On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 5:03 PM Kewen.Lin wrote:
>
> Hi Bin,
>
> > I see, it's similar to the auto-increment case where cost should be
> > recorded only once. So this is okay given 1) fine predicting
> > rtl-unroll is likely impossible here; 2) the patch has very limited
> > impact.
> >
> Really
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
--- Comment #1 from Kevin Stallard ---
A more complete output of the error:
/home/parallels/Perforce/kevin.stallard_Ubuntu18_Helios-Nucleus-Development_9171/BraceTest/BraceTest.cpp:
In constructor 'BraceTest::BraceTest()':
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
Bug ID: 96743
Summary: ICE on flexible array in initializer list using
lambdas
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 2:28 PM Joe Ramsay wrote:
>
> From: Joe Ramsay
>
> Hi,
>
> Previously, the machine description patterns for vst1q accepted a generic
> memory
> operand for the destination, which could lead to an unrecognised builtin when
> expanding vst1q* intrinsics. This change fixes
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 10:32 AM Christophe Lyon via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> armv8-m.base (cortex-m23) has the movt instruction, so we need to
> disable the define_split to generate a constant in this case,
> otherwise we get incorrect insn constraints as described in PR94538.
>
> We also need to
Snapshot gcc-9-20200821 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20200821/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 7:42 PM Dennis Zhang wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> This patch enables MVE vsub instructions for auto-vectorization.
> It adds RTL templates for MVE vsub instructions using 'minus' instead of
> unspec expression to make the instructions recognizable for vectorization.
> MVE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
Bug ID: 96742
Summary: "warning: comparison of unsigned expression in ‘< 0’
is always false" with dependent values
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96741
Bug ID: 96741
Summary: ICE in value_dependent_expression_p when compiling
Boost.Xpressive in C++03 mode
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 07:00:13PM -0300, Giuliano Belinassi wrote:
> This patch series add a new flag "-fparallel-jobs=" to control if the
> compiler should try to compile the current file in parallel.
[...]
> Bootstrapped and Regtested on Linux x86_64.
>
> Giuliano Belinassi (6):
> Modify gcc
On 8/20/20 4:22 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This patch implements C++20 P1009, allowing code like
new double[]{1,2,3}; // array bound will be deduced
Since this proposal makes the initialization rules more consistent, it is
applied to all previous versions of C++ (thus, effectively, all the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96740
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96740
Bug ID: 96740
Summary: frexp, modf, and remquo missing attribute nonnull
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96739
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96739
Bug ID: 96739
Summary: attribute(constructor) vs format NULL check
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
On 8/19/20 6:09 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
I think you need a while loop there, not just an if, to account for the
case of multiple consecutive cdk_attrs. At least the GNU attribute syntax
direct-declarator:
[...]
(
Hi Roger,
On 2020-08-21 8:53 a.m., Roger Sayle wrote:
> I was wondering whether Dave or Jeff (or someone else with access
> to real hardware) might "spin" this patch for me?
This may be totally unrelated to this patch but I hit this error in stage2
testing your change:
build/genattrtab
This is my proposed fix to PR middle-end/87256 where synth_mult takes an
unreasonable amount of CPU time determining an optimal sequence of
instructions to perform multiplications by (large) integer constants on
hppa.
One workaround, proposed in bugzilla, is to increase the hash table used
to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96738
Bug ID: 96738
Summary: GCC generates worse assembly than clang and It fails
to vectorized code compared to clang
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:29 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:50 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:41 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > > gcc/
> > > > > > > PR target/88808
Hi Jose,
Proposed patch to PR95352 - ICE on select rank with assumed-size
selector and lbound intrinsic.
Patch tested only on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Add check for NULL pointer before trying to access structure member,
patch by Steve Kargl.
this is OK, but you'll have to adjust your
Gerald Pfeifer writes:
> I noticed there's a couple of links on arm.com that changed recently
> (probably in the last month or so).
>
> Can you please help and get those updated? (Even those that redirect.)
>
>
> On http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-10/changes.html
>
>
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 1:08 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 10:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:46 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 12:36 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96736
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9b5d4f6e6689cb80933aa5ac22684c83c7604a11
commit r11-2801-g9b5d4f6e6689cb80933aa5ac22684c83c7604a11
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96736
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96735
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Checking out master instead of the branch I was on "fixed" things.
So, I guess may just be random timestamps in git, which do not
get updated correctly with contrib/gcc_update.
Hi Jose,
Proposed patch to PR94110 - Passing an assumed-size to an assumed-shape
argument should be rejected.
OK for master.
Thanks a lot for the patch!
Best regards
Thomas
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 10:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:46 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 12:36 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:50 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96737
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96736
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Looks like "cold" is defined in Darwin headers.
It needs to be moved after the #if check for Darwin.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:46 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 12:36 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:50 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:41 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96737
Bug ID: 96737
Summary: ICE when compiling module and submodule in same file
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96262
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
PR tree-optimization/21137 is now an old enhancement request pointing out
that an optimization I added back in 2006, to optimize "((x>>31)&64) != 0"
as "x < 0", doesn't fire in the presence of unanticipated type conversions.
