https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101188
--- Comment #14 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #13)
> Also I don't have a test case for your scenario. I can reproduce the bug
> back to v5 on avr and maybe it is even older. As it appears, this PR lead
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101188
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108996
--- Comment #9 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> (In reply to Ulrich Weigand from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > > What is done on other arches?
> >
> > That depends on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108996
--- Comment #8 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Though, relying on DW_OP_entry_value is not reliable, if e.g. tail calls are
> (or could be) involved, then GDB needs to punt.
The only way a tail call could
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108996
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> What is done on other arches?
That depends on the platform ABI. On some arches, including x86/x86_64 and
arm/aarch64, the ABI requires the generated code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989
--- Comment #22 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> PowerPC I think does, not sure about s390.
For s390x see here:
https://github.com/IBM/s390x-abi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104194
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97970
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Weigand ---
The patch did not handle flag_excess_precision correctly. I've reverted for
now and will look into a proper fix. Sorry for the breakage.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96559
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Weigand ---
> [...] as __clzdi2 points to the very same place as _Z11CeilingLog2v.
How do you get to that conclusion? Nothing in that assembler source sets
__clzdi2 to point to the same place as _Z11CeilingLog2v.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69286
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Yes, it does appear I checked in this code, but the tpf-unwind.h changes were
actually provided by Jim Johnston on the IBM TPF team:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg02104.html
In any case,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86772
Bug 86772 depends on bug 86807, which changed state.
Bug 86807 Summary: spu port needs updating for CVE-2017-5753
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86807
What|Removed |Added
|--- |FIXED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uweigand at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86807
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Mon Aug 6 14:40:56 2018
New Revision: 263335
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263335=gcc=rev
Log:
[spu, commit] Define TARGET_HAVE_SPECULATION_SAFE_VALUE
The SPU processor is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85075
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Maybe I'm confused, but: How does this even build?
_Float128 is a C-only extension, this type is not supposed to be available at
all in C++ mode as far as I know.
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: s390x-ibm-linux
Created attachment 43828
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83396
--- Comment #64 from Ulrich Weigand ---
I'm seeing the same error on spu-elf when building newlib with GCC revision
255614. In case this isn't fixed by more recent changes already, here's a
reduced test case (build with -O -g):
const char *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82960
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82960
--- Comment #5 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Fri Dec 8 11:33:09 2017
New Revision: 255508
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255508=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/82960
* config/spu/spu.c (pad_bb): Only check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82960
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Weigand ---
I'll have a look. I still need to get my SPU build environment back up and
running, the build currently fails due to unrelated issues.
I remember looking at this a few years back:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #71 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #70)
> If funny line information is the only consequence, no. Is it safe to assume
> that libsanitizer won't crash or produce garbege because of this?
Why should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #60 from Ulrich Weigand ---
... well, as Florian said as well :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #59 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #57)
> libsanitizer miscalculates the Pcs in the backtrace:
>
> #0 0x1000839 in NullDeref
> #1 0x10006c1 in main
> #2 0x3fff6e23069 in __libc_start_main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #48 from Ulrich Weigand ---
s390(x) has -fasynchronous-unwind-tables on by default anyway, and .eh_frame
based DWARF unwinding is the only way to create stack backtraces that always
works.
However, I understood that asan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #22 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #21)
> Could libsanitizer call __tls_get_offset instead, after setting %r12 or
> whatever else is needed for it to make work and then perhaps adjust the
> result if
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Compiling the following test case with g++ -Os -fpic on s390x-ibm-linux results
in abort() being called
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77359
--- Comment #19 from Ulrich Weigand ---
I've been looking into this a bit with Dominik, and here's what I understand of
the problem so far:
- It really all starts with emit-rtl.c:init_emit doing:
REGNO_POINTER_ALIGN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70168
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70168
--- Comment #5 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Thu Mar 10 23:59:20 2016
New Revision: 234127
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234127=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/70168
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70168
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Thu Mar 10 23:58:44 2016
New Revision: 234126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234126=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/70168
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c
||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
||patches/2016-03/msg00671.ht
||ml
Component|rtl-optimization|target
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uweigand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70168
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Created attachment 37925
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37925=edit
Patch to add retval vs. newval overlap check
This patch fixes the problem for me with the GCC 5 branch. Not fully
: major
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: amodra at gcc dot gnu.org, dje at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: powerpc64le-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
--- Comment #7 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Ah, OK. I did't realize this value didn't fit into a 106-bit mantissa.
I agree that it probably doesn't make sense to change the internal
representation to allow larger mantissas. First of all, there's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #3)
> > while with GCC, we get:
> >
> > high double: 7FEF
> > low double: 7C8F FFFE
>
> Right. This is 0x1.f78p+1023
,
||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Hmm. For some reason, the gnulib definition of LDBL_MAX differs from GCC's
definition. With gnulib, we get:
high
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69464
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68759
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Weigand ---
FYI, two patches to fix this issue have just been committed to powerpc-next:
https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/2e50c4bef77511b42cc226865d
https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/a61674bdfc7c2bf909c4010699
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68759
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68759
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Weigand ---
I've tried to reproduce this, but with no success so far. This is primarily
because I cannot manage to get a current mainline Linux kernel built with
allyesconfig for powerpc64le in the first place
||2015-12-07
CC||amodra at gcc dot gnu.org,
||dje.gcc at gmail dot com
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uweigand at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
--- Comment #14 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Building the following reduced test case with
-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fcx-fortran-rules
with an spu-elf cross-cc1 shows the ICE.
