https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101456
Bug ID: 101456
Summary: Unnecessary vzeroupper when upper bits of YMM
registers already zero
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93897
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
Another testcase:
[hjl@gnu-cfl-1 tmp]$ cat x.c
extern int foo();
extern int bar();
typedef int (*func_t)(int);
struct test
{
func_t func1;
func_t func2;
};
void mainfunc (struct test *iface)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
The v3 patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575102.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51142|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Comment on attachment 51142 [details]
> A patch
>
> Can't you use one single local_cpu_detect and pass it 2 arguments (arch/tune
> and 32/64) instead of just one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51125|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101336
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51124|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 51124
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51124=edit
A patch
Please test this patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101366
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101336
Bug ID: 101336
Summary: Incorrect target on gnux32 hosts
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libffi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101332
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101187
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101332
Bug ID: 101332
Summary: [12 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr91838.C
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101294
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101294
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
This works:
diff --git a/gcc/expr.c b/gcc/expr.c
index 025033c9ecf..bd85bbfdd6f 100644
--- a/gcc/expr.c
+++ b/gcc/expr.c
@@ -7078,7 +7078,8 @@ store_constructor (tree exp, rtx target, int cleared,
poly_int64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101294
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101241
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93645
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||freesoftware at logarithmus
dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101215
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101215
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-06-25
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101185
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51469
Bug 51469 depends on bug 83782, which changed state.
Bug 83782 Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] Inconsistent address for hidden
ifunc in a shared library
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83782
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83782
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100704
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101023
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
This bug is exposed by r11-508.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101023
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92469
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
This isn't completely fixed:
[hjl@gnu-clx-1 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./
/export/gnu/import/git/sources/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr97032.c -m32
-fdiagnostics-plain-output -O2 -mincoming-stack-boundary=2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101023
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101023
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97770
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #18)
>
> That's going to work I guess but it will pessimize general optimization
> which no longer know this is computing popcount (not sure if the old
> version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101005
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100896
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100951
Bug ID: 100951
Summary: vec_duplicate leads to worse code
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100593
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69471
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.5 |9.3
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100896
Bug ID: 100896
Summary: --enable-initfini-array should be enabled for cross
compiler to Linux
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100407
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #9)
>
> seurer@gcc1-power7:~/gcc/git/build/gcc-test$ grep .rodata attr-retain-1.s
> .string "used_rodata2"
> .string "unused_rodata"
> .string "used_rodata"
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100865
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
A small benchmark:
https://gitlab.com/x86-benchmarks/microbenchmark/-/tree/memset/broadcast
shows that broadcast is a little bit faster on Intel Core i7-8559U:
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 microbenchmark]$ make
gcc -g -I.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100865
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100865
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 50916
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50916=edit
x86: Convert CONST_WIDE_INT to broadcast in move expanders
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100407
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50914|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100407
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 50914
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50914=edit
attr-retain-1.s
Here is my attr-retain-1.s. Please upload your attr-retain-1.s.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100407
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
I can't reproduce it with GCC master, glibc 2.33 and binutils 2.36 branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100407
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #2)
> I got it to fail on the gcc110 gcc farm machine.
>
> g:659cc7d6320aae7ab390b5886f0efed22f78e244, r12-1164
> make -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix'{-m32}'
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100865
Bug ID: 100865
Summary: pass_data_constant_pool_broadcast doesn't work on
TImode
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100787
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
I have
[hjl@gnu-skx-1 gcc-32bit]$ ls /usr/local32/bin
addr2line as dwp gprof ld.bfd nm objdump readelf strings
ar c++filt elfedit ld ld.gold objcopy ranlib size strip
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100787
Bug ID: 100787
Summary: [12 Regression] Bootstrap failure caused by r12-1077
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100704
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100704
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Hmm, I didn't realize we can't push %xmm regs... With loads+stores the
> pushes do not look less efficient for this particular example? I suppose a
> nice
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100704
Bug ID: 100704
Summary: Vector register isn't used to push BLKmode argument
onto stack
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100483
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Symbol resolution in an executable or a shared library at run-time is
determined by
1. Linker options + all input files at link-time.
2. ld.so + all shared libraries at run-time.
