https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95310
--- Comment #3 from ensadc at mailnesia dot com ---
When verifying the fix, I noticed a new bug:
template requires true
using iter_reference_t = decltype(*T{});
template
struct result {
using type = iter_reference_t;
};
template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97452
David Ledger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davidledger at live dot com.au
---
Hi.
Thanks for the review. See the comments below.
I attached the updated patch.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:52:33PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2020-10-15 at 13:39 -0400, Antoni Boucher wrote:
Thanks. I updated the patch with these changes.
Thanks for patch; review below. Sorry if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97465
--- Comment #3 from fdlbxtqi ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> e.g. what kind of cross build? We're not psychic.
I try to build x86_64-linux-gnu to x86_64-linux-gnu lol since I do not want vtv
to ruin my ABIs.
However, after
Snapshot gcc-9-20201016 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20201016/
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82343
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20201016 (experimental) [master revision
3e8d8f3b883:93f23a96b87:02629b116eed7c6911ef0eb2ef97e1883e9fb1de] (GCC)
[504] %
[504] % gcctk -O2 small.c
[505] %
[505] % gcctk -O3 small.c
during GIMPLE pass: vect
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:59:5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97039
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97465
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
e.g. what kind of cross build? We're not psychic.
On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:35:44AM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> This patch is revised from the first version of the patch posted.
In the future, please send a NEW series, in a NEW thread, when you have
a new series. I was waiting for a new series (because you needed
changes), and I missed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97465
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97355
--- Comment #15 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> In any case, the change to use -gdwarf-* by default even when not compiling
> just assembly was based on the assumption that gas would in that case pretty
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97465
Bug ID: 97465
Summary: cross build gcc with vtv enabled failed. Cannot find
out headers in glibc why?
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95979
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02629b116eed7c6911ef0eb2ef97e1883e9fb1de
commit r11-4020-g02629b116eed7c6911ef0eb2ef97e1883e9fb1de
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94761
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Commit e69bf64be925 added the host and target flags originally, and it
seems to have been just a mistake that is used --build=${build_alias}
--host=${build_alias}. (Now of course that has spread to
I have a tiny program composed of a few functions
and one of those functions (setupB) has gone missing.
Since I need to walk its GIMPLE, this is a problem.
The program:
-- aux.h -
#include "stdlib.h"
typedef struct A A_t;
typedef struct A B_t;
struct A {
I wrote:
Regression-tested. OK for trunk?
I will remove this part
- When an actual argument list is provided, skip the absent arguments.
+ When an actual argument list is provided, skip the absent arguments
+ unless copy_type is true.
To be used together with
Hello Harald,
*ping*
OK for master / 10-branch?
OK for both (with a suitable waiting period).
Best regards
Thomas
Hello world,
here's a patch which corrects some wrong declarations (and fixes
the segfault for FINDLOC on Darwin ARM).
Regression-tested. OK for trunk?
Best regards
Thomas
Correct decls for functions which do not pass actual arguments.
A wrong decl for findloc caused segfaults at
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 04:20:36PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> This series of 9 patches is an attempt to gather together all of the patches
> that are needed to be able to configure and build a little endian 64-bit
> PowerPC Linux GCC compiler where the defualt long double format uses the
AS Jakub observed in an earlier testcase (97325), when EVRP dumps the
known SSA_RANGES, it isn't expecting names to be deleted that it could
not delete, so it wasn't checking.
With the hybrid model, ranger sometimes deletes things that EVRP
calculated a range for, and the resulting dump was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96927
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
In order to match evrp behaviour, adjust POINTER_PLUS_EXPR processing to
handle a zero constant plus something to return the something.
ie
[0, 0] + CONST will now return [CONST, CONST] instead of the
previous behaviour of [1, +INF].
Bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, no regressions,
In the hybrid folder, range_of_stmt and range_on_edge invoke the same
routines in both evrp_folder and ranger_folder and compare results.