void
test (_Complex float *dest,
_Complex float scale, int count)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68062
--- Comment #8 from Ulrich Weigand ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> I think there was some inconsistencies in C vs. C++ FEs in this area (but as
> usual I don't remember exactly but I remember Uli complaining about it again
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68231
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66728
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #4)
Testing a patch. It involves tightening the mode of the rtx returned
by rtl_for_decl_location, as well as new asserts, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66728
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A bit of debugging shows that what's going on here is this:
add_const_value_attribute is called with the following constant RTL:
(const_wide_int
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Compiling the following test case:
__uint128_t test(void)
{
static const __uint128_t two127 = ((__uint128_t) 1) 127;
return two127;
}
on x86_64-linux
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: amodra at gcc dot gnu.org, bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target: powerpc64-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64638
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
--- Comment #12 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Wed Dec 17 15:07:28 2014
New Revision: 218821
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218821root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-12-17 Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
--- Comment #13 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Since this has been in mainline for two weeks without reported issues, and it
should in general be a safe change, I've backported the patch to 4.9 now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64160
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The ususal test in such scenarios involves reg_overlap_mentioned_p:
/* Nonzero if modifying X will affect IN. [...] */
int
reg_overlap_mentioned_p (const_rtx x, const_rtx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64160
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
--- Comment #10 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Wed Dec 3 21:59:10 2014
New Revision: 218335
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218335root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/64010
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
--- Comment #11 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Nick,
I've checked this in to mainline now. I'd like to wait for a couple of days to
see if anything breaks before backporting ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64115
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Tue Dec 2 14:27:46 2014
New Revision: 218273
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218273root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/64115
* config/rs6000
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64115
--- Comment #7 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Tue Dec 2 14:30:47 2014
New Revision: 218274
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218274root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/64115
* config/rs6000
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64115
--- Comment #8 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Tue Dec 2 14:33:00 2014
New Revision: 218275
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218275root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/64115
* config/rs6000
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64115
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
--- Comment #5 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34170
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34170action=edit
Do not clobber function argument registers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64115
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64115
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje.gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63952
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Fri Nov 21 15:33:27 2014
New Revision: 217929
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217929root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/63952
* optabs.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63952
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63952
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I guess I can see why there might be an abnormal edge starting at bb 3, or at
least, that the compiler might not be easily able to deduce that it isn't
necessary.
However, I do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
I think this is hard warning to avoid in the compiler as we don't know if
foo calls longjmp or not. Note we don't know
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62259
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53854
--- Comment #9 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I just noticed that this bug has disappeared on mainline. Binary search showed
that this happens with rev. 211007, which checks in this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61920
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Since we didn't backport the actual ABI change to the branches, only the
warning, I think it would be consistent to use something like this on the
branches:
#define
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61920
--- Comment #7 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Mon Jul 28 14:32:13 2014
New Revision: 213127
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213127root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libobjc/61920
* encoding.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61920
--- Comment #8 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Mon Jul 28 14:33:20 2014
New Revision: 213128
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213128root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libobjc/61920
* encoding.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60102
--- Comment #12 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Sandra Loosemore from comment #9)
I've been looking at this a little bit more.
DWARF_FRAME_REGNUM is specifically documented to take a hard register number
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61300
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60870
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60870
--- Comment #5 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #4)
I don't have a PPC system. Can you see if the attached patch to
gcc/go/gofrontend/expressions.cc fixes the problem?
Yes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57363
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57949
--- Comment #9 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Fri Nov 15 23:39:50 2013
New Revision: 204870
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204870root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc:
2013-11-15 Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig
-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
Building the following test case (reduced from Python 2.7.5) with -O2 -g:
extern void *memmove (void *, const void *, __SIZE_TYPE__);
extern void *memset (void *, int, __SIZE_TYPE__);
typedef
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57363
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56184
--- Comment #5 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-06
19:27:31 UTC ---
Depending on configure tests of the installed (cross-)assembler, the ICE may
not occur. In those cases, I'm now able to reliably reproduce the ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56184
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56184
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54739
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-01
12:16:53 UTC ---
It seems all three of those targets have an iordi3 pattern that triggers even
for 32-bit compiles. In this case, the lower-subreg pass now no longer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49443
--- Comment #7 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-10
13:26:51 UTC ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Fri Aug 10 13:26:44 2012
New Revision: 190296
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190296
Log:
ChangeLog
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53854
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-04
17:17:22 UTC ---
The problem with this is that there was a reason why I originally supported
only a single constant pool reference per instruction: there needs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-26
09:05:56 UTC ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Tue Jun 26 09:05:48 2012
New Revision: 188979
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188979
Log:
PR tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53729
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-26
09:05:55 UTC ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Tue Jun 26 09:05:48 2012
New Revision: 188979
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188979
Log:
PR tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53729
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53706
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53729
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-15
13:30:40 UTC ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Fri Jun 15 13:30:36 2012
New Revision: 188661
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188661
Log:
gcc/
PR tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-15
15:11:51 UTC ---
Now fixed on mainline; still fails on 4.7.
(While the bug is probably latent even earlier, this particular test case does
not crash on 4.6.)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636
Bug #: 53636
Summary: SLP may create invalid unaligned memory accesses
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53636
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo
