http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54767
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-16
13:57:53 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 16 13:57:48 2013
New Revision: 195238
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195238
Log:
2013-01-16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53465
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-16
13:57:54 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 16 13:57:48 2013
New Revision: 195238
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195238
Log:
2013-01-16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55964
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-16
14:07:03 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 16 14:06:58 2013
New Revision: 195239
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195239
Log:
2013-01-16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3713
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54767
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56001
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56017
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56015
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-17
10:48:40 UTC ---
Hmm, I wonder if it isn't better to disable TER for these cases. We might
run into similar issues with other loads (BIT_FIELD_REF and vectors
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #172 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-17
10:53:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #171)
Created attachment 29182 [details]
Patch to compress line info
This patch removes column information from LTO (so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56020
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #56 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-17
14:30:10 UTC ---
4.3 vs. trunk I get 9.5s vs. 12.3s for -O3. With 4.7 and 4.6 I get the same
result (on Intel CPUs). Thus basically re-confirmed after the recent
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #57 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-17
14:42:11 UTC ---
A proper fix these days (with tuples) is to add new tree codes that carry
the knowledge that
countm1.6_40 = _38 / _39;
may not trap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #176 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-17
14:54:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #175)
Created attachment 29191 [details]
alternative patch without the compression.
This is alternative patch just
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56023
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-18
10:18:51 UTC ---
Can you fill out known-to-work? Especially whether 4.7.x works and whether
4.6.3 worked?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55833
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42371
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56022
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21182
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56027
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56027
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-18
11:49:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
(In reply to comment #1)
I think you want a pass-thru:
#define opaque(x) __asm volatile (# x : =g (x) : 0 (x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56029
Bug #: 56029
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed, location
references block not in block tree
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56029
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56029
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56029
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-18
13:02:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
It's the PHI arg location of
integer_cst 0x747f59e0 type pointer_type 0x76754d20 constant 0
as seen after
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56029
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-18
13:14:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 29204
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29204
somewhat reduced testcase
Somewhat reduced testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56035
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56049
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56047
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56056
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56061
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56077
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56076
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56075
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56074
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56068
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56085
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56081
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54402
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56063
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23
16:52:13 UTC ---
ISTR old bugzilla had a reconfirm-now-like style. As long as one would be
able to eventually re-set the reconfirmed date back if it was changed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56062
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56107
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56098
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56097
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-25
18:16:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
So, we replace
# a.0_26 = PHI a.0_10(5)
with
# a.0_26 = PHI .MEM_10(5)
This happens when we call
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56117
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56116
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56115
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56112
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
08:55:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Created attachment 29272 [details]
gcc48-pr56094.patch
input_location is used heavily in the gimplifier
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
09:45:06 UTC ---
label_visit () seems to collect recursively points_to bits over the predecessor
graph, thus using a quadratic amount of memory. It does so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
10:04:46 UTC ---
Moving -points_to to a separate obstack might also help (performing
label_visit
in topological order we could then free -points_to once we have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56127
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56118
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
11:57:25 UTC ---
We have the producer of the loop closed PHI use not in the last partition
as it is designed to happen. I have a patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
12:07:12 UTC ---
The optimization is sound without -fno-builtin-memset. Otherwise not - why
would that not be in effect for darwin? Can you attach preprocessed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
Bug #: 56128
Summary: [4.8 Regression] No way to disable build of
libsanitizer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
12:21:14 UTC ---
13:17 jakub richi: libgomp defines FUTEX_{WAIT,WAKE} on its own rather then
including linux/futex.h, guess the googlers could
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56053
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
12:34:15 UTC ---
Seems to fortify by default and thus expose a builtin anyway.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
13:48:29 UTC ---
BB 12 does not belong to loop 1 but is marked so. Broken by late phicprop.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:03:18 UTC ---
When propagate_rhs_into_lhs alters the CFG from
if ()
{
if ()
exit_loop;
}
to
if ()
{
exit_loop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56061
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28
14:45:50 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 28 14:45:46 2013
New Revision: 195508
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195508
Log:
2013-01-28
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56034
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|regression |rtl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-29
10:40:29 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 29 10:40:24 2013
New Revision: 195533
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195533
Log:
2013-01-29
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-29
14:22:56 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 29 14:22:47 2013
New Revision: 195541
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195541
Log:
2013-01-29
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-29
14:24:01 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 29 14:23:48 2013
New Revision: 195542
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195542
Log:
2013-01-29
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56141
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56061
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
11:21:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
(In reply to comment #1)
I don't think we necessarily want to support this fully...
Are such bug reports useful
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56061
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
11:25:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Does it make sense to allow -O0 -flto at all?
The classical example why we want to support this is a static library
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56147
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47409
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
11:38:30 UTC ---
struct s2 {
volatile int x;
};
struct s2 s;
void foo (void) {
s = s;
}
As said previously I think that volatile struct members
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56147
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
11:39:28 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jan 30 11:39:19 2013
New Revision: 195575
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195575
Log:
2013-01-30
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56147
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56141
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
11:40:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
If you're doing a non-default build (e.g. using cloog) you need to say
exactly
what you're
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
13:50:04 UTC ---
All of the tree SSA incremental time is spent in computing the IDFs. With
a patch to cache IDF on def-blocks nothing is gained.
Unpatched, n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
14:38:29 UTC ---
The following (old!?) idea helps though:
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-loop-manip.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-30
15:40:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
The following (old!?) idea helps though:
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-loop-manip.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56150
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56151
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56150
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
08:53:03 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 31 08:52:56 2013
New Revision: 195608
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195608
Log:
2013-01-31
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56150
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
08:53:47 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 31 08:53:43 2013
New Revision: 195609
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195609
Log:
2013-01-31
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53073
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
09:01:02 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 31 09:00:54 2013
New Revision: 195610
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195610
Log:
2013-01-31
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56150
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56151
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
10:13:27 UTC ---
Ok, reverted. With n = 5 rest_of_handle_split_after_reload blows up
memory usage to 3.5GB for me ... With n = 4 I managed to complete
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
10:47:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #3)
I don't see anything bogus on the warning, it is useful to inform the
developer
about
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56157
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56157
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
11:54:09 UTC ---
Reduced testcase:
struct Pixel {
unsigned short r;
unsigned short g;
unsigned short b;
unsigned short a;
};
void fn(unsigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56157
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
11:59:06 UTC ---
Even more reduced, avoids any loop versioning in the vectorizer:
struct Pixel {
unsigned short r;
unsigned short g;
unsigned short b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56157
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31
14:45:46 UTC ---
The check
/* In the end of a pattern sequence we have a use of the original
stmt,
so we need to compare OPRND
601 - 700 of 53236 matches
Mail list logo