https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
See pr 112572 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #14 from Haochen Jiang ---
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-8250U and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U both have AVX.
I am trying to reproduce that on building trunk with GCC 13.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
It might be that the issue has been latent for a long time and only started to
show up with newer sources and that bootstrap actually is the only way to
workaround it now (well when it is fixed).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
Wait -march=native .
Are these all on cores that have avx on it? If this is a dup of that other bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112406
--- Comment #15 from Robin Dapp ---
Hmm, that's definitely related to the original change but most likely not to
the fixes.
gcc_assert (code == IFN_COND_ADD || code == IFN_COND_SUB
|| code == IFN_COND_MUL || code ==
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #11 from urs at akk dot org ---
I'm using
gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/13/lto-wrapper
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none:amdgcn-amdhsa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #10 from Haochen Jiang ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> I suspect the common theme here is enable-default-pie .
>
> In the case of the original report was built with a compiler that had
> enabled and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Summary|Failure to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
I will look into this tomorrow but maybe there is some gc issue going on.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #4)
> Could you provide the exact options you build GCC with --disable-bootstrap
> for me to reproduce?
>
> I suppose all of them are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
--- Comment #22 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c656d268c9dac8b6f710b9bbd399214cb11b3287
commit r14-5635-gc656d268c9dac8b6f710b9bbd399214cb11b3287
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect the common theme here is enable-default-pie .
In the case of the original report was built with a compiler that had enabled
and --disable-bootstrap got it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
urs at akk dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||urs at akk dot org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #4 from Haochen Jiang ---
It is weird since everything passed even under bootstrap.
Could you provide the exact options you build GCC with --disable-bootstrap for
me to reproduce?
I suppose all of them are '--enable-libsanitizer'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112520
--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #2)
> Not a target-specific issue. Starting from
> https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/
> ea2c0016502472aa8baa3149050ada776d17a009 where an unnamed union is added.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112520
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112406
--- Comment #14 from Tamar Christina ---
Thanks, Those cases seem fixed now.
I do however still see another LTO failure that looks related in SPECCPU 2006:
ratectl.c:1566:6: internal compiler error: in vect_transform_reduction, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111972
--- Comment #14 from liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> (In reply to liuhongt from comment #12)
> >
> > Is there any progress for this?
>
> I have a patch ready to post for this but since I changed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112598
--- Comment #2 from JuzheZhong ---
Since zvl128b and zvl256b bug fix are done.
So I am gonna work on zvl512b now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112597
--- Comment #4 from JuzheZhong ---
Confirm on C/C++ RV32 and RV64 FAILs
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr30957-1.c also happens on X86 so we need to ignore it.
The other one is:
FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/gather-scatter/gather_load_run-12.c
execution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112611
Jiahao Xu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xujiahao at loongson dot cn
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69549
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100530
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112638
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112645
Bug ID: 112645
Summary: missed-optimization: cswitch optimization missed in
nested if-statement
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70
--- Comment #9 from LIU Hao ---
(In reply to Costas Argyris from comment #8)
> (In reply to LIU Hao from comment #3)
> > Costas, would you like to provide a configure option to exclude that
> > manifest?
>
> I created a patch for that and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111972
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to liuhongt from comment #12)
>
> Is there any progress for this?
I have a patch ready to post for this but since I changed employement a few
weeks ago, I have to clear legal requirements
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112644
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
hwasan-thread-clears-stack.c looks like it now able to describe the location.
So that seems like only a testsuite issue.
halt_on_error-1.c does look like we just halt on a failure instead of continue
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112644
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
for halt_on_error-1.c, it is trying to match:
WRITE of size 17 at 0x[0-9a-f]+.*READ of size 1 at 0x[0-9a-f]+.*WRITE of size 1
at 0x[0-9a-f]+.*READ of size 1 at 0x[0-9a-f]+.*
But we get just:
WRITE of size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112644
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112644
Bug ID: 112644
Summary: [14 Regression] Some of the hwasan testcase fail after
the recent merge
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111972
liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102144
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102144
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112637
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-11-21
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112325
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e5e305e6048c042139037378fe6abfad5735b54f
commit r14-5632-ge5e305e6048c042139037378fe6abfad5735b54f
Author: liuhongt
Date: Fri Nov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100903
--- Comment #13 from Christopher Head ---
Could the error message be made more readable by trying to call an
undefined-but-declared non-consteval function inside the consteval context in
the error case, rather than throwing? The name of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
--- Comment #21 from Li Pan ---
(In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #18)
> I did a quick testsuite run on rv32 and can confirm that this fixes the
> issue for me.
Confirmed that this fixes the issue on RV64 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112583
--- Comment #5 from Patrick O'Neill ---
I built all the zvl variants as a multilib. It seems like that caused them to
interfere with eachother (potentially picking up the wrong glibc?). I'll rerun
with separate runs & update the issues with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112596
--- Comment #4 from Veeraraghavan Sekar ---
Okay thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #19)
> I have noticed some other gather related failures but haven't had time to
> triage them to file bugs. Hoping to get to that soon.
I had noticed the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112614
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The sign of a NaN isn't specified for conversions, only for a few
operations such as absolute value, negation, copysign.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For clarification: I did not bisect, but yesterdays build did work,
today's doesn't, and I am seeing warnings while building libgfortran
most likely pointing to this change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56655
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56655=edit
config.status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
Bug ID: 112643
Summary: Failure to build libitm with --disable-bootstrap after
r14-5607-g2f8f7ee2db82a3
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112563
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It doesn't work after the string.h declarations of those functions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112563
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe
extern "C" {
static void *memcpy (void *, const void *, decltype (sizeof 0)) __attribute__
((weakref ("__sanitizer_internal_memcpy")));
static void *memmove (void *, const void *, decltype (sizeof
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #9 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112563
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, I see, the problem is that the sanitizers use (both in GCC and Clang)
-fno-builtin option, which makes it not work unless user uses just memcpy.
