https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Great! I was thinking there whether exists some array to map from mode to
vector, but missed this one. Good to know we have this kind of function!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
The second testcase still ICEs though, so investigating that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91355
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 21 13:53:57 2019
New Revision: 278551
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278551=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/91355
* tree-ssa-sink.c (select_best_block):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92616
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
gettimeofday agrees with clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME):
void dumpNow() {
struct timespec ts;
clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, );
auto const now = time(nullptr);
struct timeval tv;
gettimeofday(,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92002
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
So I managed to commit to trunk:
+ poly_uint64 this_max_nunits = 1;
slp_tree res = vect_build_slp_tree_2 (vinfo, stmts, group_size, max_nunits,
matches,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91927
--- Comment #10 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> I think the following patch is the correct fix:
> diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md
> b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md
> index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92616
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> I can reproduce it, but I think this has to be a glibc problem. Libstdc++
> simply calls clock_gettime(3), and both that and time(3) come from glibc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92002
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase:
extern void fancy_abort(const char *, int, const char *)
__attribute__((__noreturn__)) __attribute__((__cold__));
typedef union tree_node *tree;
typedef const union tree_node *const_tree;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
There's also a missed optimization showing - we analyze the group_size == 3
case
successfully but fail to consider splitting it as it fails the unroll check
because
/* We consider breaking the group
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92616
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I see the same result when using clock_gettime directly instead of
system_clock::now()
#include
#include
#include
#include
void dumpNow() {
struct timespec ts;
clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, );
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92616
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I can reproduce it, but I think this has to be a glibc problem. Libstdc++
simply calls clock_gettime(3), and both that and time(3) come from glibc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks for your confirmation and notes! Yes, the realignment codes won't take
effect from Power8 which supports unaligned vector load/store. I'll learn the
code, follow your suggestion and cook some patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92616
Bug ID: 92616
Summary: Inconsistency in time between system_clock::now() and
time(nullptr)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66773
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Marjamäki ---
Well I am just a happy gcc user.. if some gcc maintainer thinks this ticket is
invalid feel free to close it. I can't expect that everybody will think just
like me. :-)
As a Cppcheck developer I am
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92615
Bug ID: 92615
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in extract_insn
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
So for
patt_17 = (long int) patt_18;
for example vect_get_vector_types_for_stmt now computes V2DI and V2SI as
vectype and nunits_vectype. I think that's undesirable.
scalar_type =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
So I think the issue is that we have
/* Calculate the unrolling factor based on the smallest type. */
poly_uint64 unrolling_factor
= calculate_unrolling_factor (max_nunits,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66773
--- Comment #9 from Daniel Marjamäki ---
Problems;
* Code that performs comparison properly gets a warning.
* Code where programmer makes a mistake with a cast does not generate a
warning.
* This warning encourage programmers to cast and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92417
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71785
--- Comment #16 from Aleksey ---
> > It would be helpful if you give the explanation how these options affect
> > "un-factoring".
>
> What options? -fno-reorder-blocks? Those doo the same to this code as
> they do anywhere else: the compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91786
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63181
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4)
> This one should be moved to its own separate option per bug 7651
Indeed it should, and if we add -Wdangling-field then that would be the ideal
option to move
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92524
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #6 from Klaus Leppkes ---
As it might be purely related to google benchmark, I opened an issues for
google benchmark citing this bug report:
https://github.com/google/benchmark/issues/903
I search for some doc and found
"g" : Any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92605
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92614
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91355
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 21 10:59:27 2019
New Revision: 278548
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278548=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/91355
* tree-ssa-sink.c (select_best_block):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92614
Bug ID: 92614
Summary: Bootstrap broken due to libgo run-time
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92524
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92611
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92610
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92002
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 47319
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47319=edit
preprocessed tree-ssanames.c
I'm attaching the preprocessed tree-ssanames.c; wide-int.cc is equally affected
but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92609
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30357
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #6)
> At least as far as this particular testcase goes, there's a warning from
> -Wuninitialized at least... if you initialize parentValue to EP_VAL2 like I
> think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92608
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68606
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92613
Bug ID: 92613
Summary: Bogus warning with -cpp and -fpreprocessed
Product: gcc
Version: 7.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91027
--- Comment #8 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> Hi,
> this patch triggers another confusion in ipa-devirt.
> It tries to build type inheritnace graph but since D frotnend produces
> only functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91027
--- Comment #7 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> Hi,
> this patch triggers another confusion in ipa-devirt.
> It tries to build type inheritnace graph but since D frotnend produces
> only functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91027
--- Comment #6 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2)
>
> I am not really fluent with d. Does d have something like ODR?
> If it doesn't then we need to arrange free_lang data to not consider d
> types to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92002
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92557
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92612
--- Comment #2 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Following patch fixes that:
>
> diff --git a/benchspec/CPU/525.x264_r/src/ldecod_src/inc/configfile.h
> b/benchspec/CPU/525.x264_r/src/ldecod_src/inc/configfile.h
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 92612, which changed state.
Bug 92612 Summary: [10 Regression] Linker error in 525.x264_r after r278509
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92612
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92612
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And the short examples do exactly what the original source does:
//taken from google benchmark
template
inline void DoNotOptimize(Tp const& value) {
asm volatile("" : : "r,m"(value) : "memory");
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If it would use %0 and %1, it would find they are different and would need to
use an instruction that can copy that in between those.
Whether this PR is valid or invalid is unclear, matching constraints for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58875
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89800
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92612
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92612
Bug ID: 92612
Summary: [10 Regression] Linker error in 525.x264_r after
r278509
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91927
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think the following patch is the correct fix:
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md
b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md
index ad4676bc167..787323255cb 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84889
--- Comment #19 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #18)
> @David: Can we close this now?
I'm guessing he's probably waiting for his static analyzer to be merged; that
patch series looked like it had some stuff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63181
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92600
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection,|
|needs-reduction
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82520
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92071
--- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> I'd say this should be fixed in the arm backend, instead of asserts it
> should check whether operands are aligned and if not, perform unaligned load
> or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92611
Bug ID: 92611
Summary: auto vectorization failed for type promotation
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Nov 21 09:18:06 2019
New Revision: 278545
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278545=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-11-21 Richard Biener
Revert
2019-09-17 Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Nov 21 09:16:46 2019
New Revision: 278544
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278544=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-11-21 Richard Biener
Revert
2019-09-17 Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 91790, which changed state.
Bug 91790 Summary: ICE: verify_ssa failed (error: definition in block 2 follows
the use)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30357
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92610
Bug ID: 92610
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in calc_dfs_tree, at
dominance.c:458 since r270940
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92610
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, the fix for PR91790 was indeed incorrect. But the whole realignment code
is somewhat "old"...
Ideally we'd move the vect_setup_realigment code down to after we computed
the dataref_ptr here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92158
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92600
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92608
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48829
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92609
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92609
Bug ID: 92609
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in warn_types_mismatch, at
ipa-devirt.c:1000 since r265519
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68606
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92463
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
101 - 178 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
