vec-mul is an execution test, but it only requires a powerpc_vsx_ok
effective target, which is enough only for compile tests. In order to
To check for runtime and execution environment support, we need to
require vsx_hw. Make that a condition for execution, but still
perform a compile test if
The floating-point overloads of from_char are only declared if
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_USELOCALE is #defined as nonzero. That's exposed from
charconv as _cpp_lib_to_chars >= 201611L, so guard the test body with
that.
Regstrapped on ppc64le-linux-gnu, and tested on
x86_64-linux-gnu-x-ppc{,64}-vx7r2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105459
Bug ID: 105459
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault (in record_operand_costs)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105458
Bug ID: 105458
Summary: [12/13 Regression] ICE in set_relation, at
value-relation.cc:609
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105457
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
All,
Thanks for all the help from the past. I'm (still) working on porting
GCC to a new processor ISA and ran into the following problem: the CPU
supports two kinds of register+offset based loads (and stores).
The generic format accepts any base register and any offset. The syntax
for this type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105457
Bug ID: 105457
Summary: error: '__builtin_huge_valq()' is not a constant
expression
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On Apr 28, 2022, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-vect-31a.c covers ppc variants
>> that accept and reject misaligned accesses. The message that it
>> expects for rejection was removed in the gcc-11 development cycle
On May 2, 2022, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Send full patches always please.
I'll try to remember that. In case I fail, I hope you won't mind too
much reminding me.
(You'd also asked me not to send patches as followups, but... revised
versions of a patch still belong in the same thread,
Ping #5:
| Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 21:14:55 -0400
| From: Michael Meissner
| Subject: [PATCH, V4] Eliminate power8 fusion options, use power8 tuning, PR
target/102059
| Message-ID:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-April/593153.html
We really need closure on this so I can do the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong choice of source in |load introduced by ce1 for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's valid
On PR102629 I noticed that we were giving the entire lambda as the location
for this template-id.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* pt.cc (tsubst_copy_and_build) [TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR]: Copy location.
(do_auto_deduction): Use expr location.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105324
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It should depend on:
#if __cpp_lib_to_chars >= 201611L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105324
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
Hi!
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 10:53:40PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Apr 28, 2022, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 03:09:54AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> +"no __intrinsic_type support for [long] double on PPC w/o
> >> VSX");
> > This change isn't in
On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 7:09 PM Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022, Zopolis0 via Gcc wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to regenerate autotools files in liboffloadmic (and other
> > directories) but when running automake it tells me I need to run aclocal,
> > which gives me a warning about not
While looking at PR96645 I noticed that while we were diagnosing names
changing meaning in the full class context, we weren't doing this for
lookups in nested class bodies.
Note that this breaks current range-v3; I've submitted a pull request to fix
its violation of the rule.
Tested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> Maybe
>
> _GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
> basic_string&
> assign(const _CharT* __s)
> {
> __glibcxx_requires_string(__s);
>
On 5/2/22 18:04, Martin Jambor wrote:
> (Minor nit and I don't care too much, but in GCC we traditionally
> specify co-authors in the ChangeLog entry beginning by providing more
> names, one per line. But perhaps we want to adapt more widely used
> practices.)
Hello.
Using Co-Authored-By is
Currently when checking the constraints of a class template, we do so in
the context of the template, not the specialized type. This is the best
we can do for a primary template since the specialized type is valid
only if the primary template's constraints are satisfied. But for a
partial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105433
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7e1f30d7edd433ca0fc28ae9ac1ce9b522790baf
commit r13-75-g7e1f30d7edd433ca0fc28ae9ac1ce9b522790baf
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri Apr 29
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:38 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> Add .note.GNU-stack assembly source to avoid linker warning:
>
> ld: warning: /tmp/ccPZSZ7Z.o: missing .note.GNU-stack section implies
> executable stack
> ld: NOTE: This behaviour is deprecated and will be removed in a future
> version of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Pinging this series again.
