[Bug tree-optimization/91322] [10 regression] alias-4 test failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48185 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48185&action=edit qemu execution trace

[Bug tree-optimization/91322] [10 regression] alias-4 test failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48184 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48184&action=edit GCC passes dumps

[Bug tree-optimization/91322] [10 regression] alias-4 test failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322 --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48183 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48183&action=edit executable asm from objdump

[Bug tree-optimization/94043] [9 Regression] ICE in superloop_at_depth, at cfgloop.c:78

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94043 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/94456] New: ICE in aarch64/sve/pr87815.c since r10-7491

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since r10-7491, I've noticed a regression with an ICE: FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/pr87815.c -march=armv8.2-a+sve (internal compiler error) /gcc/test

[Bug target/94445] gcc.target/arm/cmse/cmse-15.c fails for cortex-m33

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94445 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- I also checked that arm_handle_cmse_nonsecure_call correctly duplicates the type.

[Bug target/94445] New: gcc.target/arm/cmse/cmse-15.c fails for cortex-m33

: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that when GCC is configured --target arm-none-abi --with-mode=thumb --with-cpu=cortex-m33, the cmse-15.c test fails: FAIL: gcc.target/arm/cmse/cmse

[Bug tree-optimization/94401] pr92420.c fails on aarch64 since r10-7415

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94401 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- The defaults are OK (either native or cross aarch64)

[Bug tree-optimization/90332] New test case gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-sad-2.c in r270847 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90332 --- Comment #12 from Christophe Lyon --- > Can you open a new bugreport? Sure, I filed PR94401

[Bug tree-optimization/94401] New: pr92420.c fails on aarch64 since r10-7415

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that the fix for PR90332 caused a regression on aarch64: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92420.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92

[Bug tree-optimization/90332] New test case gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-sad-2.c in r270847 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90332 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/94339] [10 regression] ICE in tree_class_check_failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94339 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48123 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48123&action=edit ada-lang.ii.xz

[Bug middle-end/94339] New: [10 regression] ICE in tree_class_check_failed

: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, I've noticed this ICE while building GDB with recent GCC trunk, it appeared between: r10-7336 and r10-7346 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-g++ -g -O2 -c ada-la

[Bug target/94317] gcc/config/arm/arm_mve.h:13907: strange assignment ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94317 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/90378] [9/10 regression] -Os -flto miscompiles 454.calculix after r266385 on Arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90378 --- Comment #10 from Christophe Lyon --- I checked the stack settings on the ARMv7 and ARMv8 machines: ARMv7: beced000-bed0e000 rw-p 00:00 0 [stack] ARMv8: fff12000-fff33000 rw-p 00:00 0 [stack] In both cases

[Bug rtl-optimization/90378] [9/10 regression] -Os -flto miscompiles 454.calculix after r266385 on Arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90378 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- I also tried to run the program under QEMU, it works (doesn't crash)

[Bug rtl-optimization/90378] [9/10 regression] -Os -flto miscompiles 454.calculix after r266385 on Arm

||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- I am able to reproduce the failure with the same commit mentioned by Maxim in comment #3. Using a more

[Bug fortran/89661] FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_61.f90 -O (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89661 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- I added --enable-default-pie to my configure options, and it's still successful.

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- It worked for me with gcc-8-branch at g:9eba9635f653291804ecb832eebe1ed96e3346ba Using: ../gcc/configure --with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16 --with-float=hard --with-mode=thumb --with-build-config=boo

[Bug analyzer/93375] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3258

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93375 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #7) > Does the patch in comment #6 fix the remaining test failures for everyone? It's OK for me on arm, thanks.

[Bug rtl-optimization/91333] [9/10 Regression] suboptimal register allocation for inline asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91333 --- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #12) > (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #10) > > (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #9) > > > Fixed by Vlad's patch on the trunk. > > > > This pat

[Bug rtl-optimization/91333] [9/10 Regression] suboptimal register allocation for inline asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91333 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/92706] SRA confuses FRE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92706 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/93473] ICE on valid with long module + submodule names

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93473 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug analyzer/93375] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3258

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93375 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug testsuite/93391] [10 regression] new test cases c-c++-common/Wconversion-pr40752.c and pr40752a.c fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93391 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/40752] -Wconversion generates false warnings for operands not larger than target type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40752 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/93263] [9/10 Regression] -fno-automatic and RECURSIVE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263 --- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon --- > Seen on arm too, both master and gcc-9 And aarch64 too.

