[Bug c/91348] Missed optimization: not passing hidden pointer but copying memory

2020-01-25 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91348 Chris Hall changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc at gmch dot uk --- Comment #3 from

[Bug libgcc/93145] strerror_r() and INT_MIN returns "Unknown error -18446744071562067968" (for x86_64)

2020-01-03 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93145 --- Comment #2 from Chris Hall --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > You want to file it against glibc; https://sourceware.org/bugzilla . > glibc has the implementation of strerror_r/_itoa_word . Ooops. I thought this would be the

[Bug libgcc/93145] New: strerror_r() and INT_MIN returns "Unknown error -18446744071562067968" (for x86_64)

2020-01-03 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
NCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gcc at gmch dot uk Target Milestone: --- For unknown errors __strerror_r() does: p = _itoa_word (abs (errnum), [20], 10, 0); where abs(INT_MIN) is

[Bug inline-asm/92151] Spurious register copying

2019-10-21 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92151 Chris Hall changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc at gmch dot uk --- Comment #2 from

[Bug inline-asm/92151] New: Spurious register copying

2019-10-18 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gcc at gmch dot uk Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 47066 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47066=edit Code to demonstrate the issue. The attached code is a fragment of a larger function. The larger funct

[Bug c/84100] [7 Regression] Function __attribute__((optimize(align-loops=32))) gives spurious warning and is ignored

2018-02-14 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84100 --- Comment #11 from Chris Hall --- FWIW: __attribute__((aligned(32))) works nicely for functions. Generally there is little to be gained from aligning all loops/jumps/labels in a given function or group of functions. Further, when code

[Bug c/84100] [7 Regression] Function __attribute__((optimize(align-loops=32))) gives spurious warning

2018-02-04 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84100 --- Comment #7 from Chris Hall --- And here's a funny thing... ... if I compile "-O3 -falign-functions -falign-loops=32" I get the alignment I ask for. ... if I compile "-O3 -falign-functions -falign-loops=32 -fno-tree-vectorize" I get the

[Bug c/84100] [7 Regression] Function __attribute__((optimize(align-loops=32))) gives spurious warning

2018-02-02 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84100 --- Comment #6 from Chris Hall --- Created attachment 43325 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43325=edit Summary of results using Compiler Explorer: for v5.4.0, 6.3.0 and 7.2.0. Setting -O2 or -O3 on the command line appears

[Bug c/84101] New: -O3 and -ftree-vectorize trying too hard for function returning trivial pair-of-uint64_t-structure

2018-01-29 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gcc at gmch dot uk Target Milestone: --- The following: typedef struct uint64_pair uint64_pair_t ; struct uint64_pair { uint64_t w0

[Bug c/84100] New: Function __attribute__((optimize(align-loops=32))) gives spurious warning

2018-01-29 Thread gcc at gmch dot uk
: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gcc at gmch dot uk Target Milestone: --- With v7.2.1, compiling for recent x86_64, the command line option "-falign-loops=32" is accepted and has the desired effect.