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-April/592685.html
This series adds new C-family frontend attributes for recording string
"tags" in DWARF and BTF debug info to support kernel use cases.
There remains one issue in the implementation which has not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105456
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||105361
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105456
Bug ID: 105456
Summary: Child I/O does not propage iostat
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101133
Niall Douglas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||s_gccbugzilla at nedprod dot
com
---
On Mon, 2 May 2022, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > Co-Authored-By: Alexander Monakov
>
> (Minor nit and I don't care too much, but in GCC we traditionally
> specify co-authors in the ChangeLog entry beginning by providing more
> names, one per line. But perhaps we want to adapt more widely used
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105455
Bug ID: 105455
Summary: ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: verify_flow_info:
REG_BR_PROB does not match cfg)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
This patch fixes an oversight whereby we treated >= as the end of
a template argument. This causes problems in C++14, because in
cp_parser_template_argument we go different ways for C++14 and C++17:
/* It must be a non-type argument. In C++17 any constant-expression is
allowed. */
if
Consider
struct F {
F(int) {}
F operator()(int) const { return *this; }
};
and
F(i)(0)(0);
where we're supposed to first call the constructor and then invoke
the operator() twice. However, we parse this as an init-declarator:
"(i)" looks like a perfectly valid declarator, then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, while the patch makes the warning go away, it exports
_ZNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEE15_M_replace_coldEPcmPKcmm@@GLIBCXX_3.4.21
Hello,
On Sun, Apr 17 2022, Artem Klimov via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Fix issue PR99619, which asks to optimize TLS access based on
> visibility. The fix is implemented as an IPA optimization, which allows
> to take optimized visibility status into account (as well as avoid
> modifying all language
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105454
Bug ID: 105454
Summary: DWARF has wrong decl_line for type defined inside
program
Product: gcc
Version: 9.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-debug
On Mon, 2 May 2022, 13:26 Marc Glisse via Gcc, wrote:
> On Mon, 2 May 2022, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
>
> > Jakub Jelinek writes:
> >
> >> The first release candidate for GCC 12.1 is available [...]
> >
> > There is an unfixed bogus warning that is a regression in 12
> > and that I think will have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105453
Bug ID: 105453
Summary: wrong choice of source in load instruction
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Hi!
On 2022-05-01T11:02:29+0100, Iain Sandoe via Gcc wrote:
>> On 29 Apr 2022, at 15:34, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>>
>> The first release candidate for GCC 12.1 is available from
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12.1.0-RC-20220429/
>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think this is quite related to the PR98465 discussions.
The warning is on dead code, for basic_string at least when using reasonable
allocators the _M_dataplus._M_p member will always point either into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104336#c1 contains a workaround
> > for libstdc++
>
> Maybe
Hi Jakub, hello all,
let's start with a list of smaller patches, which are pending review
but each of them should be relatively quickly approvable. Some are really
tiny and obvious bug fixes - others are a bit larger but still smallish:
* [Patch] OpenMP: Fix use_device_{addr,ptr} with
This makes sure to not consider calls to builtin decls with
mismatching arguments as inexpensive.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed.
2022-04-13 Richard Biener
* tree-scalar-evolution.cc (expression_expensive_p):
Never consider mismatched calls as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104336#c1 contains a workaround
> for libstdc++
Maybe
_GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
basic_string&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwakely at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84774
Bug 84774 depends on bug 104336, which changed state.
Bug 104336 Summary: bogus -Wrestrict for std::string assignment with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104336
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104336
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
On Mon, 2 May 2022, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
Jakub Jelinek writes:
The first release candidate for GCC 12.1 is available [...]
There is an unfixed bogus warning that is a regression in 12
and that I think will have a pretty wide effect (any code
that assigns/appends a 1-char string literal
On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 9:57 AM Roger Sayle wrote:
>
>
> This patch fixes PR tree-optimization/102950, which is a P2 regression,
> by providing better range bounds for BIT_XOR_EXPR, BIT_AND_EXPR and
> BIT_IOR_EXPR on signed integer types. In general terms, any binary
> bitwise operation on
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> The first release candidate for GCC 12.1 is available [...]