[Bug fortran/93263] [9/10 Regression] -fno-automatic and RECURSIVE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/93135] New: g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist118.C fails on aarch64

: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- The test fails on aarch64: g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist118.C -std=c++14 (internal compiler error) g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist118.C -std=c++14 (test for excess errors) g++.dg

[Bug c/36941] gcc does not reject invalid cast

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36941 --- Comment #11 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Fri Dec 6 10:54:46 2019 New Revision: 279039 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279039&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [testsuite][aarch64] type_redef_11.c: Update expected diagnostics. Aft

[Bug c/88827] Rejects valid program using &* operator combination.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88827 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Fri Dec 6 10:54:46 2019 New Revision: 279039 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279039&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [testsuite][aarch64] type_redef_11.c: Update expected diagnostics. Afte

[Bug tree-optimization/92822] New: regressions on aarch64 after r278938

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- After commit r278938, I've noticed regressions on aarch64: FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/fmla_intrinsic_1.c scan-assembler-times fmla\\tv[0-9]+.2s, v[0-9]+.2s, v[0-9]+.2s\\

[Bug tree-optimization/91975] worse code for small array copy using pointer arithmetic than array indexing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91975 Bug 91975 depends on bug 92047, which changed state. Bug 92047 Summary: [10 regression] aarch64 regressions after r276645 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92047 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/92047] [10 regression] aarch64 regressions after r276645

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92047 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/91612] [10 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/aapcs/align4.c ICE after r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91612 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/91613] [10 regression][arm] gcc.dg/pr83930.c ICE since r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91613 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/91615] [10 regression][armeb] ICEs since r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91615 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/92473] test pr92324-2.c fails on arm and aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92473 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47218 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47218&action=edit Execution trace for arm

[Bug target/92473] test pr92324-2.c fails on arm and aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92473 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47217 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47217&action=edit Execution trace for aarch64

[Bug target/92473] New: test pr92324-2.c fails on arm and aarch64

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- The test pr92324-2.c introduced at r277958 fails on arm and aarch64: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92324-2.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92324-2.c execution

[Bug middle-end/92333] missing variable name referencing VLA in warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92333 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/92208] [9/10 Regression] internal compile error, character array of dynamic length returned from function and passed to subroutine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92208 --- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #8) > (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #7) > > On gcc-9, the patch introduced regressions, seen on arm and aarch64: > > On trunk, the following was needed (

[Bug fortran/92208] [9/10 Regression] internal compile error, character array of dynamic length returned from function and passed to subroutine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92208 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/61761] [C++11] std::proj returns incorrect values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61761 --- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon --- It's still failing on trunk: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2019-11/msg00131.html

[Bug libstdc++/61761] [C++11] std::proj returns incorrect values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61761 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/92207] [10 Regression] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- When single-stepping in the r277178 executable, the final => 0x18bc0 <_malloc_r+1092>:str r3, [r2, #4] succeeds and (gdb) p /x $r2 $2 = 0x804aa40

[Bug target/92207] [10 Regression] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- In particular, the execution continues after the last block dumped by qemu: 0x00018e40: e5974008 ldr r4, [r7, #8] 0x00018e44: e0898008 add r8, sb, r8 0x00018e48: e3888001 orr r8, r8, #1

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47104 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47104&action=edit Execution trace for r277178

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47105 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47105&action=edit Execution trace for r277179

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47103 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47103&action=edit Executable from r277179

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47102 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47102&action=edit Executable from r277178

[Bug target/92207] New: pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- As discussed in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg01619.html I have noticed a regression after r277179. However, it seems tricky to reproduce, and I had to manually

[Bug testsuite/92144] [10 regression] c-c++-common/Warray-bounds-4.c still fails after r277080

|u |u arm aarch64 CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Seen on arm and aarch64 too.