In implementing hybrid folder, I inherited it from evrp_folder since
EVRP has a few pre-and post statement things to do.
when the hybdrid folder calls
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97462
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4a135bd987e7bff6d3b94efa085e0c246348b486
commit r11-4016-g4a135bd987e7bff6d3b94efa085e0c246348b486
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
We were asserting that the shifts should not be negative, instead, just
return false indicating we can't tell anything about operand1 from the
result.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, no regressions, pushed.
Andrew
2020-10-16 Andrew Macleod
PR tree-optimization/97462
gcc/
*
On 10/16/20 2:46 PM, Alan Lehotsky wrote:
I’m in the process of upgrading a gcc port, but my client is using a gcc 4.4.1
port right now and has run into a scheduler bug. This seems to have been fixed
at some point, as the 8.3.1 code base doesn’t seem to have the bug. But they’d
like a fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|ipa |tree-optimization
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted the patch to the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/556399.html
Hi,
in PR 97456, IPA-SRA triggers a bug in tree-complex.c where it
converts:
a$_M_value_21 = COMPLEX_EXPR ;
(where ISRA.18 is IPA-SRA created PARM_DECL with DECL_IGNORED_P set,
which is why it only happens with IPA-SRA) into:
a$_M_value_21 = COMPLEX_EXPR ;
i.e. it replaces two
I’m in the process of upgrading a gcc port, but my client is using a gcc 4.4.1
port right now and has run into a scheduler bug. This seems to have been fixed
at some point, as the 8.3.1 code base doesn’t seem to have the bug. But they’d
like a fix on their 4.4.1 base.
Basically, what I see
On 10/15/20 7:21 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Ed,
In commit r232377 (aka 2be75957b80b640c0aac4356ab861edd0c2f1b9d in the
git repo) you added a new header to the include/precompiled directory.
That wasn't mentioned in the ChangeLog, wasn't in the patch posted to
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:17 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:58:34AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > Don't set HAVE_AS_GDWARF_5_DEBUG_FLAG nor HAVE_AS_WORKING_DWARF_4_FLAG
> > if there is an extra assembly input file in debug info generated by
> > --gdwarf-5/--gdwarf-4:
> >
> >
On Linux/x86_64,
429ad0bb0d3dc77e44f95620341da4938d49168e is the first bad commit
commit 429ad0bb0d3dc77e44f95620341da4938d49168e
Author: Richard Biener
Date: Thu Oct 15 11:55:53 2020 +0200
tree-optimization/97428 - split SLP groups for loop vectorization
caused
FAIL:
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:58:34AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Don't set HAVE_AS_GDWARF_5_DEBUG_FLAG nor HAVE_AS_WORKING_DWARF_4_FLAG
> if there is an extra assembly input file in debug info generated by
> --gdwarf-5/--gdwarf-4:
>
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25878
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97451
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
(In
Don't set HAVE_AS_GDWARF_5_DEBUG_FLAG nor HAVE_AS_WORKING_DWARF_4_FLAG
if there is an extra assembly input file in debug info generated by
--gdwarf-5/--gdwarf-4:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25878
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26740
Also replace success with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97464
Bug ID: 97464
Summary: Missed redundant store optimization opportunity
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97460
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97460
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ccb4f20cbee1756c464033bbdda2f27b6aa2a63f
commit r11-4015-gccb4f20cbee1756c464033bbdda2f27b6aa2a63f
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
My changes to friend handling meant that there are now cases where a
friend doesn't get a lang-specific object. So we need to check there
is one before looking inside it.
PR c++/97460
gcc/cp/
* pt.c (push_template_decl): Check DECL_LANG_SPECIFIC in friend
case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94761
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #21 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #20)
> >
> >Is this your preferred solution?
>
> The backen should use more lowlevel functions to build this type rather than
> copying from a type that isn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On October 16, 2020 5:46:28 PM GMT+02:00, amacleod at redhat dot com
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
>
>--- Comment #19 from Andrew Macleod ---
>(In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97463
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97462
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96171
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.0, 9.3.0
Known to fail|11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97460
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97451
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96258
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96258
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a16da48bf19bb139e5461e5b5b7f072d5369b054
commit r11-4014-ga16da48bf19bb139e5461e5b5b7f072d5369b054
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
cp_parser_declaration peeks at 1 or 2 tokens, when I changed it not to
peek past EOF, I set the second token to NULL. But there are paths
through the function that just look at the second token. Fixed by
setting that token to EOF rather than NULL in this case.