There is an unfixed bogus warning that is a regression in 12
and that I think will have a pretty wide effect (any code
that assigns/appends a 1-char string literal to std::string):
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 8:35 PM Roger Sayle wrote:
>
>
> This patch implements the constant folding optimization(s) described in
> PR middle-end/98865, which should help address the serious performance
> regression of Botan AES-128/XTS mentioned in PR tree-optimization/98856.
> This combines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105441
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4a6d7da796e456115bbac92e056123f095a3780c
commit r12-8327-g4a6d7da796e456115bbac92e056123f095a3780c
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105451
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105436
--- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Noticed similar build failure on llvm-13:
[ 1%] Building CXX object
utils/TableGen/CMakeFiles/obj.llvm-tblgen.dir/AsmMatcherEmitter.cpp.o
In file included from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105452
Bug ID: 105452
Summary: static_assert inside nameless nested union: invalid
"inaccessible within this context" error
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Hi!
Now that GCC 12 branched, can I ask you for:
1) pings for OpenMP patches that are ready and you'd like to get reviewed for
GCC 13
2) what OpenMP 5.0/5.1/5.2 features people are already working on and plan to
post patches later during stage1
Thanks
Jakub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104265
Bug 104265 depends on bug 104240, which changed state.
Bug 104240 Summary: SLP discovery does not consider swapping comparisons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104240
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 104240, which changed state.
Bug 104240 Summary: SLP discovery does not consider swapping comparisons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104240
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104240
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104240
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:41e3db05d697405256b6002d8432955a93d249f1
commit r13-71-g41e3db05d697405256b6002d8432955a93d249f1
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
The following extends SLP discovery to handle swapped operands
in comparisons.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed.
2022-05-02 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/104240
* tree-vect-slp.cc (op1_op0_map): New.
(vect_get_operand_map): Handle
Hi!
On the following testcase, we emit deprecated warnings or unavailable errors
even on merge declarations of those lambdas (the dg-bogus directives), while
IMHO we should emit them only when something actually calls those lambdas.
The following patch temporarily disables that diagnostics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103911
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:86d821ddf5615e693ead667b2580898f46de8eb9
commit r13-70-g86d821ddf5615e693ead667b2580898f46de8eb9
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105441
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:576f975cabb0fd9843de152a2d247d486a967b08
commit r13-69-g576f975cabb0fd9843de152a2d247d486a967b08
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105451
Bug ID: 105451
Summary: miss optimizations due to inconsistency in complex
numbers associativity
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
On 5/2/22 11:36, Richard Biener wrote:
> Linkers will need heuristics anyway for older plugins and I think
> LLVM could just behave here.
Leaving that for the future, I may return to it. Right now, the benefit
is pretty low to me.
Martin
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:36 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:27 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > On 5/2/22 11:14, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:08 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 5/2/22 11:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >>> In fact I think GCC
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:27 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 5/2/22 11:14, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:08 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >>
> >> On 5/2/22 11:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> In fact I think GCC is correct in its handling and LLVM would need to dup
> >>> () the
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105415
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12/13 Regression] |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105415
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02f03c5c826d0cb7c32398af0c4282921e6e072a
commit r13-68-g02f03c5c826d0cb7c32398af0c4282921e6e072a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
On 5/2/22 11:14, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:08 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>> On 5/2/22 11:03, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> In fact I think GCC is correct in its handling and LLVM would need to dup
>>> () the
>>> file descriptor. Was this issue raised with the LLVM folks?
>>
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:08 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 5/2/22 11:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> > In fact I think GCC is correct in its handling and LLVM would need to dup
> > () the
> > file descriptor. Was this issue raised with the LLVM folks?
>
> I don't know here.
>
> > I suspect the BFD
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:06 AM Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:51 AM Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
On 5/2/22 11:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> In fact I think GCC is correct in its handling and LLVM would need to dup ()
> the
> file descriptor. Was this issue raised with the LLVM folks?
