[Bug tree-optimization/88932] [8/9 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (Error: definition in block 29 does not dominate use in block 25)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88932 bin.cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Comment #4

[Bug tree-optimization/28364] poor optimization choices when iterating over a std::string (probably not c++-specific)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28364 bin.cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/82965] [8 regression][armeb] gcc.dg/vect/pr79347.c starts failing after r254379

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965 bin.cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/68576] scev failed for loop auto parallelize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68576 --- Comment #5 from bin.cheng --- The type conversion comses from lim, below code: /* In case this is a stmt that is not unconditionally executed when the target loop header is executed and the stmt may invoke undefined

[Bug tree-optimization/68576] scev failed for loop auto parallelize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68576 --- Comment #6 from bin.cheng --- Hmm, at least for this case, lim should be aware that lim candidate doesn't invoke undefined overflow when it is not executed after entering target loop. Thus we don't need to rewrite it in unsigned arithmetic.

[Bug tree-optimization/68576] scev failed for loop auto parallelize

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68576 bin.cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Comment #4

[Bug tree-optimization/68529] scev failed for while(i--)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68529 --- Comment #5 from bin.cheng --- The dump before ldist is as below: foo1 () { unsigned int nchar; char c[1]; : c = {}; : # nchar_14 = PHI c[nchar_14] = 65; nchar_5 = nchar_14 + 4294967295; if

[Bug tree-optimization/67921] [6 Regression] "internal compiler error: in build_polynomial_chrec, at tree-chrec.h:147" when using -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921 bin.cheng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Comment #5

[Bug tree-optimization/67921] [6 Regression] "internal compiler error: in build_polynomial_chrec, at tree-chrec.h:147" when using -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921 --- Comment #6 from bin.cheng --- The fact is GCC calls function: chrec_fold_minus (type, chrec1, chrec2) // type == sizetype // chrec1 == 4 - (sizetype) // chrec2 == (sizetype) ((int *) p1_8(D) + ((sizetype) a_23 *

[Bug tree-optimization/67921] [6 Regression] "internal compiler error: in build_polynomial_chrec, at tree-chrec.h:147" when using -fsanitize=undefined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921 --- Comment #7 from bin.cheng --- Hmm, this issue could be simply because chrec_fold_multiply doesn't use sizetype as CHREC_RIGHT's type to build pointer type CHREC: return build_polynomial_chrec (CHREC_VARIABLE (op0),

[Bug rtl-optimization/62151] [5 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62151 --- Comment #15 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Hmm, words on tem_insn issue at the end of comment #12 isn't mature. It's more complicated than that. Turns out live range of register which is noted as DEAD in i1/i2 can

[Bug rtl-optimization/62151] [5 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62151 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug rtl-optimization/62151] [5 Regression] wrong code at -O2 and -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62151 --- Comment #13 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- The check itself is suspicious too. Why do we want to check elim_i2/elim_i1 when distributing REG_DEAD note from i1?

[Bug middle-end/62178] [5.0 regression] [AArch64] Performance regression on matrix matrix multiply due to r211211

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62178 --- Comment #5 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Now I think the patch proposed isn't good enough. I am revisiting the implementation to see if I can improve the existing algorithm, rather than just adding another heuristic pass.

[Bug target/58623] lack of ldp/stp optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58623 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug target/62173] [5.0 regression] [AArch64] Performance regression due to r213488

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug tree-optimization/63411] [4.9/5 regression] ivopt produces wrong struct offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63411 --- Comment #2 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #0) Compiling the following as C or C++: typedef struct { unsigned char sprindex; unsigned char y; unsigned char index; unsigned

[Bug tree-optimization/49444] IV-OPTs changes an unaligned loads into aligned loads incorrectly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49444 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug tree-optimization/62631] gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopts-lt-2.c FAILs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62631 --- Comment #4 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Hi Rainer, This is caused by abnormal huge cost of function call `shiftadd_cost (true, DImode, 2)'. It returns 100+ cost, resulting in huge cost when representing use 1 with cand 4

[Bug driver/62290] New: --print-file-name doesn't work for liblto_plugin.so

: driver Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com At least with revision@214413, gcc configured with below options on x86_64. $ ../gcc/configure --prefix=../target/ --enable-languages=c,c++,ada,fortran,java,objc,obj-c++,go Option

[Bug target/62178] [AArch64] Performance regression on matrix matrix multiply due to r211211

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62178 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug c++/62150] New: test case g++.dg/ext/arm-fp16/fp16-mangle-1.C failed on ARM

Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com Hi, The test case is like below. /* { dg-do compile { target arm*-*-* } } */ /* { dg-options -mfp16-format=ieee } */ /* Test mangling */ /* { dg-final { scan

[Bug libstdc++/62118] New: cases under libstdc++-v3/testsuite/ext/ failed on aarch64/arm

Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com Hi, Revision 213779 causes lots cases under libstdc++-v3/testsuite/ext/ failed on aarch64-none-elf and arm-none-eabi. The log message is like In file

[Bug ipa/61659] [4.9/4.10 Regression] Extra undefined symbol because of devirtualization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61659 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug target/62025] [4.9/4.10 Regression] Miscompilation of openssl sha512.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62025 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug tree-optimization/62032] FAIL: vsnprintf-chk.c execution, -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62032 --- Comment #3 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- I did some investigation and think it's a latent bug of lto which reveaded by r213585. Before the revision, pass_fold_builtins::execute calls gimple_fold_builtins directly to fold

[Bug tree-optimization/62032] New: FAIL: vsnprintf-chk.c execution, -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com Created attachment 33256 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33256action=edit tarball of dump files Hi

[Bug tree-optimization/62032] FAIL: vsnprintf-chk.c execution, -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62032 --- Comment #1 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Only fail with lto options.

[Bug target/61411] [NEON] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at postreload.c:411

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61411 --- Comment #3 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Then I think it's a latent bug in LRA. It should consult back-end about legitimized address expressions.

[Bug target/61411] [NEON] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at postreload.c:411

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61411 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug target/61367] New: Annoying rtx cost information in middle end dumps on arm/aarch64 targets

: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com Created attachment 32877 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32877action=edit zipped dump files. Given a simple program like

[Bug tree-optimization/60363] [4.9/4.10 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 --- Comment #15 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Should be fixed now.

[Bug tree-optimization/60363] [4.9 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 --- Comment #10 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Patch sent at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg00857.html , but it need to wait for stage 1. I will xfail it for now.

[Bug target/53090] suboptimal ivopt

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug regression/60363] [4.9 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 --- Comment #7 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- The problem has nothing to do with VRP, and might be a missed opportunity of jump threading. The dump after VRP but before jump threading at the end of VRP is like: ... bb 21

[Bug target/58424] [ARM]gcc.target/arm/pr42575.c failed on arm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58424 --- Comment #2 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Yes, It works for below combination of options: -mthumb -mcpu=cortex-m4 -mthumb/-marm -march=armv7-a/-mcpu=cortex-a7 But still happens for: -mthumb -mcpu=cortex-m3 -mthumb

[Bug regression/60363] [4.9 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 --- Comment #5 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Vrp1 generates below code: bb 3: if (b_elt_11(D) != 0B) goto bb 4; else goto bb 8; bb 4: # kill_elt_10 = PHI kill_elt_4(3) goto bb 6; bb 5: kill_elt_14

[Bug regression/60363] [4.9 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 --- Comment #6 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- After investigation, I think the root cause is: For given mergephi2 dump (before vrp), there are latch(bb13) and header(bb14) of a loop: bb 13: # changed_18 = PHI changed_26(12

[Bug regression/60363] [4.9 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug regression/60363] [4.9 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 --- Comment #3 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- After patching 208165, there are two more jump threading opportunities for dom1 pass. Jump threading is doing alright, the interesting thing is why there is no such opportunities

[Bug regression/60363] [4.9 Regression]: logical_op_short_circuit, gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c scan-tree-dump-times dom1 Threaded 4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363 --- Comment #4 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Although may be irrelavant. I found loop's latch doesn't get updated after removing the forwarder latch basic block. Previous patch only catches function remove_forwarder_block

[Bug tree-optimization/60280] [4.9 Regression] gcc.target/arm/ivopts.c and gcc.target/arm/ivopts-2.c failed caused by preserving loop structure.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/60280] [4.9 Regression] gcc.target/arm/ivopts.c and gcc.target/arm/ivopts-2.c failed caused by preserving loop structure.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280 --- Comment #3 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- I think 4_8 is ok for this case. At least it doesn't have http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-04/msg01530.html committed if I was right.