PR c++/96258
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97463
Bug ID: 97463
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in warn_parm_ptrarray_mismatch on
an incompatible function redeclaration
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97463
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot
gnu.org
Hello,
The VxWorks ports come with specific crtstuff objects to cope
with the variety of possible means to load code on a target, as
kernel modules or RTPS (Real Time Processes).
Compilation of those objects is currently explicitly replicated
for the two modes, through t-vxcrtstuff:
20201016 (experimental) [master revision
37753588116:be453072dd2:6c6e0cafa38cee8309f37b846cb7db813a472a54] (GCC)
[555] %
[555] % gcctk -O1 -c -w small.c
[556] % gcctk -Os -c -w small.c
during GIMPLE pass: evrp
small.c: In function ‘d’:
small.c:7:1: internal compiler error: in op1_range, at range-op.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83417
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or:
unsigned r3_128u_v4 (__uint128_t n)
{
unsigned long a;
a = (n >> 96);
a += (n >> 64) & 0xULL;
a += (n >> 32) & 0xULL;
a += (n & 0xULL);
return a % 3;
}
if the target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
And indeed the following avoids the issue:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-complex.c b/gcc/tree-complex.c
index 2e54bbb917c..71ad7c18523 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-complex.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-complex.c
@@ -570,8 +570,10 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
E.g.
unsigned r3_128u_v3 (__uint128_t n)
{
unsigned long a;
a = (n >> 88);
a += (n >> 44) & 0xfffULL;
a += (n & 0xfffULL);
return a % 3;
}
could work, but haven't measured how fast
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #19 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #18)
> On October 16, 2020 4:17:43 PM GMT+02:00, amacleod at redhat dot com
>
> >
> >Yeah, I haven't tripped over it in ADA. This was a 512 byte quad on the
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97460
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction |
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
In this testcase we weren't able to deduce b's type:
template void Task() { }
auto b = { };
because resolve_nondeduced_context doesn't iterate on the {}'s elements.
So make sure to look into {} too. We don't need to handle nested {}
here.
We could either tweak resolve_nondeduced_context
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97457
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
For the similar testcase:
long a;
short b;
signed char c(char d, char e) { return d + e; }
int main(void) {
a = -30;
for (; a < 24; a = c(a, 5)) {
short *f =
(*f)--;
}
if (b != -11)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97419
--- Comment #7 from Steve Fink ---
I can workaround the bug by avoiding declval:
- using Iter = decltype(std::declval().begin());
- using Elem = decltype(*std::declval());
+ using Iter = decltype(static_cast(nullptr)->begin());
+ using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97461
--- Comment #3 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Probably started from
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=871e5ada6d53d5eb ("Make TOPN
counter dynamically allocated.") when dynamic memory allocation call was added
to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97461
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Original firefox lockup is slightly more complicated: malloc() call happens in
a constructor of external library (at _gpg_err_init()).
(gdb) bt
#0 __lll_lock_wait (futex=0x5591defd9720 , private=0) at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97461
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 49388
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49388=edit
a.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97461
Bug ID: 97461
Summary: allocate_gcov_kvp() deadlocks in firefox LTO+PGO build
(overridden malloc() recursion)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On October 16, 2020 4:17:43 PM GMT+02:00, amacleod at redhat dot com
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
>
>--- Comment #17 from Andrew Macleod ---
>(In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Looking at Martin's reduced testcase
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Confirmed with -fwhole-program -O3 IPA SRA messes things up here cloning
> wrong
> and producing the strange
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97129
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96258
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nathan at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ping (#2) the following 9 patches to add support for building a GCC toolchain
where the default long double is IEEE 128-bit floating point instead of the IBM
extended double floating point.