Short testcase:
extern "C" void *memcpy (void *, const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #7)
> # head -10 /proc/cpuinfo
> processor : 0
> BogoMIPS: 50.08
> Features: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp
> asimdhp cpuid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112573
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-11-20
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
# head -10 /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
BogoMIPS: 50.08
Features: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp
asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm lrcpc dcpop asimddp ssbs
CPU implementer :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Running a bootstrap right now and will report back in a few.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70
--- Comment #8 from Costas Argyris ---
(In reply to LIU Hao from comment #3)
> Costas, would you like to provide a configure option to exclude that
> manifest?
I created a patch for that and attached it here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112552
Patrick O'Neill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112561
Patrick O'Neill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #45 from Costas Argyris ---
Created attachment 56653
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56653=edit
Introduce configure option --disable-win32-utf8-manifest
Thanks for the pointers.
I attach a patch that disables
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112562
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So does this fix it?
2023-11-20 Jakub Jelinek
PR sanitizer/112562
* sanitizer_common/sanitizer_asm.h (ASM_TYPE_FUNCTION): Use @function
rather than %function except on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112583
--- Comment #4 from Patrick O'Neill ---
Investigating this now. I'll let you know what I find out.
All these tests were run in the same environment so be wary when looking at any
of them until I figure out the environment issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112596
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Veeraraghavan Sekar from comment #2)
> You have common reason on what cause
>
> _Unwind_Resume and _Unwind_RaiseException_Phase2?
I don't understand the question. Those functions are used
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112642
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |c++
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90693
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111309
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Does
2023-11-20 Jakub Jelinek
PR c/111309
* c-c++-common/pr111309-2.c (foo): Don't expect errors for C++ with
-fshort-enums if second argument is E0.
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112642
--- Comment #3 from Miro Palmu ---
Further reduced:
#include
using namespace std::literals;
consteval void bar() {
auto _ = [](auto s) { return s; }(""s);
}
int main() {
bar();
return 0;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89316
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #14 from Uroš Bizjak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112506
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
with a case sensitive source partition on x86_64-darwin12, (I think these have
also been reported, but cannot find the pR right now):
=== gm2 tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112506
--- Comment #2 from Iain Sandoe ---
is your file system "default" (i.e. case-preserving-case-insensitive) on the
source code volume?
If so, those fails look suspiciously similar to the ones I see - reposted in
PR111627.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112592
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That seems like a backend bug.
pa_scalar_mode_supported_p returns true for TARGET_64BIT && mode == TImode, but
MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE macro doesn't reflect that and is still using the default
definition of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112583
--- Comment #3 from Robin Dapp ---
I cannot reproduce this either. Just started with binop/* and don't see any
fails locally. Patrick, could you check what caused this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112642
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Further reduced:
#include
using namespace std::literals;
template
constexpr auto
fold2(T init)
{ return std::move(init); }
template
constexpr auto
fold(T init)
{ return fold2(std::move(init)); }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112563
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The __builtin_mem* redirections actually don't seem to be necessary (at least
for me on x86_64-linux), though I certainly don't see any messages about
ignoring something.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #1)
> r14-5595-g06e7cc79fd3b1b built OK last, I think, and
> r14-5606-ge85c596ae2d1e5 is what failed.
My last build is r14-5590-g9d58d2d8ba290d and r14-5606-ge85c596ae2d1e5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112642
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112641
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 56652
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56652=edit
reduced.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112642
Bug ID: 112642
Summary: ranges::fold_left tries to access inactive union
member of string in constant expression
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112641
Bug ID: 112641
Summary: : `drop_view::begin const` has (n)
complexity
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
--- Comment #18 from Robin Dapp ---
I did a quick testsuite run on rv32 and can confirm that this fixes the issue
for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 56651
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56651=edit
bid128_fma.i
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-14.0.0./work/build/./gcc/xgcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112638
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
-verify --disable-libvtv --with-zstd --without-isl
--enable-default-pie --enable-host-pie --enable-host-bind-now
--enable-default-ssp --with-build-config='bootstrap-O3 bootstrap-lto'
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20231120 (experimental
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112640
Bug ID: 112640
Summary: [14 regression] Failed bootstrap on arm64
(libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_fma.c:3569:1: internal
compiler error: in extract_base_offset_in_addr, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112639
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 56650
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56650=edit
gcc14-pr112639.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324
--- Comment #11 from David Edelsohn ---
GIMPLE supports must_tail, but it is not exposed at the sources level /
attributes in GCC.
CPython is not adding the LLVM JIT at runtime. The proposal is to utilize LLVM
at build time to generate code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112632
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112639
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112639
Bug ID: 112639
Summary: Incorrect handling of __builtin_c[lt]zg argument
side-effects
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112633
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112638
Bug ID: 112638
Summary: ICE: in add_dwarf_attr, at dwarf2out.cc:4501
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111970
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
OK, so for RISC-V with the testcase from the description there's the
following issue:
_179 = [(uint8_t *)_618];
_225 = BIT_FIELD_REF [(uint8_t *)_179], 8,
16>;
...
vect__8.9_405 = {_218, _224,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90693
--- Comment #6 from Wilco ---
Thanks Jakub - with the 2nd patch we get the expected sequence on AArch64:
sub x1, x0, #1
eor x0, x0, x1
cmp x0, x1
csetx0, hi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110415
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112622
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112618
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