[Bug tree-optimization/60280] New: gcc.target/arm/ivopts.c and gcc.target/arm/ivopts-2.c failed caused by preserving loop structure.

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com gcc.target/arm/ivopts-2.c is like: /* { dg-do assemble } */ /* { dg-options -Os -fdump-tree-ivopts -save-temps

[Bug tree-optimization/60280] gcc.target/arm/ivopts.c and gcc.target/arm/ivopts-2.c failed caused by preserving loop structure.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280 --- Comment #1 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- It's caused by patch at (revision r198333): http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-04/msg01530.html After patching, forwarder basic block 6 in below dump didn't get removed: tr4

[Bug tree-optimization/59519] [4.9 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in slpeel_update_phi_nodes_for_guard1, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:486

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519 --- Comment #10 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9) BTW, the patch can hardly regress anything, it only affects cases that ICEd before the patch. Em, I am worried if vectorization can

[Bug tree-optimization/59519] [4.9 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in slpeel_update_phi_nodes_for_guard1, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:486

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519 --- Comment #7 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) Created attachment 31562 [details] gcc49-pr59519.patch I wonder if this isn't just a checking issue, the two PHI nodes created

[Bug tree-optimization/59519] [4.9 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in slpeel_update_phi_nodes_for_guard1, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:486

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519 --- Comment #5 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- For the offending loop: bb 5: bb 6: # b.4_30 = PHI b.4_12(5), 1(12) # prephitmp_28 = PHI c.1_9(5), c.1_21(12) # b_lsm.11_13 = PHI b.4_12(5), 1(12) # ivtmp_46 = PHI

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #10 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- The offending loop before IVOPT is like: bb 350: # var_index_1889 = PHI 1(924), var_index_983(923) # var_index.250_1269 = PHI 1(924), var_index.250_1959(923) if (var_index

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bernds

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #13 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #12) -fno-auto-inc-dec avoids the crash. Dup of #52306? It looks like, AFAICT. Only this time it's blocking bootstrap :(

[Bug c++/59555] New: bogus error: template with C linkage with preprocessed c++ file

Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com Created attachment 31478 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31478action=edit preprocessed c++ file For attached preprocessed file, arm-none-eabi

[Bug middle-end/52306] [4.8/4.9 regression] ICE in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2158

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug tree-optimization/59519] [4.9 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in slpeel_update_phi_nodes_for_guard1, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:486

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug tree-optimization/59519] [4.9 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in slpeel_update_phi_nodes_for_guard1, at tree-vect-loop-manip.c:486

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519 --- Comment #4 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- First clue. b_lsm.11_13 is recognized as chrec {1, +, 1}_2 with the patch, thus the loop can be vectorized now. bb 5: bb 6: # b.4_30 = PHI b.4_12(5), 1(12) # prephitmp_28

[Bug tree-optimization/50955] [4.7 Regression] IVopts incorrectly rewrite the address of a global memory access into a local form.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug tree-optimization/50955] [4.7 Regression] IVopts incorrectly rewrite the address of a global memory access into a local form.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 --- Comment #19 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- not about an iv use appearing in memory reference while not marked as address_p, and can be fixed by revise the existing check condition, is it true? No, even expressing

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #6 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Hi, Sorry I don't have m68k environment to do the bootstrap, could anyone help dump -fdump-tree-all-details -fdump-rtl-all-slim with and without the patch for me? Otherwise I have

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #8 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #1) Between r205951 and r205984. (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #7) (In reply to bin.cheng from comment #6) Hi, Sorry I don't have

[Bug bootstrap/59536] [4.9 regression] internal compiler error: in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2376 breaks m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536 --- Comment #9 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Turns out my crossed bare-metal tool works after deleting all preprocessed # xxx file lines, but why these lines matter?

