https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83139
--- Comment #2 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Apparently, this is because check_path() is being inlined and checks that the
argument is NULL. Then when it sees the second use of pbuf, it considers it
possible that it i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83139
--- Comment #1 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Created attachment 42702
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42702=edit
generated .i file
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j...@jak-linux.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 42701
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81501
--- Comment #1 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
To qualify the performance overhead, I added empty constructors and destructors
with noinline, and compiled the code with g++ and clang++, and then ran a loop
1000
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j...@jak-linux.org
Target Milestone: ---
I only tested this on amd64, but see for yourself:
+ cat t.cc
struct foo {
foo();
~foo();
};
foo *test() {
static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81408
--- Comment #4 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Note that apt has 1219 loops, so 134 is almost 11% of the loops causing the
warning, compared to about 0.7% (8) before.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81408
--- Comment #3 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
7.1.0-9 corresponds to "SVN 20170705 (r250006) from the gcc-7-branch."
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81408
--- Comment #2 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Build log with -v:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/usr/bin/g++-7
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none
OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81408
--- Comment #1 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Created attachment 41727
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41727=edit
preprocessed source of a.cc
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j...@jak-linux.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41726
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41726=edit
Minimized example
Compiling a recent apt wit
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j...@jak-linux.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 40721
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40721=edit
Reproducer
We define three macros in APT:
#define APT_IGNORE_DEPRECATED_P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77729
--- Comment #9 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> This looks like missing removal of casts.
>
> Note in C, char_var|32 is really the same as ((int)char_var)|32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77729
--- Comment #6 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Note this testcase needs to be improved as I have a patch which converts a
> switch with just one case and a defau
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77729
--- Comment #5 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Created attachment 39678
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39678=edit
ppc64le
Hmm, AFAICT the same seems to happen on powerpc64le:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77729
--- Comment #3 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Created attachment 39677
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39677=edit
arm (thumb2) output at -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77729
--- Comment #2 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Created attachment 39676
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39676=edit
Aarch64 output at -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77729
--- Comment #1 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
Created attachment 39675
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39675=edit
C reproducer
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j...@jak-linux.org
Target Milestone: ---
In the attached test case, the aarch64 target inserts a uxtb instruction that
is not needed:
ldrbw1, [x0]
orr w1, w1, 32
uxtbw1, w1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71556
--- Comment #1 from Julian Andres Klode <j...@jak-linux.org> ---
To be clear, while the attachment uses the (I assume still) non-standard
C.UTF-8, the same also happens with the C locale, and the "" locale in an
en_IE.UTF-8 environment.
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j...@jak-linux.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 38713
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38713=edit
C++ reproducer
In contrast to strptime(), std::get_time() requires lead
: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: j...@jak-linux.org
Created attachment 22161
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22161
C file
The attached code compiles into an executable that takes 1.6 seconds to run,
when compiled with clang, it takes 0.001
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46186
--- Comment #1 from Julian Andres Klode j...@jak-linux.org 2010-10-26
14:30:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 22162
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22162
Clang's assember
Attaching the assembler output from clang, it should help
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46186
--- Comment #3 from Julian Andres Klode j...@jak-linux.org 2010-10-26
14:32:27 UTC ---
System information:
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 4.4.5-5'
--with-bugurl=file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46186
--- Comment #5 from Julian Andres Klode j...@jak-linux.org 2010-10-26
14:53:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
GCC's output is significantly faster at -O3 or without the noinline attribute
I just tested and at -O3, gcc-4.4 creates slow code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46186
--- Comment #7 from Julian Andres Klode j...@jak-linux.org 2010-10-26
15:00:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
GCC's output is significantly faster at -O3 or without the noinline
attribute
I just tested
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46186
--- Comment #8 from Julian Andres Klode j...@jak-linux.org 2010-10-26
15:25:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
You get this kind of speedup if the compiler knows that the result of the loop
is
sum=(b*(b-1)-a*(a-1))/2
In which case
26 matches
Mail list logo
