On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 10:05 AM Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> > > Is it possible to create a test case that gas would throw an error for
> > > invalid operands?
> >
> > You can use -ffix-xmmN to disable XMM0-15.
>
> I mean can we create an intrinsic test for this PR that produces xmm16-3
On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:27 AM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Since PHADDW/PHADDD/PHADDSW/PHSUBW/PHSUBD/PHSUBSW/PSIGNB/PSIGNW/PSIGND
> have no AVX512 version, replace the "Yv" register constraint with the
> "x" register constraint.
LGTM, please backport to GCC10/GCC11 branch.
>
> PR t
On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 4:50 AM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Since KL instructions have no AVX512 version, replace the "v" register
> constraint with the "x" register constraint.
>
> PR target/105058
> * config/i386/sse.md (loadiwkey): Replace "v" with "x".
> (aesu8):
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 7:04 PM Hongyu Wang wrote:
>
> > > Is it possible to create a test case that gas would throw an error for
> > > invalid operands?
> >
> > You can use -ffix-xmmN to disable XMM0-15.
>
> I mean can we create an intrinsic test for this PR that produces xmm16-31?
> And the -ffi
> > Is it possible to create a test case that gas would throw an error for
> > invalid operands?
>
> You can use -ffix-xmmN to disable XMM0-15.
I mean can we create an intrinsic test for this PR that produces xmm16-31?
And the -ffix-xmmN is an option for assembler or compiler? I didn't
find it in
This patch adds Fortran support for OMP 5.1 "canonical loop nest form"
and non-rectangular loops. The C/C++ and middle-end support is already
present except for some missing constraint checks in the gimplifier,
which I've added here. There's still a TODO with respect to the
not-yet-implemente
I've got another patch forthcoming (stage 1 material) that adds some new
diagnostics for non-rectangular loops during gimplification of OMP
nodes. When I was working on that, I discovered that the Fortran front
end wasn't attaching location information to the tree nodes
corresponding to the va
I ran into this bug in the handling of clauses on the combined "masked
taskloop" OMP directive when I was working on something else. The fix
turned out to be a 1-liner. OK for trunk?
-Sandracommit 17c4fa0bd97c070945004095a06fb7d9e91869e3
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date: Wed Mar 23 18:45:25 2
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 6:08 PM Hongyu Wang wrote:
>
> Is it possible to create a test case that gas would throw an error for
> invalid operands?
You can use -ffix-xmmN to disable XMM0-15.
> H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches 于2022年3月26日周六 04:50写道：
> >
> > Since KL instructions have no AVX512 version, rep
Is it possible to create a test case that gas would throw an error for
invalid operands?
H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches 于2022年3月26日周六 04:50写道：
>
> Since KL instructions have no AVX512 version, replace the "v" register
> constraint with the "x" register constraint.
>
> PR target/105058
>
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 06:15:56PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 3/25/22 4:08 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 02:51:38PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > It seems likely many of these tests should move to g++.target/powerpc .
>
> Probably, that can be a follow on patch.
On 3/25/22 4:08 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 02:51:38PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> This patch updates the POWER testsuite test cases using -mcpu= and -mtune=
>> to use the preferred -mdejagnu-cpu= and -mdejagnu-tune= options. This also
>> obviates the need for the dg
Committed.
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
index 9cff81b9..689feeba 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
@@ -193,6 +193,27 @@ a work-in-progress.
+C
+
+ Some new features from the upcoming C2X revision of the ISO C
+
The attached 93280 test no longer ICEs but looks like it was never added to the
testsuite. The 104583 test, modified so that it closely resembles 93280, still
ICEs.
The problem is that in 104583 we have a value-init from {} (the line A a{};),
so this code in convert_like_internal
7960 /
PR analyzer/104308 reports that when -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value
complains about certain memmove operations where the source is
uninitialized, the diagnostic uses UNKNOWN_LOCATION:
In function 'main':
cc1: warning: use of uninitialized value '*(short unsigned int *)&s + 1'
[CWE-457] [-W
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 02:51:38PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> This patch updates the POWER testsuite test cases using -mcpu= and -mtune=
> to use the preferred -mdejagnu-cpu= and -mdejagnu-tune= options. This also
> obviates the need for the dg-skip-if directive, since the user cannot
> overrid
Replace -msse with -msse2 since requires SSE2.
PR testsuite/105055
* gcc.target/i386/pr95483-1.c: Replace -msse with -msse2.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95483-1.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95483-1.c
Since KL instructions have no AVX512 version, replace the "v" register
constraint with the "x" register constraint.