[Bug tree-optimization/52272] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] Performance regression of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug middle-end/39838] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] unoptimal code for two simple loops

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39838 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug middle-end/39838] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] unoptimal code for two simple loops

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39838 --- Comment #16 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- For optimization level O2, the dump before IVOPT is like: bb 2: _21 = p_6(D)-count; if (_21 0) goto bb 3; else goto bb 11; bb 3: bb 4: # i_26 = PHI i_20(10

[Bug tree-optimization/59479] Inlining of static function bloats code size when Os

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59479 --- Comment #2 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- I will investigate it later. Just clarifying, the function is called three times by the caller, it would increase code size usually. BTW, could you explain a little about 2nd-order

[Bug tree-optimization/59445] [4.9 Regression] ICE in add_old_iv_candidates, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:2541

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59445 --- Comment #18 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Hi Dominique d'Humieres, Thanks for verifying it.

[Bug tree-optimization/59445] [4.9 Regression] ICE in add_old_iv_candidates, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:2541

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59445 --- Comment #16 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- I fixed the reported problem and posted new patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg01159.html Apology that I missed java in bootstrap for previous patch. This version

[Bug tree-optimization/59479] New: Inlining of static function bloats code size when Os

Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com Created attachment 31424 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31424action=edit The preprocessed file for newlib/libc/stdio/findfp.c Hi, for attached preprocessed

[Bug tree-optimization/59445] [4.9 Regression] ICE in add_old_iv_candidates, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:2541

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59445 --- Comment #13 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Sorry for bothering, I have reverted the patch. Will investigate it.

[Bug tree-optimization/59445] [4.9 Regression] ICE in add_old_iv_candidates, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:2541

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59445 --- Comment #14 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- I found out the root cause of this ICE and will use the simplified code given by comment#9 as an example. The gimple dump before IVOPT is like: bb 2: bb 3: # c_2 = PHI c_5(D

[Bug tree-optimization/59445] [4.9 Regression] ICE in add_old_iv_candidates, at tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:2541

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59445 --- Comment #15 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 31414 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31414action=edit The generated assembly with/without patch for code in comment #9 on cortex-m3

[Bug tree-optimization/39200] ivopts slows down SciMark sparse matrix benchmark

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39200 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug rtl-optimization/55190] [SH] ivopts causes loop setup bloat

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55190 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug rtl-optimization/50749] Auto-inc-dec does not find subsequent contiguous mem accesses

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50749 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker.cheng

[Bug target/58423] New: [ARM]ICE with shrink-wrap-sibcall.c on a15/neon/hard

Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com GCC ICEed with shrink-wrap-sibcall.c on a15 with below command line: ./arm-none-eabi-gcc -O2 -marm -mcpu=cortex-a15 -mfpu=neon -mfloat-abi=hard shrink-wrap-sibcall.c -S -o shrink-wrap

[Bug target/58424] New: [ARM]gcc.target/arm/pr42575.c failed on arm

: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com gcc is at revision r202599 and is configured as: ../gcc/configure build=i686-linux-gnu host=i686-linux-gnu target=arm-none-eabi prefix=.../trunk-orig/target/ disable-decimal-float disable-libffi

[Bug target/56102] Wrong rtx cost calculated for Thumb1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56102 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/57540] stack pointer related loop invariants after reload for ARM mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57540 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |target

[Bug target/57540] stack pointer related loop invariants after reload for ARM mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57540 --- Comment #3 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- I think this should be handled in expand. During expanding, GCC tries base + scaled_offset + offset pattern, which is invalid for targets like arm. At this point we still have

[Bug target/57540] stack pointer related loop invariants after reload

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57540 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Component|rtl-optimization|target

[Bug rtl-optimization/57540] New: stack pointer related loop invariants after reload

