https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115174
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #32 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Marc Poulhiès from comment #31)
> Hello Martin,
>
> Any chance the fix that fixes the new test for 32bits can be also backported?
>
> 4923ed49b93352bcf9e43cafac38345e4a54c3f8
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
The IL we generate the jump function from is:
_1 = cclauses_2(D) != 0B;
c_parser_omp_all_clauses (_1);
Which translates to the expected jump function:
callsite void c_parser_omp_teams(int**)/3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114247
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #29 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985
--- Comment #19 from Martin Jambor ---
The following minimized testcase ICEs with r15-312-g36e877996936ab
cross-compiler to ppc64le with -O2 nicely:
void omp_clause_elt_check(int *, const char *, const char *);
enum { C_OMP_CLAUSE_SPLIT_COUNT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985
--- Comment #16 from Martin Jambor ---
I'll have look, hopefully on Monday.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106935
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114935
Bug ID: 114935
Summary: Miscompilation of initializer_list in
presence of exceptions
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107021
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106935
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
This ICE no longer happens with GCC 13, in fact after r13-4240-gfeeb0d68f1c708
(Martin Jambor: ipa-cp: Do not consider useless aggregate constants). From the
patch description, it does not look to be a fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102310
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113964
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> No, I think the issue is that ESRA leaves e.f0 alone:
>
> e$f3_7 = e.f3;
> e$f0$f4_8 = e.f0.f4;
> _1 = e$f0$f4_8;
> _2 = (unsigned char) _1;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114452
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Paweł Bylica from comment #5)
> (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #4)
> > In this testcase all (well, both) functions referenced from the array
> > are semantically equivalent which is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114662
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Thanks a lot for taking care of it before I had a chance to.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #75 from Martin Jambor ---
The above fixes the testcase from comment #58. I am not sure if any other
testcases discussed here remain unresolved. I am also not sure to what extent
we want to that patch of mine, I guess I'll
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #26 from Martin Jambor ---
This should be fixed on master, I'll backport the fix in a few weeks to at
least gcc-13 where it was reported.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114247
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
On master this has been fixed by r14-9813-g8cd0d29270d4ed where I
unfortunately copy-pasted a wrong bug number :-/
I assume this needs backporting to at least gcc-13 and gcc-12. I'll do
that in a week or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113964
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Oops. I made a mistake, the commit above fixes PR 114247, sorry :-/
This one is the next in my queue. Sorry again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114247
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Thanks, I will bootstrap and test the patch on x86_64 and submit it
for review then.
Can I ask you, can you please modify the testcase so that it does not
use printf but simply calls __builtin_abort in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #24 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #23)
> I however wonder if we really guarantee to copy the paddings everywhere else
> then the total scalarization part?
> (i.e. in all paths through the RTL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #71 from Martin Jambor ---
I have sent the patch to the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6le5s25kl@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111571
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] ICE in |[13 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114247
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I don't seem to be able to get riscv64 qemu running in reasonable
time. Can someone please verify that the following patch fixes
the issue?
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-param-manipulation.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114247
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #22 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 57828
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57828=edit
Potential fix
I'm testing this patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114452
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #66 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 57750
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57750=edit
Patch comparing jump functions
I'm testing this patch. (Not sure how to best check that it does not
inadvertently
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114254
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 regression]|[11/12/13 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108802
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #65 from Martin Jambor ---
I hope to have some jump-function comparison functions ready for testing later
today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112980
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I'd like to ping this, are there plans to implement this in the near-ish term?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111571
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6r0gbwf7l@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113757
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114254
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a patch on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6r0gkzvi4@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108802
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed an improved patch on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6r0gkzvi4@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114254
Bug ID: 114254
Summary: Indirect inlining through C++ member pointers fails if
the underlying class has a virtual function
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114238
Bug ID: 114238
Summary: Multiple 554.roms_r run-time regressions (4%-20%)
since r14-9193-ga0b1798042d033
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108802
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a patch on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6y1bdx3yg@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113476
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111573
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I cannot see any difference at -O3 with or without -fno-early-inlining.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112312
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
It seems this has been fixed in current master (which is to become gcc 14).