PR target/105058
* config/i386/sse.md (loadiwkey): Replace "v" with "x".
(aesu8): Likewise.
---
gcc/config/i386/sse.md | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertio
On 3/25/22 12:45, David Malcolm wrote:
On Wed, 2022-03-23 at 17:52 +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 23/03/2022 17:31, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
The concern is that the constraints implied by atttributes access
and
nonnull are independent of each other. I would suggest to document
th
Tested powerpc64le-linux, pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/std/bit (bit_cast, byteswap, endian): Add doxygen
comments.
---
libstdc++-v3/include/std/bit | 20 +++-
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/libstdc++-v
This patch updates the POWER testsuite test cases using -mcpu= and -mtune=
to use the preferred -mdejagnu-cpu= and -mdejagnu-tune= options. This also
obviates the need for the dg-skip-if directive, since the user cannot
override the -mcpu= value being used to compile the test case.
This passed re
Hello, and thanks for the review!
> 1) Do I correctly understand that __conditions_accu_true/false track
> every short-circuit sub-expression of a condition and record
> if a given sub-expr is seen to be true or false?
Sort-of. It is not really aware of sub-expressions at all, but tracks every
bo
On 3/25/22 11:58, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
Jonathan reported on IRC that we don't parse
__builtin_bit_cast (type, val).field
etc.
The problem is that for these 2 builtins we return from
cp_parser_postfix_expression instead of setting postfix_expression
to the cp_build_* value and falling through
On 3/25/22 14:09, Patrick Palka wrote:
When constructing the builtin operator->* candidate set according to
the available conversion functions for each operand type, we end up
considering a candidate with C1=T (a TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARM) and C2=F,
during which we crash from lookup_base because depende
On 3/25/22 12:07, Patrick Palka wrote:
When an if-stmt is deemed non-constant because both of its branches are
non-constant, we issue a rather generic error which, given that it points
to the 'if' token, misleadingly suggests the condition is at fault:
constexpr-105050.C:8:3: error: expressio
On Wed, 2022-03-23 at 17:52 +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 23/03/2022 17:31, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > The concern is that the constraints implied by atttributes access
> > and
> > nonnull are independent of each other. I would suggest to document
> > that without talking ab
When constructing the builtin operator->* candidate set according to
the available conversion functions for each operand type, we end up
considering a candidate with C1=T (a TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARM) and C2=F,
during which we crash from lookup_base because dependent_type_p sees
a TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARM when
On 3/25/22 12:34, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
cplus_decl_attributes can be called with attributes equal to
error_mark_node, there are some spots in the function that test
it or decl_attributes it calls starts with:
if (TREE_TYPE (*node) == error_mark_node || attributes == error_mark_node)
r
For IBM Z in particular there is a problem with structs like:
struct A { float a; int :0; };
Our ABI document allows passing a struct in an FPR only if it has
exactly one member. On the other hand it says that structs of 1,2,4,8
bytes are passed in a GPR. So this struct is expected to be passed i
On 3/25/22 11:42, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Christophe Lyon via Gcc-patches wrote:
This reverts commit r12-1434-g046a3beb1673bf to fix PR target/104882.
As discussed in the PR, it turns out that the MVE ISA has no natural
mapping with GCC's vec_pack_trunc
Since PHADDW/PHADDD/PHADDSW/PHSUBW/PHSUBD/PHSUBSW/PSIGNB/PSIGNW/PSIGND
have no AVX512 version, replace the "Yv" register constraint with the
"x" register constraint.
PR target/105052
* config/i386/sse.md (ssse3_phwv4hi3):
Replace "Yv" with "x".
(ssse3_phdv2si3): Lik
On 3/25/2022 4:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The following testcase ICEs on aarch64-linux with -g and
assembles with a warning otherwise, because it emits
ldrb w0,[x0,16]!
instruction which sets the x0 register multiple times.
Due to disabled DCE (from -Og) we end up before REE with:
(insn
Hi,
Addressed all of your comments bar the pred ops one.
Is this OK?
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/aarch64/aarch64.cc (aarch64_vector_costs): Define
determine_suggested_unroll_factor and m_nosve_pattern.
(determine_suggested_unroll_factor): New function.