The fix is to call STRIP_NOPS at the appropriate point.
I'd considered
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96262
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c44c2a3b0559979e3694ee2ab6860ec95fa3068a
commit r11-2800-gc44c2a3b0559979e3694ee2ab6860ec95fa3068a
Author: liuhongt
Date: Wed Jul
This simple patch to match.pd optimizes away bit permutation
operations, specifically bswap and rotate, in calls to popcount and
parity. Although this patch has been developed and tested on LP64,
it relies on there being no truncations or extensions to "marry up"
the appropriate PARITY, PARITYL
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 12:36 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:50 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:41 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:35 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:50 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:41 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96724
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96726
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Patches have been submitted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-August/054903.html
and https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-August/054904.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96727
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Patches have been submitted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-August/054903.html
and https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-August/054904.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96728
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Another patch has been submitted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-August/054907.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96736
Bug ID: 96736
Summary: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++1998/all_attributes.cc on
Darwin
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:50 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:41 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > > gcc/
> > > > > > > PR target/88808
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:50 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:41 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > gcc/
> > > > > > PR target/88808
> > > > > > * config/i386/i386.c
OG10 = devel/omp/gcc-10
a GCC 10 branch with some additional OpenMP/OpenACC/offloading patches
I have cherry-picked the following GCC 11 patches,
related to OpenMP 5 features (newest commit first):
commit 8ec8095634cab5053da4c49935eeba13f2aee2fa
gcc/fortran/module.c: Fix indentation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96735
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
(And yes, I did run contrib/gcc_update)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95352
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 10:35:27AM +, jrfsousa at gmail dot com wrote:
> Done!
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-August/054908.html
>
> Thank you very much.
>
Thanks for submitting. If no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96735
Bug ID: 96735
Summary: --enable-maintainer-mode broken
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:41 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
> > > > > gcc/
> > > > > PR target/88808
> > > > > * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_preferred_reload_class): Allow
> > > > > QImode data go into mask registers.
> > > >
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 8:41 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
> > > > > gcc/
> > > > > PR target/88808
> > > > > * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_preferred_reload_class): Allow
> > > > > QImode data go into mask registers.
> > > >
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:44 PM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches writes:
> > ping ^ 4, it's a very simple fix for ICE.
>
> OK, thanks. (Reviewing on the basis that I agree it's a simple rtx
> correctness fix.)
>
Thanks for the review.
> Richard
>
> >
> > On Mon, Aug
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:15 PM Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> > > > gcc/
> > > > PR target/88808
> > > > * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_preferred_reload_class): Allow
> > > > QImode data go into mask registers.
> > > > * config/i386/i386.md: (*movhi_internal): Adjust
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96727
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96726
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
Seemingly, the patch which caused this made it now to GCC 10;
at least it fails now with offloading on the OG10 branch, after
merging the trunk into that branch.
Hence, I committed this to GCC 10 to avoid this ICE. It occurs
here for libgomp.c/../libgomp.c-c++-common/reduction-16.c when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95320
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2974c828615b240f66b208301b5a73c6a07fcb22
commit r10-8653-g2974c828615b240f66b208301b5a73c6a07fcb22
Author: Tobias Burnus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96732
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96728
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-21
Status|UNCONFIRMED
From: Joe Ramsay
Hi,
Previously, the machine description patterns for vst1q accepted a generic memory
operand for the destination, which could lead to an unrecognised builtin when
expanding vst1q* intrinsics. This change fixes the pattern to only accept MVE
memory operands.
Tested on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63854
--- Comment #33 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b46584d7836bee011facdf946fd7241c748d66f0
commit r11-2799-gb46584d7836bee011facdf946fd7241c748d66f0
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Fri
> > > gcc/
> > > PR target/88808
> > > * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_preferred_reload_class): Allow
> > > QImode data go into mask registers.
> > > * config/i386/i386.md: (*movhi_internal): Adjust constraints
> > > for mask registers.
> > >
This patch improves the code generated on PA-RISC for DImode
(double word) left shifts by small constants (1-31). This target
has a very cool shd instruction that can be recognized by combine
for simple shifts, but relying on combine is fragile for more
complicated functions. This patch tweaks
On Dec 20, 2019, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 10/12/19 15:58 +0100, Corentin Gay wrote:
>> This patch was tested on x86_64-linux and is part of our nightly testing
>> on all platforms, including VxWorks.
> Was it tested on AIX?
> I think dg-require-gthreads will prevent the tests running for
On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 09:24 +0200, Andrea Corallo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> just a small patch updating some comments that apparently went out of
> sync a while ago adding gcc_jit_context_new_rvalue_from_long.
> Okay for trunk?