The first patch was revised with input from Joesph Myers. I will list that
patch in this list. Most of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96258
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97129
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #16)
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2020, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
> >
> > --- Comment #15 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97460
Bug ID: 97460
Summary: [11 Regression] A boost ICE since
r11-3883-g068644a14976ce67
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97460
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Last reconfirmed|
Hello.
There's another version of the patch that should be based on what
I discussed with Richi and Jakub:
- the first patch introduces a new option -fbit-tests that analogue to
-fjump-tables
and will control the new if-to-switch conversion pass
- the second patch adds the pass
- I share
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97453
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
>
> --- Comment #15 from Andrew Macleod ---
> Well it seems far more incorrect that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Macleod ---
Well it seems far more incorrect that types_compatible_p () is FALSE for a type
and its MIN/MAX value?
Whats the point of MIN/MAX if you cant count on them being the right types, or
at least conmpatible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97327
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by SRINATH PARVATHANENI
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:90042c43a92c452a5f9f3afbfcdad511ea09a54f
commit r11-4006-g90042c43a92c452a5f9f3afbfcdad511ea09a54f
Author: Srinath
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 16 October 2020 14:21
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH][GCC] arm: Fix the warning -mcpu=cortex-m55 conflicting
> with -march=armv8.1-m.main (pr97327).
>
> Hello,
>
> This patch fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
But that's just a waste of memory ... the expectation that the min/max values
are of the same type is simply wrong.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97414
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://reviews.llvm.org/D8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97360
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 49386
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49386=edit
Patch to create integral MAX and MiN
Joy. I'll try it and see what happens.
And back to the first problem where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
Bug ID: 97459
Summary: __uint128_t remainder for division by 3
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
Hello,
This patch fixes (PR97327) the warning -mcpu=cortex-m55 conflicts with
-march=armv8.1-m.main
for -mfloat-abi=soft by adding the isa_bit_mve_float to clearing FP bit list.
The following combination are fixed with this patch:
$ cat bug.c
int main(){
return 0;
}
$ arm-none-eabi-gcc
This changes SLP def gathering to not fail due to mismatched
def type but instead demote the def to external. This allows the
new testcase to be vectorized in full (with GCC 10 it is not
vectorized at all and with current trunk we vectorize only the
store). This is important since with BB
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020, guojiufu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just had a check on below patch for PR66552.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-February/540930.html
> It seems this patch works fine now. This patch fixes PR66552 which
> request to optimizes (x shift (n mod C)) to
> (x shift (n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97428
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Michael_S from comment #9)
> Hopefully, you did regression tests for all main AoS<->SoA cases.
We only test what we have in the testsuite ;)
> I.e.
>
> typedef struct { double re, im; }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96914
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by SRINATH PARVATHANENI
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7591fc054f40c96fabe05d74d61d1c144798354b
commit r10-8907-g7591fc054f40c96fabe05d74d61d1c144798354b
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96914
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by SRINATH PARVATHANENI
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c4fb78e5d79b02ae720b2db42fa00e2c8d2d7ed5
commit r10-8906-gc4fb78e5d79b02ae720b2db42fa00e2c8d2d7ed5
Author:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96914
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by SRINATH PARVATHANENI
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f5d0b57da1a0529a44da772f4f0b227cd5c50fd5
commit r10-8905-gf5d0b57da1a0529a44da772f4f0b227cd5c50fd5
Author:
Status
==
GCC trunk which eventually will become GCC 11 is still open for general
development. Stage 1 will end on the end of Sunday, Nov 15th 2020
at which point we will transition into Stage 3 which allows for general
bugfixing.
We have accumulated quite a number of regressions, a lot
Status
==
GCC trunk which eventually will become GCC 11 is still open for general
development. Stage 1 will end on the end of Sunday, Nov 15th 2020
at which point we will transition into Stage 3 which allows for general
bugfixing.
We have accumulated quite a number of regressions, a lot
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 16 October 2020 12:45
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH][GCC-10 backport] arm: [MVE] Remove illegal intrinsics (PR
> target/96914)
>
> Hello,
>
> Applied cleanly, Ok for backporting this
1 - 100 of 260 matches
Mail list logo