(aarch64_vector_co
Hi!
cplus_decl_attributes can be called with attributes equal to
error_mark_node, there are some spots in the function that test
it or decl_attributes it calls starts with:
if (TREE_TYPE (*node) == error_mark_node || attributes == error_mark_node)
return NULL_TREE;
But the recent PR104245 ch
The following patch is for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104971
The PR was already fixed by Jakub but his patch did not fix a latent LRA
bug mentioned in the PR comments. The current patch fixes the latent bug.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64 and a
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:07:31PM -0400, Patrick Palka via Gcc-patches wrote:
> When an if-stmt is deemed non-constant because both of its branches are
> non-constant, we issue a rather generic error which, given that it points
> to the 'if' token, misleadingly suggests the condition is at fault:
When an if-stmt is deemed non-constant because both of its branches are
non-constant, we issue a rather generic error which, given that it points
to the 'if' token, misleadingly suggests the condition is at fault:
constexpr-105050.C:8:3: error: expression ‘’ is not a constant
expression
8
Hi!
Jonathan reported on IRC that we don't parse
__builtin_bit_cast (type, val).field
etc.
The problem is that for these 2 builtins we return from
cp_parser_postfix_expression instead of setting postfix_expression
to the cp_build_* value and falling through into the postfix regression
suffix handl
Hi,
I noticed that, while the C/C++ frontends invoke the GENERIC match.pd
simplifications to do early folding, the debug output from
generic-match.cc does not appear in the -fdump-tree-original output,
even with -fdump-tree-original-folding or -fdump-tree-original-all. This
patch fixes that.
For
When we optimize permutations in a reduction chain we have to
be careful to select the correct live-out stmt, otherwise the
reduction result will be unused and the retained scalar code will
execute only the number of vector iterations.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed to
On 10/03/2022 06:09, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
The size argument larger than size of SRC for strnlen and strndup is
problematic only if SRC is not NULL terminated, which invokes undefined
behaviour. In all other cases, as long as SRC is large enough to have a
NULL char (i.e. size 1 or more), a l
On Fri, 2022-03-25 at 10:58 +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> This commit broke bootstrapping - well, at least kind of:
> make pdf (and probably 'make dvi' and other formats using TeX)
> now fails with:
> > Runaway argument?
> >
> > -Wanalyzer-tainted-allocation-size @gol
> > -Wanalyzer-tainted-
On 25/03/2022 18:56, Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches wrote:
Perhaps a suitable compromise would be to add a separate warning flag
specifically for the strn* warnings, so users deliberately using the
bound to express a limit other than the length of the argument string
(and confident that their st
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:42 PM Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:11 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Since we're now vectorizing by default at -O2 issues like PR101908
> > > become more important where we app
On Thu, 17 Mar 2022, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 8:13 AM Patrick Palka wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 3:24 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> > >
> > > name_lookup::search_unqualified uses a statically allocated vector
> > > in order to avoid repeated reallocation, under the ass
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 09:36:10AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/24/22 18:43, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 05:12:12PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 3/24/22 15:56, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:02:29PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > > > On
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:11 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > Since we're now vectorizing by default at -O2 issues like PR101908
> > become more important where we apply basic-block vectorization to
> > parts of the function covering loa
On 3/24/22 18:43, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 05:12:12PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/24/22 15:56, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:02:29PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/24/22 11:49, Marek Polacek wrote:
I started looking into this PR because in GCC 4.9
Pushed to wwwdocs.
---
htdocs/gcc-12/porting_to.html | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-12/porting_to.html b/htdocs/gcc-12/porting_to.html
index 470703c7..079bda30 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-12/porting_to.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-12/porting_to.html
@@ -67,7
On 3/17/22 06:35, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
On 15/03/22 14:36 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/15/22 10:40, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
On 15/03/2022 21:09, Martin Sebor wrote:
The strncmp function takes arrays as arguments (not necessarily
strings).? The main purpose of the -Wstring
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:11 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Since we're now vectorizing by default at -O2 issues like PR101908
> become more important where we apply basic-block vectorization to
> parts of the function covering loads from function parameters passed
> on the stack. S
> -Original Message-
> From: Andre Vieira (lists)
> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 3:01 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov ; Richard Sandiford
>
> Subject: [aarch64] Update Neoverse N2 core definition
>
> Hi,
>
> As requested, I updated the Neoverse N2 entry to use
On 3/25/22 13:35, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi!
On 2022-03-25T13:08:52+0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 3/25/22 11:04, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 25.03.22 10:27, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:18:49AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
[...]
Fix this by scaling down the faili
Hi!
On 2022-03-25T13:08:52+0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 3/25/22 11:04, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>> On 25.03.22 10:27, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:18:49AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
[...]