Component: rtl-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: amker.cheng at gmail dot com For below program, void foo ( unsigned char *len, int alphaSize, int maxLen ) { int i, j, k; unsigned char tooLong

[Bug rtl-optimization/57540] stack pointer related loop invariants after reload

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57540 --- Comment #1 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com --- The dump of loop_init is like, 72: r178:SI=0 106: L106: 90: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 6 91: r178:SI=r178:SI+0x1 94: r190:SI=r177:SI0x2 REG_DEAD r177:SI 95: r191:SI

[Bug rtl-optimization/56124] Redundant reload for loading from memory

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56124 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/56139] New: unmodified static data could go in .rodata, not .data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56139 Bug #: 56139 Summary: unmodified static data could go in .rodata, not .data Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug rtl-optimization/56124] New: Redundant reload for loading from memory

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56124 Bug #: 56124 Summary: Redundant reload for loading from memory Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/56124] Redundant reload for loading from memory

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56124 --- Comment #1 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com 2013-01-28 02:43:10 UTC --- The root cause is in ira:scan_one_insn function. It decrease cost of memory for pseudo which are target of loading from memory: if (set != 0

[Bug target/56102] New: Wrong rtx cost calculated for Thumb1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56102 Bug #: 56102 Summary: Wrong rtx cost calculated for Thumb1 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/56102] Wrong rtx cost calculated for Thumb1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56102 --- Comment #1 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com 2013-01-25 03:46:59 UTC --- I have investigated this issue. GCC uses function init_lower_subreg to initialize costs of MOVE insn with different mode, then uses this information

[Bug target/56102] Wrong rtx cost calculated for Thumb1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56102 --- Comment #2 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com 2013-01-25 07:25:34 UTC --- Created attachment 29270 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29270 correct test case The previous test case is not appropriate

[Bug target/56058] New: GCC arm-none-eabi build failure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56058 Bug #: 56058 Summary: GCC arm-none-eabi build failure Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major

[Bug tree-optimization/55906] New: suboptimal code generated for post-inc on Thumb1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55906 Bug #: 55906 Summary: suboptimal code generated for post-inc on Thumb1 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/54910] ARM: Missed optimization of very simple ctz function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54910 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC

[Bug tree-optimization/55424] New: [4.8 Regression]gcc.dg/uninit-pred-8_b.c bogus warning line 23 on ARM/Cortex-M0/-Os

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55424 Bug #: 55424 Summary: [4.8 Regression]gcc.dg/uninit-pred-8_b.c bogus warning line 23 on ARM/Cortex-M0/-Os Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug tree-optimization/49498] [4.7/4.8 Regression]: gcc.dg/uninit-pred-8_b.c bogus warning line 20

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49498 --- Comment #19 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com 2012-11-21 13:24:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #18) *** Bug 55424 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Just for the record. If the analysis I gave in Comment #17

[Bug tree-optimization/49498] [4.7/4.8 Regression]: gcc.dg/uninit-pred-8_b.c bogus warning line 20

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49498 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC

[Bug target/54989] FAIL: gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c scan-rtl-dump hoist PRE/HOIST: end of bb .* copying expression on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54989 --- Comment #7 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com 2012-10-31 08:45:37 UTC --- I think this is fixed and it's a bug in 4.8.0. Hi Jack, could you verify that it is fixed? Thanks very much.

[Bug other/55031] New: Documentation on RTL GCSE pass is outdated

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55031 Bug #: 55031 Summary: Documentation on RTL GCSE pass is outdated Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/54989] FAIL: gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c scan-rtl-dump hoist PRE/HOIST: end of bb .* copying expression on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54989 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC

[Bug rtl-optimization/54133] regrename introduces additional dependencies

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54133 --- Comment #8 from amker.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com 2012-09-25 07:45:02 UTC --- I have spent some time investigating this bug and now I think I understand the issue. The problematic instruction patterns which save/restore

[Bug target/54414] New: ARM:mis-compiled prologue/epilogue on cortex-m0 when optimizing with -Os

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54414 Bug #: 54414 Summary: ARM:mis-compiled prologue/epilogue on cortex-m0 when optimizing with -Os Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status:

  1   2   >