused macro.
---
gcc/dwarf2out.cc | 5 -
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/dwarf2out.cc b/gcc/dwarf2out.cc
index ad1d804dcaf..e60575b1398 100644
--- a
On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 03:42:48PM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> This adds a flag to CONSTRUCTOR nodes indicating that for
> clobbers this marks the end-of-life of storage as opposed to
> just ending the lifetime of the object that occupied it.
> The dangling pointer diagnostics us
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 3:48 PM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 2/2/22 15:38, Richard Biener wrote:
> > ... checking for seen_error () unnecessary.
>
> Sure, so something like this?
yes, I think so.
> Ready to be installed?
OK.
> Thanks,
> Martin
On 2/2/22 15:38, Richard Biener wrote:
... checking for seen_error () unnecessary.
Sure, so something like this?
Ready to be installed?
Thanks,
MartinFrom fd7385e495acfced416b37320b4bb7475bf2f9ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Martin Liska
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 14:21:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH]
This adds a flag to CONSTRUCTOR nodes indicating that for
clobbers this marks the end-of-life of storage as opposed to
just ending the lifetime of the object that occupied it.
The dangling pointer diagnostics uses CLOBBERs but is confused
by those emitted by the C++ frontend for example which emits
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 3:31 PM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> When one uses something like: -Wl,-plugin-opt=debug,
> we end up with lto1 WPA invocation that has 'debug'
> on command line. We interpret that as input filename.
>
> The patch moves resolution checking later so that we end up with
> a reasona
When one uses something like: -Wl,-plugin-opt=debug,
we end up with lto1 WPA invocation that has 'debug'
on command line. We interpret that as input filename.
The patch moves resolution checking later so that we end up with
a reasonable error message:
lto1: error: open debug failed: No such file
On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 09:19:03AM +0100, Marcel Vollweiler wrote:
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog:
>
> * c-omp.cc (c_omp_split_clauses): Added OMP_CLAUSE_HAS_DEVICE_ADDR case.
> * c-pragma.h (enum pragma_kind): Added 5.1 in comment.
> (enum pragma_omp_clause): Added PRAGMA_OMP_CLAUSE_H
I'd like to ping the remaining two of the series to fix PR100499:
Refactor LSHIFT_EXPR handling of multiple_of_p to use the correct type
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/589172.html
Adjust multiple_of_p to work correctly for wrapping operations
(in some cases)
https://gc
On 2/2/22 12:57, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> Bootstrapped and regtested on s390x-redhat-linux. Ok for
> releases/gcc-11?
>
>
>
> s390_code_end () puts indirect branch tables into separate sections and
> tries to switch back to wherever it was in the beginning by calling
> switch_to_section (curre
Bootstrapped and regtested on s390x-redhat-linux. Ok for
releases/gcc-11?
s390_code_end () puts indirect branch tables into separate sections and
tries to switch back to wherever it was in the beginning by calling
switch_to_section (current_function_section ()).
First of all, this is unnecessa
Hi Robin,
> Bootstrapped and reg-tested on s390x, Power 9, x86 and SPARC.
I've now also tested the patch on sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11: no regressions.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bi
On 1/31/22 09:00, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Dan Li writes:
Shadow Call Stack can be used to protect the return address of a
function at runtime, and clang already supports this feature[1].
/* This file should be included last. */
#include "target-def.h"
@@ -7478,10 +7479,31 @@ aarch6
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 12:28 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> The attached patch adjusts the placement of the warn-access pass
> as the two of you suggested in the bug. Please let me know if
> this is good to commit or if you want me to make some other tweaks.
>
> The patch passes tests in an x86_64-li
On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 7:41 PM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> Ping
I didn't quite get Jeffs comment, so I waited (sorry). I've meanwhile added
extern bool mark_dfs_back_edges (struct function *);
so please make verify_mark_backedges take a struct function * and replace
'cfun' with the explicit argu
On 1/31/22 08:26, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Thanks for the discussion and sorry for the slow reply, was out most of
last week.
Dan Li writes:
Thanks, Ard,
On 1/26/22 00:10, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 at 08:53, Dan Li wrote:
Hi, all,
Sorry for bothering.
I'm trying to co
On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 5:59 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 11:21 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 7:56 PM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Backport -mindirect-branch-cs-prefix:
> >
> > LGTM in case a x86 maintainer also acks this. Can you a
On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 4:21 PM Arjun Shankar wrote:
>
> > +/* As a special case, X + C < Y + C is the same as X < Y even with wrapping
> > + overflow if X and Y are signed integers of the same size, and C is an
> > + unsigned constant with all bits except MSB set to 0 and size >= that of
> > +
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 at 00:23, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 2/1/22 17:15, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 at 00:13, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2/1/22 12:48, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 at 18:54, Martin Sebor via Libstdc++
> >>> wrote:
>
> Passing an
This patch updates the documentation for Tom's change of the default
-mptx= version - mentioning also -mptx=7.0.
I forgot whether ptx = 7.0 was working fine or whether there was
a reason not to mention it.
At some point, we also have to update -misa=... Currently, only
sm_30 and sm_35 are documen
Hi Jakub,
+case OMP_CLAUSE_HAS_DEVICE_ADDR:
+ t = OMP_CLAUSE_DECL (c);
+ if (TREE_CODE (t) == TREE_LIST)
+{
+ if (handle_omp_array_sections (c, ort))
+remove = true;
+ else
+{
+ t = OMP_CLAUSE_DECL (c);
+ w
71 matches
Mail list logo