Fix this by scaling down the failing test-cases.
Tested o
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 01:13:06PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Also, I think typically in the Fortran FE side-effects would go into
> > se.pre and se.post sequences, not into se.expr, and this routine
> > doesn't emit those se.pre/se.post sequences anywhere, so presumably it
> > assumes they d
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, Richard Biener wrote:
> We have
>
> return VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR( VEC_PERM_EXPR < {<<< Unknown tree:
> compound_literal_expr
> V D.1984 = { 0 }; >>>, { 0 }} , {<<< Unknown tree:
> compound_literal_expr
> V D.1985 = { 0 }; >>>, { 0 }} , { 0, 0 } > & {(short in
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:34 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:16:40PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Tobias Burnus
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
> > > > On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 01:08:52PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 3/25/22 11:04, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> > On 25.03.22 10:27, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:18:49AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > Fix this by scaling down the failing test-case
Since we're now vectorizing by default at -O2 issues like PR101908
become more important where we apply basic-block vectorization to
parts of the function covering loads from function parameters passed
on the stack. Since we have no good idea how the stack pushing
was performed but we do have a go
On 3/25/22 11:04, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 25.03.22 10:27, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:18:49AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
[...]
Fix this by scaling down the failing test-cases.
Tested on x86_64-linux with nvptx accelerator.
[...]
Will defer to Thomas, as it i
This used to work long ago but broke at some point, so I'm applying the fix
only on the mainline, all the more so that it deals the "section" attribute.
Tested on x86-64/Linux, applied on the mainline.
2022-03-25 Eric Botcazou
c-family/
* c-ada-spec.cc (dump_ada_import): Deal with th
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:16:40PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Tobias Burnus
> wrote:
> >
> > On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
> > > On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
> > >static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
> > On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
> >static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1]=2.0e+0};
> > That is an invalid RANGE_EXPR where the maximum is smaller tha
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Christophe Lyon via Gcc-patches wrote:
> This reverts commit r12-1434-g046a3beb1673bf to fix PR target/104882.
>
> As discussed in the PR, it turns out that the MVE ISA has no natural
> mapping with GCC's vec_pack_trunc / vec_unpack standard patterns, unli
Hi!
The following testcase ICEs on aarch64-linux with -g and
assembles with a warning otherwise, because it emits
ldrb w0,[x0,16]!
instruction which sets the x0 register multiple times.
Due to disabled DCE (from -Og) we end up before REE with:
(insn 12 39 13 2 (set (reg:SI 1 x1 [orig:93 _2 ] [93])
On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1]=2.0e+0};
That is an invalid RANGE_EXPR where the maximum is smaller than the minimum.
The following patch fixes that. If TYPE_MAX_VALUE is
On 25.03.22 10:27, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:18:49AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
[...]
Fix this by scaling down the failing test-cases.
Tested on x86_64-linux with nvptx accelerator.
[...]
Will defer to Thomas, as it is a purely OpenACC change.
One way to d
This commit broke bootstrapping - well, at least kind of:
make pdf (and probably 'make dvi' and other formats using TeX)
now fails with:
Runaway argument?
-Wanalyzer-tainted-allocation-size @gol -Wanalyzer-tainted-array-inde@ETC.
src/gcc-mainline/gcc/doc/invoke.texi:96
82: File ended while s
We have
return VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR( VEC_PERM_EXPR < {<<< Unknown tree:
compound_literal_expr
V D.1984 = { 0 }; >>>, { 0 }} , {<<< Unknown tree: compound_literal_expr
V D.1985 = { 0 }; >>>, { 0 }} , { 0, 0 } > & {(short int) SAVE_EXPR
, (short int) SAVE_EXPR });
where we gimplif
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:18:49AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> When a display manager is running on an nvidia card, all CUDA kernel launches
> get a 5 seconds watchdog timer.
>
> Consequently, when running the libgomp testsuite with nvptx accelerator and
> GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O0 we run into a few FAI
Hi,
When a display manager is running on an nvidia card, all CUDA kernel launches
get a 5 seconds watchdog timer.
Consequently, when running the libgomp testsuite with nvptx accelerator and
GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O0 we run into a few FAILs like this:
...
libgomp: cuStreamSynchronize error: the launch ti
Hi!
On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1]=2.0e+0};
That is an invalid RANGE_EXPR where the maximum is smaller than the minimum.
The following patch fixes that. If TYPE_MAX_VALUE is smaller than
TYPE_MIN_VALUE, the array is empty a
72 matches
Mail list logo