If my bisecting is correct, it has been fixed by r14-5628-g53ba8d669550d3 (Jan
Hubicka: inter-procedural value range propagation).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108802
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 57462
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57462=edit
Simple testcase (needs disabling early - and only early - SRA)
This is a simpler testcase which exhibits the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113476
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a patch on the mailing list that converts the array of lattices
to a vector:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6frxoxzpk@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
I have access to the benchmark and building it with -fprofile-generate
it fails for me (with an ICE in add_symbol_to_partition_1) only when I
use -fno-use-linker-plugin and either -std=c++11 or -std=c++03.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113712
--- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Filip Kastl from comment #17)
> I've bisected this (using the test from Andrew Pinski) to
> r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797
That's a coincidence, with -fno-ipa-sra the testcase fails even earlier,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113847
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> CCing also Martin who should know how/why IPA SRA doesn't reconstruct the
> component ref chain here
I have not had a look at this specific case (yet), but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113833
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 57397
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57397=edit
-fopt-info-vec before/after comparison
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> A compare before/after the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110422
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113833
Bug ID: 113833
Summary: 435.gromacs fails verification on with -Ofast
-march={cascadelake,icelake-server} and PGO after
r14-7272-g57f611604e8bab
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113757
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6bk8r5kfi@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
> Might be also an interaction with IPA ICF in case there's a pointer to
> the pair involved?
Yes, this is exactly what seems to be happening. The problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113359
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
SRA creates the replacements (in GCC 13) during total scalarization,
i.e. the bit that is not driven by pre-existing accesses to
aggregates, but because it sees an aggregate that is small and regular
and so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113757
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113646
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Did you try with -fprofile-partial-training (is that default on? it
> probably should ...). Can you please try training with the rate data
> instead of train
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113655
Bug ID: 113655
Summary: Cross compiling to mips64-elf fails because
"MIPS_EXPLICIT_RELOCS was not declared" after
r14-8386-g58af788d1d0825
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113646
Bug ID: 113646
Summary: PGO hurts run-time of 538.imagick_r as much as 68% at
-Ofast -march=native
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113641
Bug ID: 113641
Summary: 510.parest_r with PGO at O2 slower than GCC 12 (7% on
Zen 3&2, 4% on CascadeLake) since
r13-4272-g8caf155a3d6e23
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113600
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #2)
> A patch is posted at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-December/640276.html
>
> Would you give a try to see if it fixes the regression, I don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107946
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-26
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113600
Bug ID: 113600
Summary: 525.x264_r run-time regresses by 8% with PGO -Ofast
-march=znver4
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105275
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I have re-checked this year again (using master revision
r14-7200-g95440171d0e615) but this time on a high-frequency Zen3 CPU (EPYC
75F3). Run-time of 525.x264_r built with master with PGO and -O2 improved
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112616
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk. I did not want to backport this but because this variant does
not require disabling DCE, I will probably do after a few weeks on master, if
there are no issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108007
--- Comment #22 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk. I did not want to backport this but because of PR 112616 I
will probably do after a few weeks on master, if there are no issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113490
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113476
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
The right place where to free stuff in lattices post-IPA would be in
ipa_node_params::~ipa_node_params() where we should iterate over lattices and
deinitialize them or perhaps destruct the array because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113490
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6cytv3eyy.fsf@/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
--- Comment #28 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #27)
> The original article checked gcc-10.
> gcc-13 is checked in the following article:
>
> https://pvs-studio.com/en/blog/posts/cpp/1067/
>
> I suspect it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113490
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110422
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk, I plan to backport to open release branches in the upcoming
weeks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 94629, which changed state.
Bug 94629 Summary: 10 issues located by the PVS-studio static analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110422
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112616
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> # q_11 = PHI <0B(2), removed_return.14_14(D)(4),
> removed_return.14_14(D)(3)>
> _12 = *q_11;
>
>
> WTF
Well, _12 is not used anywhere, so the code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108007
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
I have submitted a slightly modified patch to the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6cyu1e9kw.fsf@/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113296
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 113296, which changed state.
Bug 113296 Summary: [14 Regression] SPEC 2006 434.zeusmp segfaults on Aarch64
when built with -Ofast -march=native -flto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113296
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113178
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107823
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109744
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109780
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #26 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109823
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109828
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109918
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110001
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110065
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110091
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110294
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110450
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110705
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110768
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110941
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110942
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111003
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111012
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111291
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |mikael at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
1 - 100 of 552 matches
Mail list logo