On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 05:07:53PM +0800, Hongyu Wang wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches 于2023年8月31日周四 17:44写道：
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 04:20:19PM +0800, Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > For vector move insns like vmovdqa/vmovdqu, their evex counterparts
> > > requrire
Hi,
Integer expression "(X - N * M) / N" can be optimized to "X / N - M" with
the below conditions:
1. There is no wrap/overflow/underflow.
wrap/overflow/underflow breaks the arithmetic operation.
2. "X - N * M" and "X" are not of opposite sign.
Here, the operation "/" would be "trunc_div",
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23970
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Unswitching does this as a separate transform now, the "hoist guards"
transform.
It's even done completely separate now:
unsigned int
tree_ssa_unswitch_loops (function *fun)
{
bool changed_unswitch =
Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches 于2023年8月31日周四 17:44写道：
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 04:20:19PM +0800, Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > For vector move insns like vmovdqa/vmovdqu, their evex counterparts
> > requrire explicit suffix 64/32/16/8. The usage of these instruction
> > are prohibited
Uros Bizjak via Gcc-patches 于2023年8月31日周四 18:16写道：
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:20 AM Hongyu Wang wrote:
> >
> > From: Kong Lingling
> >
> > Current reload infrastructure does not support selective base_reg_class
> > for backend insn. Add insn argument to base_reg_class for
> > lra/reload
Uros Bizjak via Gcc-patches 于2023年8月31日周四 18:01写道：
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 11:18 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 04:20:17PM +0800, Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > From: Kong Lingling
> > >
> > > In inline asm, we do not know if the insn can
Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches 于2023年8月31日周四 17:18写道：
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 04:20:17PM +0800, Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > From: Kong Lingling
> >
> > In inline asm, we do not know if the insn can use EGPR, so disable EGPR
> > usage by default from mapping the common reg/mem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111243
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The problem is that -Og aimed at solving two problems that are often in
conflict with each other - improving the debugging experience _and_ runtime
performance.
For the second goal it started as -O1 and
Richard Biener via Gcc-patches 于2023年8月31日周四 17:31写道：
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 11:26 AM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:25 AM Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Kong Lingling
> > >
> > > Disable EGPR usage for below legacy insns in opcode
Richard Biener via Gcc-patches 于2023年8月31日周四 17:21写道：
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:22 AM Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > Intel Advanced performance extension (APX) has been released in [1].
> > It contains several extensions such as extended 16 general purpose registers
> >
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 at 20:52, François Dumont via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Any feedback regarding this patch ?
This is a fairly large patch and before we make any more changes to
unordered containers we have an ABI break to fix:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111050
>
>
On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 09:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 at 20:52, François Dumont via Libstdc++
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Any feedback regarding this patch ?
>
> This is a fairly large patch and before we make any more changes to
> unordered containers we have an ABI break
Committed, thanks Juzhe.
Pan
From: 钟居哲
Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 3:28 PM
To: Li, Pan2 ; gcc-patches
Cc: Li, Pan2 ; Wang, Yanzhang ;
kito.cheng
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: Support FP ADD/SUB/MUL/DIV autovec for VLS mode
LGTM。
Le 31/08/2023 à 22:42, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit :
Dear all,
gfortran's array bounds-checking code does a mostly reasonable
job for array sections in expressions and assignments, but
forgot the case that (rank-1) expressions can involve array
constructors, which have a shape ;-)
The
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 at 21:43, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 at 18:42, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 at 16:26, Christophe Lyon
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > As discussed in PR104167 (comments #8 and below), and PR111238, using
> > > -Wl,-gc-sections in the libstdc++
On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 10:13:40AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> The value of .CLZ (0) is undefined then. I belive your analysis is correct in
> that both 63 - _35 might overflow and that dom3 (thus ranger) mis-computes
> the range for _35. I wonder why we don't elide _36 ? _31 : 1 with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111261
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The FE already has to do lookup for s in that initializer, so it knows that
another member was found.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111261
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> In fact with trunk we diagnose this properly with -std=c++17 but not
> -std=c++20.
So it's probably because c++17 uses extern template for std::string and
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 3:58 PM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc
wrote:
>
> My translation validation tool reports some miscompilations related to the
> internal call CLZ(0) when CLZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO is false, but I am not
> sure I use the correct semantics...
>
> I started by modeling CLZ(0) as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111260
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #1 from
Hello,
we ran into an issue with the following (rather benign) C++ snippet:
#include
#include
struct Foo {
void Bar() ;
std::mutex some_lock;
std::atomic some_number;
};
void Foo::Bar() {
some_lock.lock();
some_number++;
some_lock.unlock();
}
When compiling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111265
Bug ID: 111265
Summary: Compiler segfault with character array in deferred
type, when returned by a function
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
LGTM。
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: pan2.li
Date: 2023-09-01 11:33
To: gcc-patches
CC: juzhe.zhong; pan2.li; yanzhang.wang; kito.cheng
Subject: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: Support FP ADD/SUB/MUL/DIV autovec for VLS mode
From: Pan Li
This patch would like to allow the VLS mode autovec for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111261
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111258
Jiang An changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de34 at live dot cn
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111264
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111261
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Ever confirmed|0
On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 8:08 AM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
> On 8/11/23 05:51, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 11:17 AM Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >> So it turns out there was a simplier way of starting to
> >> improve VRP to start to fix PR
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023, 17:05 Alejandro Colomar via Gcc,
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've been confused for some time with a compilation error that
> pointed to a slightly-off location. I wasn't seeing that I used
> a temporary variable in a constant expression. The code could be
> reduced to:
>
> $ cat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19832
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19832
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3d86e7f4a8aef1b864a51660825597eafe9059b1
commit r14-3606-g3d86e7f4a8aef1b864a51660825597eafe9059b1
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 7:25 PM Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This patch adds the following match patterns to optimize these:
> /* (a != b) ? (a - b) : 0 -> (a - b) */
> /* (a != b) ? (a ^ b) : 0 -> (a ^ b) */
> /* (a != b) ? (a & b) : a -> (a & b) */
> /* (a != b) ? (a | b) : a ->
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 5:15?AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2023, Filip Kastl wrote:
> >
> > > > The most obvious places would be right after SSA construction and
> > > > before RTL expansion.
> > > > Can you provide
201 - 233 of 233 matches
Mail list logo