Yes
Thanks for fixing these
Dave
On 8/21/20 9:55 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
* c0db5b424d33577e633895c9c430bc1626336fb5
Backport of 'Fortran: Fix OpenMP's 'if(simd:' etc. conditions'
Missed that OG10 has changed the warning to an error;
this could be also something for the trunk, matching C/C++
which does print an error ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96734
--- Comment #1 from Ariadne Conill ---
Manually compiling cp/method.o using:
g++ -c -o cp/method.o -O2 method.ii
works fine.
I wonder if this is somehow related to pre-compiled headers, actually.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96734
Bug ID: 96734
Summary: gcc 10.2.0 fails to compile on mips64 due to crash in
IPA SRA pass
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96718
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96718
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:098a67ff74cca5f17ed630d870adf364c47031f6
commit r10-8652-g098a67ff74cca5f17ed630d870adf364c47031f6
Author: Jonathan
These tests do not actually require TBB, because they only inspect the
feature test macros present in the headers. However, if TBB is installed
then its headers will be included, and the version will be checked. If
the version is too old, compilation fails due to a #error directive.
This change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96718
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:988fb2f597d67cdf3603654372c020c28448441f
commit r11-2797-g988fb2f597d67cdf3603654372c020c28448441f
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96718
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96733
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |middle-end
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95352
José Rui Faustino de Sousa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #6 from
Hi all!
Proposed patch to PR95352 - ICE on select rank with assumed-size
selector and lbound intrinsic.
Patch tested only on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Add check for NULL pointer before trying to access structure member,
patch by Steve Kargl.
Thank you very much.
Best regards,
José Rui
Pip Cet writes:
>> Pip Cet via Gcc-patches writes:
>> > I'm working on the AVR cc0 -> CCmode conversion (bug#92729). One
>> > problem is that the cmpelim pass is currently very strict in requiring
>> > insns of the form
>> >
>> > (parallel [(set (reg:SI) (op:SI ... ...))
>> >(clobber
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96733
Bug ID: 96733
Summary: std::clamp for floats and doubles produces worse code
than a combo of std::min / std::max
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan
Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches writes:
> ping ^ 4, it's a very simple fix for ICE.
OK, thanks. (Reviewing on the basis that I agree it's a simple rtx
correctness fix.)
Richard
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 6:00 PM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>>
>> Ping^3
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:21 PM Hongtao Liu
Alex Coplan writes:
> Hi Richard,
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Richard Sandiford
>> Sent: 18 August 2020 09:35
>> To: Alex Coplan
>> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Earnshaw ;
>> Marcus Shawcroft ; Kyrylo Tkachov
>>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] aarch64: Don't generate invalid
Hi Palmer,
The 64-bit RISC-V Linux port has a minimum of 39-bit virtual addresses, so it
should be 1<<36 for 64-bit targets. In the implementation of address sanitizer,
we need a shadow memory that is 1/8th of the memory size, which is
where the 36 comes from. I don't think the choice of this
Hi Martin,
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 20 2020, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Really appreciate for your detailed explanation. BTW, My previous
> >> patch for PGO build on exchange2 takes this similar method by setting
> >> each cloned node to 1/10th of the frequency several month agao :)
>
xiezhiheng writes:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Richard Sandiford [mailto:richard.sandif...@arm.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 4:55 PM
>> To: xiezhiheng
>> Cc: Richard Biener ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH PR94442] [AArch64] Redundant ldp/stp instructions
>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96718
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96731
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96731
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Tony E Lewis from comment #0)
> I can't see any obvious mention of constraints on
> uniform_int_distribution's IntType in
> http://eel.is/c++draft/rand.dist.uni.int
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67792
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Alex Kruppa from comment #4)
> Problem still exists in 10.2.0:
And everybody still just removes the build dir instead of using 'make clean'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96732
Bug ID: 96732
Summary: ice in pop_nested_class
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67792
Alex Kruppa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||akruppa at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
OG10 = devel/omp/gcc-10 – a GCC 10 branch with some additional
OpenMP/OpenACC/offloading patches
Commits:
* 16052969a54db5df3d37fdcc81acba6ed1ec8c6a
moved OG10 ChangeLog items to ChangeLog.omp
* 612fee635bbb1198bc550c9c328330cae3259ed5
Merged origin/releases/gcc-10 into branch
*
Hello Iain,
> On 20 Aug 2020, at 14:54, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
>> We have a batch of vxworks changes queued that we will be submitting soon,
>> and we might get to rationalize this with other places along the way.
>>
>
> Running the build through one more time, and I've noticed that the make
>
Thanks Tamar,
as a note: I just pushed the changes that removes GCC's compile time
warnings (as in building these transformations will output less
warnings.) Fuzzying the code found no random programs out of 50,000 that
triggered errors with field reordering and dead field elimination (i.e.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/csky/csky.opt (TARGET_BACKTRACE): New.
* doc/invoke.texi (C-SKY Options): Document -mbacktrace.
---
gcc/config/csky/csky.opt | 4
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 7 ++-
2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96731
Bug ID: 96731
Summary: uniform_int_distribution requirement that its type
is_integral is too strict
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71453
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7
97 matches
Mail list logo
