[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2021-02-02 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eedda4e160856b7ac0c533ac9445161d0fd88660 commit r11-7033-geedda4e160856b7ac0c533ac9445161d0fd88660 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2021-02-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- Indeed, r11-5904-g4cf70c20cb10acd6fb1016611d05540728176b60 fixed it. I'll add the testcase into the testsuite after testing it.

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2021-01-22 Thread acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 --- Comment #7 from Alex Coplan --- FWIW, the testcase now exits cleanly on AArch64 with current trunk.

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2021-01-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- Is it maybe fixed with the latest re-org of split_constant_offset?

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2021-01-21 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2020-11-24 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2020-11-24 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Creating dr for b[_7] base_address: offset from base address: (ssizetype) ((sizetype) (signed char) _5 * 4) constant offset from base address: -1012 step: 4 base

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2020-11-24 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P1 |P2 CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2020-11-23 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/97960] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Wrong code at -O3 since r8-6511-g3ae129323d

2020-11-23 Thread acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960 --- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan --- C testcase: const int *c(const int *p, const int *q) { if (*p < *q) return q; return p; } short a[575]; unsigned b[25]; unsigned char g; int main() { for (int e = 0; e < 23; ++e) a[e * 23] =