https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110214
Bug ID: 110214
Summary: x86 backend lacks support for vec_pack_ssat_m and
vec_pack_usat_m
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108410
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
> and the key thing to optimize is
>
> ivtmp_78 = ivtmp_77 + 4294967232; // -64
> _79 = MIN_EXPR ;
> _80 = (unsigned char) _79;
> _81 = {_80, _80, _80, _80, _80, _80, _80, _80, _80, _80, _80, _80,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109371
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110213
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't see an issue with this warning really as there is a temporary being
created for the argument of type name and that is what the issue is warning
about. the argument of type name is still passed via
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110213
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
#include
struct f
{
f(const f&);
f();
};
struct g{};
g (f);
void h()
{
f n;
const g& pt (search (std::move(n)));
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110213
--- Comment #1 from Boris Kolpackov ---
Created attachment 55304
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55304=edit
reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110213
Bug ID: 110213
Summary: Bogus (as opposed to false positive)
-Wdangling-reference warning
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107532
Boris Kolpackov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||boris at kolpackov dot net
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110170
--- Comment #8 from Hongtao.liu ---
ix86_expand_sse_fp_minmax failed since rtx_equal_p (cmp_op0, if_true) is false,
249(reg:DF 86 [ _1 ]) (if_true)
250(reg:DF 83 [ _2 ]) (if_false)
251(reg:DF 82 [ _1 ]) (cmp0_op0)
252(reg:DF 83 [ _2 ])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
So basically the biggest issue is we do the sign extend and then do the
multiply in an unsigned type; this causes all negative values causing a
wrapping which is not correct really but we don't know any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 55303
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55303=edit
Better patch
This is a better patch, operand_equal_p already does the integer cst check too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110188
--- Comment #6 from jzhgonha at 163 dot com ---
thank you very much!
发自我的小米在 "kito at gcc dot gnu.org" ，2023年6月9日
下午9:51写道：
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110188
Kito Cheng changed:
What |Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 55302
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55302=edit
Patch which I will be testing
This extends the pattern that already handles `(t * 2) / 2) -> t`.
The one thing which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86277
--- Comment #20 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #18)
> Created attachment 55300 [details]
> Alternative patch v2
This patch fails for me on several occasions including the testsuite.
I guess the logic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110212
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is a dup of this bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110212
Bug ID: 110212
Summary: ICE on invalid: template constraint failure
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
_14 = _13 * 32;
_15 = (long int) _14;
_2 = _15 /[ex] 32;
I think this will work
(simplify
(exact_div (nop_convert (mult @0 INTEGER_CST@1)) INTEGER_CST@2)
(if (!TYPE_UNSIGNED (@0)
&&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96237
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> I am going to implement the match patterns needed.
This is just expanding:
/* (zero_one != 0) ? z y : y -> ((typeof(y))zero_one * z) y */
Patterns not to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95923
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
After r14-1597-g64d90d06d2db, we now have:
_8 = a_6(D) | b_7(D);
_10 = a_6(D) == b_7(D);
_1 = _8 & _10;
(a == b) & (a | b)
I am no longer working on this right now. That is a job for reassociate I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110206
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression] wrong code |[14 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110113
--- Comment #10 from Witold Baryluk ---
Thank you Iain. Amazing debugging skills.
BTW. `import std;` was because dustmite reduced original import to just that.
Original import was `import std.math.algebraic : sqrt;`
But you already figured
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110211
Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.5.0
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110211
Bug ID: 110211
Summary: Local lambda treated as non-local
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: c++-lambda, rejects-valid
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110206
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is a difference at the gimple level even:
trunk:
_3 = { 204, 204, 204, 204 } >> u_7(D);
GCC 13.1:
_15 = BIT_FIELD_REF ;
_16 = 204 >> _15;
_17 = BIT_FIELD_REF ;
_18 = 204 >> _17;
_19 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110210
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Gcc does not provide these functions. They are provided by the libc that gcc
links to.
In the case of Linux, it is most likely glibc but it could be musl or uclibc .
If you are using a -elf target, then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110206
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110207
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |MOVED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110208
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110209
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110210
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |MOVED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110122
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:59946a4c0c97c842ac5a34de5b1aadb73b738809
commit r14-1698-g59946a4c0c97c842ac5a34de5b1aadb73b738809
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110122
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:682d401a6ba723b2bf98779d056efc8ff2640178
commit r14-1697-g682d401a6ba723b2bf98779d056efc8ff2640178
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110210
Bug ID: 110210
Summary: problem with strtol strtoll strtoul strtoull
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110209
Bug ID: 110209
Summary: problem with strtod strtof strtold
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110208
Bug ID: 110208
Summary: problem with fscanf
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110207
Bug ID: 110207
Summary: problems of fseek and fsetpos
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r14-1694-2023062131-g20643513b8d-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20230611 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109456
--- Comment #10 from Andreas Schwab ---
Or "other ABI-mandated fixed roles". This also includes return value
registers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109456
--- Comment #9 from Xi Ruoyao ---
The easiest way is considering it a documentation issue and do:
diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index 0870f7aff93..c39880349d5 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109907
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109907
--- Comment #30 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:20643513b8dd34c07f2b0fccf119153a30735f66
commit r14-1694-g20643513b8dd34c07f2b0fccf119153a30735f66
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110169
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110169
--- Comment #3 from CTC <19373742 at buaa dot edu.cn> ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #2)
> It seems csmith was run with the --float argument. Differences under -Ofast
> are expected (but even without -Ofast, it seems csmith can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110205
Bug ID: 110205
Summary: Some new warnings from clang for the range code
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
45 matches
Mail list logo