Add a compiler option at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100575
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98461
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98461
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
Is this fixed now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42587
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100489
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100461
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100461
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Daniel Starke from comment #4)
> Created attachment 50772 [details]
> rdtsc.c
>
> Please find attached the mingw-w64 file.
Please change
#if !__has_builtin(__rdtsc)
to
#if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100461
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
What is in mingw-w64-crt/intrincs/rdtsc.c?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100455
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100456
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
*** Bug 100455 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100445
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91400
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100407
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99703
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98667
Bug 98667 depends on bug 70454, which changed state.
Bug 70454 Summary: --with-arch=native isn't applied to 32-bit x86 target library
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70454
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70454
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98964
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|hppa-unknown-linux-gnu |
Component|testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100131
Bug ID: 100131
Summary: [meta-bug] internal compiler error: in
hashtab_chk_error, at hash-table.c:137
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100114
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Confirmed by code inspection, but it's for sure sth not new (but would be
> nice to fix before GCC 11.1).
>
> I suggtest to simply move the initialization inside
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100088
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100076
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
Is -O3 slower than -O3 -fno-tree-vectorize? If not, why?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100052
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
This may be related to PR 12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
I don't think we need to support taking address of intrinsic.
By definition, there is no intrinsic address to take.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47785
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
I'd like to backport it to GCC 9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12
Bug ID: 12
Summary: internal compiler error: in hashtab_chk_error, at
hash-table.c:137
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Bug ID: 6
Summary: [10 Regression] r10-9673 failed to build
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99941
Bug ID: 99941
Summary: m_ALDERLAKE is missing from m_CORE_AVX2
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99881
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 50501
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50501=edit
A patch to add vec_contruct cost
ix86_builtin_vectorization_cost has
case vec_construct:
{
/* N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99881
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-02
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99870
Bug ID: 99870
Summary: uiret generated for -mcmodel=kernel
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99857
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99857
Bug ID: 99857
Summary: [11 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.c/declare-variant-1.c
(test for excess errors) by r11-7926
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99744
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98209
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu ---
The fix was reverted by
commit de00a7bda94910835012bc7150be53b460a5c8b6
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Thu Mar 25 06:57:37 2021 -0700
Revert "x86: Skip ISA check for always_inline in system headers"
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99744
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98209
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |11.0
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
Fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99744
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99744
Bug ID: 99744
Summary: __attribute__ ((target("general-regs-only"))) doesn't
work with GPR intrinsics
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99703
--- Comment #28 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Worx from comment #27)
> (gdb) disass/r (0x0804f547 - 2), +32
> Dump of assembler code from 0x804f545 to 0x804f565:
>0x0804f545: 00 00 add%al,(%eax)
> => 0x0804f547: 0f 44 44 24 14 cmove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99703
--- Comment #25 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Worx from comment #24)
> worx@c3eden ~ $ gdb ./sample.bin
> GNU gdb (Gentoo 10.1 vanilla) 10.1
> Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99703
--- Comment #23 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 50464
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50464=edit
A program
Please run this and upload its output. If it fails to run, please
show me the output of
$ grep "^flags"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99731
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99703
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Worx from comment #21)
> Sorry about the dumb question, but how to know ?
Run it under gdb and disassemble. It should show which instruction caused
the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99731
Bug ID: 99731
Summary: g++.dg/modules/alias-1_a.H: error: failed to read
compiled module: No such file or directory
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99703
--- Comment #20 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Worx from comment #19)
> It's seems that the patch fix the issue.
>
> Unfortunately, I have another error, but it's maybe i do not proper
> configure "-march=c3"
>
>
>
> make[3]: Leaving
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99704
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
801 - 900 of 1125 matches
Mail list logo