[Bug tree-optimization/92128] fold more non-constant strlen relational expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92128 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug testsuite/92125] New test gcc.dg/ipa/pr91088.c introduced in r277054 fails

|u |u aarch64 arm CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Seen on aarch64 and arm too.

[Bug target/92048] New: [10 regression] armeb regression after r276645

: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that r276645 introduced a regression on armeb: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/fast-math-vect-pr29925.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 ma

[Bug target/92047] New: [10 regression] aarch64 regressions after r276645

: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- After r276645, I've noticed regressions on aarch64: FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/index_offset_1.c -march=armv8.2-a+sve scan-assembler-times ld1b\\tz[0-9]+.b, p[0-

[Bug middle-end/92016] [10 Regression] excess errors in Wstringop-overflow-17.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92016 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/84487] [8/9 Regression] Large rodate section increase in 465.tonto with r254427

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84487 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/91983] g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr61034.C regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91983 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/91982] gcc.target/aarch64/sve/clastb_*.c tests failing with segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91982 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/91909] [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-4.c fails on armeb after r275898

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909 --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon --- I confirm that the proposed patch fixed the problem for me.

[Bug tree-optimization/91885] [9 Regression] ICE when compiling SPEC 2017 blender benchmark with -O3 -fprofile-generate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91885 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/91909] New: [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-4.c fails on armeb after r275898

: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- After r275898, I've noticed a regression on armeb: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-4.c execution test

[Bug target/91749] [10 Regression] ICE in arm_asm_trampoline_template, at config/arm/arm.c:3973

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/91749] [10 Regression] ICE in arm_asm_trampoline_template, at config/arm/arm.c:3973

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Tue Sep 17 08:13:11 2019 New Revision: 275799 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275799&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [PR91749][arm] FDPIC: Handle -mflip-thumb 2019-09-16 Christophe Lyon

[Bug target/91749] [10 Regression] ICE in arm_asm_trampoline_template, at config/arm/arm.c:3973

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |clyon at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/91749] [10 Regression] ICE in arm_asm_trampoline_template, at config/arm/arm.c:3973

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Can you share your configure options? Also, it looks like you are forcing at least -mfdpic when running the testsuite? Why did you put "known to work 9.2", since -mfdpic does not exist in that version?

[Bug target/91738] New: [10 regression] gcc.target/arm/pr53447-5.c fails since r274823

Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since r274823, this arm test fails: FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr53447-5.c scan-assembler-times (ldrd|vldr\\.64) 20 FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr53447

[Bug target/89188] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute, at cfganal.c:1055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89188 --- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon --- Good point, I just checked with gcc-linaro-7.4.1-2019.02-x86_64_aarch64-linux-gnu, and it does ICE.

[Bug target/89188] ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute, at cfganal.c:1055

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89188 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/91684] [10 regression][ARM] ICE in gen_movdi, at config/arm/arm.md:5079

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91684 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- Indeed, it's now unsupported in this config.

[Bug target/91684] [10 regression][ARM] ICE in gen_movdi, at config/arm/arm.md:5079

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91684 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/91711] New: 23_containers/span/get_neg.cc fails on arm

++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- The new test introduced at r275403 fails on arm targets: /libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/span/get_neg.cc:27: error: call of overloaded 'span(int*, long unsigned int

[Bug middle-end/36262] [4.3 Regression] Extreme memory usage of VRP compared to older versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36262 --- Comment #16 from Christophe Lyon --- > Wrong bugzilla? But also should be fixed by the followup. I replied to the bugzilla mentioned in the ChangeLog... > > 2019-09-05 Richard Biener > > PR rtl-optimization/91656 > * p

[Bug middle-end/36262] [4.3 Regression] Extreme memory usage of VRP compared to older versions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36262 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Known

[Bug target/91708] [10 regression][ARM] Bootstrap fails in gen_movsi, at config/arm/arm.md:5258