I don't know here.
> I suspect the BFD
> linker will also not work with LLVM due to this?
I'm not sure BFD
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:51 AM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > >
> > > On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi.
> > > >>
> > > >> This in a new plug-in
On 5/2/22 11:00, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:57 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>> On 5/2/22 10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:00 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:57 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > On 5/2/22 10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >>> On Mon, May 2, 2022
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:57 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 5/2/22 10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >>
> >> On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> This
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:54 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:51 AM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > >
> > > On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > > >>
>
On 5/2/22 10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>> On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
This in a new plug-in function that helps identifying compiler
by a
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:51 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi.
> > >>
> > >> This in a new plug-in function that helps
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 10:19 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> This in a new plug-in function that helps identifying compiler
> >> by a linker. Will be used in mold linker.
> >>
> >>
Hi,
I'd like to ping this patch on behalf of Artem.
Alexander
On Sun, 17 Apr 2022, Artem Klimov wrote:
> Fix issue PR99619, which asks to optimize TLS access based on
> visibility. The fix is implemented as an IPA optimization, which allows
> to take optimized visibility status into account
On 5/2/22 10:43, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> This patch fixes an issue introduced by commit
> ef9a53feae5701953da9161afef2aea0329ec8b2:
Works for me, please install it.
Martin
>
> gcc --coverage main.c && ./a.out
> libgcov profiling error:a-main.gcda:Error writing
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105437
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.3.1, 12.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105437
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3a3eda000fdf4f8754c9a2535191091f1db0c2a2
commit r13-66-g3a3eda000fdf4f8754c9a2535191091f1db0c2a2
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
We have to watch out for vectorized stmt insert locations if the
def from the last stmt alters control flow. We constrain region
building so we know the def is outside of the current region
and thus we can insert at the region start point.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu,
This patch fixes an issue introduced by commit
ef9a53feae5701953da9161afef2aea0329ec8b2:
gcc --coverage main.c && ./a.out
libgcov profiling error:a-main.gcda:Error writing
gcc/ChangeLog:
* gcov-io.cc (gcov_rewrite): Clear the file error status.
---
gcc/gcov-io.cc | 5 -
1 file
On Mon, 2 May 2022, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 01:23:46PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Apr 2022, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 01:11:31PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
> > > wrote:
> > > > Depends. DECL_IN_CONSTANT_POOL decls
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 01:23:46PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 01:11:31PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > Depends. DECL_IN_CONSTANT_POOL decls can appear 2 ways, through
> > >
On 5/2/22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> This in a new plug-in function that helps identifying compiler
>> by a linker. Will be used in mold linker.
>>
>> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
>>
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> This in a new plug-in function that helps identifying compiler
> by a linker. Will be used in mold linker.
>
> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
>
> Ready to be installed?
It looks a bit backward
On 3/31/22 09:01, Martin Liška wrote:
> @Jakub: May I install it once stage1 opens?
May I please ping this?
Thanks,
Martin
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> On 1/3/22 12:43, Martin Liška wrote:
>> PING: Jakub?
>>
>> On 12/15/21 10:57, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 12/14/21 17:12, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi.
This in a new plug-in function that helps identifying compiler
by a linker. Will be used in mold linker.
Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
Ready to be installed?
Thanks,
Martin
include/ChangeLog:
* plugin-api.h (enum ld_plugin_compiler): New
That supports skipping of an object file (LDPS_NO_SYMS). The API will be used
by mold
and is there for some time in linkers.
Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
Ready to be installed?
Thanks,
Martin
lto-plugin/ChangeLog:
* lto-plugin.c (struct
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 8:30 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 6:22 PM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:13 PM Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 11:53 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 9:09 AM
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 04:40:33PM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > From: Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches
> > Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 15:59:45 +0200
>
> > Hi Mikael,
> >
> > > Ping for the four patches starting at
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057759.html :
> > >
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
