https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98752
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-01-19 00:00:00 |2021-12-8
--- Comment #5 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32066
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58590
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91023
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The trunk we get the following ICE:
: In substitution of 'template
std::optional > parse_variant(const Foo >& ...) [with T = ]':
:34:34: required from here
:34:34: internal compiler error: tree check:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63707
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||l2m at ukr dot net
--- Comment #24 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91499
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67259
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #20 from Hongtao.liu ---
V2HF/V4HF should also be restricted under AVX512FP16.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98614
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-09
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86646
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
MSVC also rejects it for the same reason as GCC (and ICC). Which makes clang
the one which is different than all others.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103622
Bug ID: 103622
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault (in
altivec_resolve_new_overloaded_builtin)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #19 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #17)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #16)
> > There're already testcases for vec_extract/vec_set/vec_duplicate, but those
> > testcases are written under
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79504
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69731
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from
Hi Uros,
This patch is to update mtune for tremont.
Bootstrap is ok, and no regressions for i386/x86-64 testsuite.
OK for master?
Silvermont has a special handle in add_stmt_cost function, because it has in
order SIMD pipeline. But for Tremont, its SIMD pipeline is out of order,
remove
Richard Biener writes:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2021, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>> With reference the discussions in:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/574334.html
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/572006.html
>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95564
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91760
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87174
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Interesting ICC also rejects it too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84866
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84866
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
#include
#include
// X has trivial copy ctor and nontrivial move ctor
struct X {
X() = default;
X(const X&)=default;
X(X&&) {}
};
// X needs to be nested to trigger the bug
union T1 {
X
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79329
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tyker at outlook dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86949
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81547
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60323
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Obviously this works:
struct A a = {.c = 1, .data = {1}};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34810
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86818
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #18 from Hongtao.liu ---
codegen for foo1/foo2 is suboptimal under -mavx2, i guess we can have
vec_setv16hf_0 and with vpblendw.
typedef _Float16 __v16hf __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (32)));
typedef _Float16 __m256h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tilin97 at yandex dot ru
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94310
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xmh970252187 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100518
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 51955
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51955=edit
candidate patch under testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100843
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 51954
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51954=edit
candidate patch under testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70832
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
>clang++ 3.7 works
clang 4.0 and above rejects both tests now with the same message as GCC. Are we
sure this was not a clang bug which was fixed?
Also ICC and MSVC rejects the code for the same reason too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69481
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102033
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65221
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Even doing this:
> template< typename A >
> struct X
> {
> using this_type = X;
> // typedef X this_type;
> static this_type inst;
> };
>
> template<
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68161
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #17 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #16)
> There're already testcases for vec_extract/vec_set/vec_duplicate, but those
> testcases are written under TARGET_AVX512FP16, i'll make a copy of them and
> test
On Dec 8, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
>> expr.c (emit_move_multi_word): Skip clobber during lra.
> OK.
I found a similar pattern of issuing clobbers for multi-word moves, but
not when reload_in_progress, in expr.c:emit_move_complex_parts. I don't
have a testcase, but I'm tempted to propose
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
--- Comment #12 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #11)
> On Tue, 7 Dec 2021, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103554
> >
> > --- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64989
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent.hamp at higaski dot at
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99059
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99059
Jack Adrian Zappa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||adrianh.bsc at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103024
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103530
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103097
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103560
--- Comment #6 from brocolis at eml dot cc ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> > f951.exe: Error: Nonexistent include directory './'
>
> Hmm, that seems wrong. the directory ./ definitely exists as it is the
> current working
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103097
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:af93386ffc18ca6c7d1949751ff97cc6ce092b2c
commit r12-5853-gaf93386ffc18ca6c7d1949751ff97cc6ce092b2c
Author: Alexandre Oliva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
commit r12-5852-g50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
Author: Alexandre Oliva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103530
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
commit r12-5851-g2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
Author: Alexandre Oliva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103024
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
commit r12-5851-g2bff91f3b4e6f697823a261222186f4b5b052e86
Author: Alexandre Oliva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102765
--- Comment #3 from Siarhei Siamashka ---
Thanks for the explanations. Is there a small example, which demonstrates
templates inlining causing a real practical problem for older versions of GDC?
A link to a bugtracker, commit message, post in a
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 2:47 PM Haochen Jiang via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch add combine splitter to transform vashr/vlshr/vashl_optab to
> ashr/lshr/ashl_optab for const vector duplicate operand.
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
Ok.
>
> BRs,
> Haochen
>
>
On Dec 8, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/7/2021 7:00 PM, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> PR target/103097
>> * reg-stack.c (convert_regs_1): Move any_malformed_asm
>> resetting...
>> (reg_to_stack): ... here.
> So it's "stickier" after your change. ie, instead of indicating if
>
On Dec 8, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/7/2021 10:37 PM, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> expr.c (emit_move_multi_word): Skip clobber during lra.
> OK. Nit in the ChangeLog. You forgot a '*' before the expr.c entry.
Thanks, fixed. Here's what I'm installing momentarily.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32066
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schaub.johannes@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48920
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78048
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhonghao at pku dot org.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86602
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78048
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|noexcept operator does not |noexcept operator accepts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100736
--- Comment #4 from HaoChen Gui ---
Yes, there is a question. With my patch, the test case generates following
assembly. Seems they have the same latency (cror vs. crnot). I wonder why we
need reverse the CR bit comparison when finite-math-only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94944
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|compile error accessing |compile error accessing
On 12/6/2021 7:15 PM, Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
For a function with optimize pragma, it's possible that the target
options change as optimization options change. Now we create one
optimization option node when parsing pragma optimize, but don't
create target option node for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
On 12/6/2021 11:43 AM, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
When if-converting multiple SETs and we encounter a swap-style idiom
if (a > b)
{
tmp = c; // [1]
c = d;
d = tmp;
}
ifcvt should not generate a conditional move for the instruction at
[1].
In order
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96416
--- Comment #24 from Zach Laine ---
Sorry for the delay. I confirmed that this makes my case well-formed with
releases/gcc-11, and that it's ill-formed with GCC 11.2 and GCC 10.x.
On 12/6/2021 11:43 AM, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
If one of the to-be-converted SETs requires the original comparison
(i.e. in order to generate a min/max insn) but no other insn after it
does, we can omit creating temporaries, thus facilitating costing.
---
gcc/ifcvt.c | 33
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69373
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think the following patch fixes the warning:
apinski@xeond:~/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/cp$ git diff except.c
diff --git a/gcc/cp/except.c b/gcc/cp/except.c
index a8acbc4b7b2..28d7810e182 100644
---
On 12/6/2021 11:43 AM, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
Following up on the previous patch, this patch makes
noce_convert_multiple emit two cmov sequences: The same one as before
and a second one that tries to re-use the existing CC. Then their costs
are compared and the cheaper one is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86583
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang 9 and above started to accept the code. I have not looked into why they
changed it yet though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71825
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|rejects-valid |accepts-invalid, diagnostic
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49729
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> GCC 4.9.0 and above removes the last diagnostics but the secone remains so
> it is better but not fully fixed.
s/secone/second/
typo fingers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49729
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-07-13 09:34:44 |2021-12-8
--- Comment #2 from Andrew
Hi!
On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 07:06:30PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 13:40 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Named address spaces are completely target-specific. Defining them
> > with
> > a pragma like this does not allow you to set the pointer mode or
> > anything
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #16 from Hongtao.liu ---
There're already testcases for vec_extract/vec_set/vec_duplicate, but those
testcases are written under TARGET_AVX512FP16, i'll make a copy of them and
test them w/o avx512fp16.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #15 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #12)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #10)
>
> > Sure.
> Please find attached the complete patch that enables HF vector modes in
> Comment #11. The patch
On 12/6/2021 11:43 AM, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
Currently we only ever call emit_conditional_move with the comparison
(as well as its comparands) we got from the jump. Thus, backends are
going to emit a CC comparison for every conditional move that is being
generated instead of
On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 13:40 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 11:12:00AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 11/13/21 1:37 PM, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > Approach 1: Custom Address Spaces
> > > =
> > >
> > > GCC's C frontend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103558
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103558
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0fb57034770aa20adced4d176f34ca611c2945bf
commit r12-5849-g0fb57034770aa20adced4d176f34ca611c2945bf
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Sun
Hi,
This patch merges the D2 testsuite upstream dmd 568496d5b.
Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu/-m32/-mx32, and
committed to mainline.
Regards,
Iain.
---
gcc/d/ChangeLog:
* dmd/MERGE: Merge upstream dmd 568496d5b.
---
gcc/testsuite/gdc.test/compilable/b19294.d
On 12/6/2021 11:43 AM, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
When noce_convert_multiple is called the original costs are not yet
initialized. Therefore, up to now, costs were only ever unfairly
compared against COSTS_N_INSNS (2). This would lead to
default_noce_conversion_profitable_p ()
On 12/6/2021 11:43 AM, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
This lifts the restriction of not allowing constants for
noce_convert_multiple. The code later checks if a valid sequence
is produced anyway.
---
gcc/ifcvt.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Fine
On 12/6/2021 11:43 AM, Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches wrote:
Add new s390-specific tests that check if we convert two SETs into two
loads on condition. Remove the s390-specific target-check in
gcc.dg/ifcvt-4.c.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ifcvt-4.c| 2 +-
On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 19:27, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 19:21, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 19:17, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Jonathan,
> > >
> > > > I've pushed this change to trunk now (it was posted and reviewed in
> > > > stage 1, I just
On 12/7/2021 10:54 PM, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
In tree-ssa-loop-split.c, split_loop and split_loop_on_cond does two
kind of split. split_loop only works for single loop and insert edge at
exit when split, while split_loop_on_cond is not limited to single loop
and insert edge at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103332
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
On 12/7/2021 10:54 PM, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
r12-4526 cancelled jump thread path rotates loop. It exposes a issue in
profile-estimate when predict_extra_loop_exits, outer loop's exit edge
is marked as inner loop's extra loop exit and set with incorrect
prediction, then a hot
On 12/7/2021 10:54 PM, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
gcc/ChangeLog:
* loop-invariant.c (find_invariants_bb): Check profile count
before motion.
(find_invariants_body): Add argument.
OK
jeff
On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 03:09:00PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/8/21 13:32, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 09:15:05AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 12/7/21 19:25, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 04:44:06PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > > >
On 12/7/2021 10:37 PM, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote:
If we emit clobbers before multi-word moves during lra, we get
confused if a copy ends up with input or output replaced with each
other: the clobber then kills the previous set, and it gets deleted.
This patch avoids emitting such
On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 11:12 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/13/21 1:37 PM, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > [Crossposting between gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org and
> > linux-toolcha...@vger.kernel.org; sorry about my lack of kernel
> > knowledge, in case of the following seems bogus]
> >
> >
On 12/8/2021 1:00 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
On 7 Dec 2021, at 14:50, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 10:55:07AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
So, this patch instead builds a relocation table (sorted list of addresses
in the blob which needs
On 12/7/2021 2:55 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The following patch adds support for relocation of the PCH blob on PCH
restore if we don't manage to get the preferred map slot for it.
The GTY stuff knows where all the pointers are, after all it relocates
it once during PCH save from the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103621
Bug ID: 103621
Summary: stable_sort could call std::__merge_sort_with_buffer
directly in typical case
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
1 - 100 of 295 matches
Mail list logo