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/91603] Unaligned access in expand_assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91603 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/91615] [10 regression][armeb] ICEs since r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91615 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #6) > Created attachment 46820 [details] > untested patch This patch fixes the armeb problems reported here, thanks! (in addition to the scan-assembler-times issue

[Bug target/91615] [10 regression][armeb] ICEs since r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91615 --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #4) > Hi Christophe, > > many thanks for your invaluable help. > > I think except this one all regressions are fixed or > at least understood. > > Unfortunately I

[Bug middle-end/91612] [10 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/aapcs/align4.c ICE after r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91612 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- > I don't know yet for pr91613 This patch fixes pr91613 too.

[Bug libstdc++/91308] [7 Regression] unique_ptr assignment fails with different deleters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91308 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/91612] [10 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/aapcs/align4.c ICE after r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91612 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #2) > Created attachment 46792 [details] > untested patch > > This is a untested patch it should fix > pr91612 pr91613 pr91615 (?) > pr91603 > and pr91605 (i386) >

[Bug tree-optimization/81740] [7 Regression] wrong code at -O3 in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81740 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/91615] [10 regression][armeb] ICEs since r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91615 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- There are also 2 regressions in gfortran --target armeb-none-linux-gnueabihf --with-cpu cortex-a9 --with-fpu neon-fp16 gfortran.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr32377.f90 -O (internal compiler error) gfortran.dg/vect/p

[Bug target/91615] New: [10 regression][armeb] ICEs since r274986

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since r274986 with the patch from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-08/msg02018.html, I've noticed ICEs on armeb (arm big-endian cross compiler): gcc.c-torture/ex

[Bug target/91614] [10 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/unaligned-memcpy-2.c FAIL since r274986

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91614 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- The same is true --with-cpu cortex-a57 --with-fpu crypto-neon-fp-armv8

[Bug target/91614] New: [10 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/unaligned-memcpy-2.c FAIL since r274986

: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since r274986, even with the patch from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-08/msg02018.html, I've noticed:

[Bug target/91613] New: [10 regression][arm] gcc.dg/pr83930.c ICE since r274986

Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- After r274986, even with the patch from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-08/msg02018.html, I've noticed: FAIL: gcc.dg/pr83930.c (int

[Bug target/91612] New: [10 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/aapcs/align4.c ICE after r274986

Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since r274985, I've noticed new failures, not fixed by the patch proposed at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-08/msg02018

[Bug tree-optimization/91457] FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for warnings, line 25)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91457 --- Comment #10 from Christophe Lyon --- Thanks for the pointer to the glibc discussion. My understanding is that GCC's warning is legitimate, and won't be removed? Since this breaks all my validations, I guess the best course of action on my si

[Bug tree-optimization/91457] FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds-4.C -std=gnu++98 (test for warnings, line 25)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91457 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/91109] [10 regression][arm] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c fails since r273135

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91109 --- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon --- Since r274532 (gcc-9-branch), I am seeing: FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects execution test target arm-none-linux-gnueabi --with-mode arm --wit

[Bug tree-optimization/91109] [10 regression][arm] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c fails since r273135

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91109 --- Comment #12 from Christophe Lyon --- Indeed, although r274163 fixes the problem I reported, it also introduces a regression when compiling the very same testcase but adding -mthumb: FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c -O2 (internal c

[Bug target/91323] LTGT rtx produces UCOMISS instead of COMISS

-*-*, ||aarch64-linux-gnu, ||arm*-linux-gnueabihf CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon --- The new test (gcc.dg/torture/pr91323.c) fails on aarch64

[Bug rtl-optimization/42575] arm-eabi-gcc 64-bit multiply weirdness

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/91109] [10 regression][arm] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c fails since r273135

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91109 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Removing the test*() calls from the end, the first failing one is testX(). However, if I remove all the preceding ones, the test passes. Using -fwhole-program instead of -flto has no effect: the test still

[Bug tree-optimization/91109] New: [10 regression][arm] gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c fails since r273135

: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, I've noticed that since r273135 (fix for PR91091), there is a regression on arm-none-linux-gnueabi --with

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >