[Bug c++/115091] New: Support value speculation in frontend

2024-05-14 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115091 Bug ID: 115091 Summary: Support value speculation in frontend Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug gcov-profile/113765] ICE: autofdo: val-profiler-threads-1.c compilation, error: probability of edge from entry block not initialized

2024-02-05 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113765 --- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen --- -O1 fixes it, so an easy patch would be diff --git a/gcc/auto-profile.cc b/gcc/auto-profile.cc index 63d0c3dc36df..180ed7a8260f 100644 --- a/gcc/auto-profile.cc +++ b/gcc/auto-profile.cc @@ -1758,7 +1758,7

[Bug gcov-profile/113765] autofdo: val-profiler-threads-1.c compilation, error: probability of edge from entry block not initialized

2024-02-05 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113765 --- Comment #1 from Andi Kleen --- Seems to be a regression, I tested the same setup on gcc 13 and the test passes there: 55:PASS: gcc.dg/tree-prof/val-profiler-threads-1.c compilation, -fprofile-generate -D_PROFILE_GENERATE 59:PASS:

[Bug gcov-profile/113765] New: autofdo: val-profiler-threads-1.c compilation, error: probability of edge from entry block not initialized

2024-02-05 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113765 Bug ID: 113765 Summary: autofdo: val-profiler-threads-1.c compilation, error: probability of edge from entry block not initialized Product: gcc Version: unknown

[Bug lto/107779] Support implicit references from inline assembler to compiler symbols

2023-10-15 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107779 --- Comment #4 from Andi Kleen --- This whole manual annotation idea (which is equivalent to marking the symbols global and visible and that is what a large part of the kernel LTO patchkit) is dead on arrival because the kernel people already

[Bug middle-end/111743] shifts in bit field accesses don't combine with other shifts

2023-10-09 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111743 --- Comment #5 from Andi Kleen --- config/i386/i386.h:#define SLOW_BYTE_ACCESS 0 You mean it doesn't define it?

[Bug middle-end/111743] shifts in bit field accesses don't combine with other shifts

2023-10-09 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111743 --- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen --- Okay then it doesn't understand that SHL_signed and SHR_unsigned can be combined when one the values came from a shorter unsigned.

[Bug middle-end/111743] New: shifts in bit field accesses don't combine with other shifts

2023-10-09 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111743 Bug ID: 111743 Summary: shifts in bit field accesses don't combine with other shifts Product: gcc Version: 13.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug lto/107779] New: Support implicit references from inline assembler to compiler symbols

2022-11-20 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107779 Bug ID: 107779 Summary: Support implicit references from inline assembler to compiler symbols Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug lto/107014] flatten+lto fails the kernel build

2022-09-25 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107014 Andi Kleen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---

[Bug preprocessor/45227] libcpp Makefile does not enable instrumentation

2022-01-04 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45227 --- Comment #5 from Andi Kleen --- I think it was the method from the info file. But I can't quite remember. If you cannot reproduce it I guess it's ok to close. Maybe I made some mistake.

[Bug middle-end/99578] gcc-11 -Warray-bounds or -Wstringop-overread warning when accessing a pointer from integer literal

2021-05-01 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578 Andi Kleen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org --- Comment

[Bug lto/99828] inlining failed in call to ‘always_inline’ ‘memcpy’: --param max-inline-insns-auto limit reached

2021-03-30 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828 --- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen --- So what do you want to fix in the kernel? Use a wrapper for taking the address of the memcpy? (I hope nothing in gcc would remove such a wrapper)