https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91804
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #16 from cqwrteur ---
ok
Would you mind looking at the following link, https://godbolt.org/z/z7K79YMWr,
and sharing your thoughts? I would greatly appreciate your feedback. Thank you
very much.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #19 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #18)
> Would you mind if I clarified a few points regarding your query? I'm
> referring to implementing "sub borrow" with sub_overflow, as demonstrated in
> the code snippet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Lewis Hyatt :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f3be7cbebce8ec9e0c5d9340b2772581454b862
commit r14-2004-g4f3be7cbebce8ec9e0c5d9340b2772581454b862
Author: Lewis Hyatt
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f5d0cec170d6d5496edf4038499d288c07d79b18
commit r14-2005-gf5d0cec170d6d5496edf4038499d288c07d79b18
Author: Tamar Christina
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110330
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82894
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||csaba_22 at yahoo dot co.uk
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110297
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79173
--- Comment #25 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f8f68c4ca622a24c2e8cf2b5f2f9fdcd47a7b369
commit r14-2001-gf8f68c4ca622a24c2e8cf2b5f2f9fdcd47a7b369
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
See this:
https://godbolt.org/z/eozPahn9G
addcarry pattern it recognizes but not subcarry.
You can see it does not recognize the following:
template
inline constexpr T sub_carry(T x,T y,T carryin,T&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus ---
Correction with regards to reg_info_size:
I claimed that reg_info_size = 3659 > 3483 – but that's not quite true.
That's the result when doing 'p reg_info_size' in lra-constraints.cc.
When going 'up' in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #55364|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110314
--- Comment #2 from Franck Behaghel
---
>This is new in 14, was OK when forking 13.
>https://ada.godbolt.org/z/TvbPxYfnP
>Currently bisecting.
Marc,
Released version may have checks disabled :
If the file gcc/DEV-PHASE contains experimental,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110314
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110132
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4eb01f987606e82ba4b7696f6cf79266d9e242ad
commit r13-7462-g4eb01f987606e82ba4b7696f6cf79266d9e242ad
Author: Alex Coplan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #85 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #83)
> Created attachment 55367 [details]
> Collapsed libcall and additional loop move invariants patch v3
Thanks for staying on it! I've looked through the latest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110328
Bug ID: 110328
Summary: Module related optimization is too aggressive
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #14 from cqwrteur ---
https://godbolt.org/z/4ej4dnr4b
I find a bug here:
f0 = __builtin_subcl(f0,v,0,);
f1 = __builtin_subcl(f1,zero,carry,);
The compiler generates:
setb %cl//redundant
movzbl %cl, %ecx//redundant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #13)
> See this:
> https://godbolt.org/z/eozPahn9G
>
>
> addcarry pattern it recognizes but not subcarry.
And see this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
Adding this debug code :
__builtin_fprintf (stderr, "DEBUG:>> %d - %d - %d\n",
get_lra_reg_info_size () ,
max_reg_num (), ORIGINAL_REGNO (operand_reg[nop]));
shows for the failing case:
DEBUG:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus ---
Some more debugging: We have:
(gdb) p debug_rtx(curr_id->insn)
(insn 106 3450 3080 4 (parallel [
(set (reg/f:DI 1433)
(plus:DI (reg/f:DI 16 s16 [3483])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #18 from cqwrteur ---
Would you mind if I clarified a few points regarding your query? I'm referring
to implementing "sub borrow" with sub_overflow, as demonstrated in the code
snippet at https://godbolt.org/z/ev3TfeTvd , correct?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110329
Bug ID: 110329
Summary: [14 regression] build fails building documentation
after r14-1949-g957ae904065917
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110307
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #6)
> Note the REG_EH_REGION. This is relevant because can_nonlocal_goto checks
> it, so for insn 25 we knew it wouldn't return to the setjmp receiver.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110305
--- Comment #9 from Michael Morrell ---
And what about when -frounding-math is used? The transformation will still
occur in simplify_binary_operation_1 if -frounding-math -fno-signed-zeros
-fno-signaling-nans is used. Note that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110284
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110329
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100650
Damian Rouson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||damian at archaeologic dot
codes
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe later, I'm currently busy with _BitInt support.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110330
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||82894
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #5 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #4)
> Jürgen,
>
> I'm afraid we need a reproducer. Or can you bisect the regression further?
In principle, I could. But I just undid this commit of yours which is just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110100
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff00fa1914e42d6b9c45cb36a5c99f94c4133cba
commit r13-7460-gff00fa1914e42d6b9c45cb36a5c99f94c4133cba
Author: Alex Coplan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110100
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9df688cbf908adc43e92bd012dafa88680ea11dc
commit r13-7461-g9df688cbf908adc43e92bd012dafa88680ea11dc
Author: Alex Coplan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110330
Bug ID: 110330
Summary: GCC does not diagnose ambiguous function introduced
from base class
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 110018, which changed state.
Bug 110018 Summary: Missing vectorizable_conversion(unsigned char -> double)
for BB vectorizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110018
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110018
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36127
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
So what seems to be happening is PRE is pull out the following from the loop:
pretmp_250 = MEM[(float *)_2 + 4294933760B + ivtmp.159_57 * 1];
_22 = (void *) ivtmp.140_79;
pretmp_253 = MEM[(float *)_22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79161
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is fixed for GCC 10 by r10-1052-gc29c92c789d9 (and the related
patch after that which disable it for the C front-end but enables it for
C++11+)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 94021, which changed state.
Bug 94021 Summary: -Wformat-truncation false positive due to excessive integer
range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94021
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94021
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
g++ -O3 -c ... is enough to repro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reducing ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
--- Comment #7 from Hongtao.liu ---
> So it looks like a generic problem and better to be handled in
> expand_partial_{load, store}_optab_fn?
There're many other places with assumption MEM_SIZE is equal to MODE_SIZE even
!MEM_SIZE_KNOWN_P,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110331
Bug ID: 110331
Summary: ppc64 vec_extract with constant index is suboptimal on
P8
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 83733, which changed state.
Bug 83733 Summary: -Wformat-overflow false positive for %d on bounded integer
when inlining
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83733
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83733
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11180
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16996
Bug 16996 depends on bug 11180, which changed state.
Bug 11180 Summary: [avr-gcc] Optimization decrease performance of struct
assignment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11180
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55906
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to work|
ude the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://bugs.gentoo.org/> for instructions.
```
```
gcc (Gentoo 14.0.0 p, commit 6cb33e2f39e289ec4f25f845d8153053147c5c49) 14.0.0
20230620 (experimental) f5d0cec170d6d5496edf4038499d288c07d79b18
Copyright (C) 2023 Free Software Founda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Either r14-1981 or r14-1951
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110018
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6f19cf7526168f840fd22f6af3f0cb67efb90dc8
commit r14-2007-g6f19cf7526168f840fd22f6af3f0cb67efb90dc8
Author: liuhongt
Date: Wed May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 80776, which changed state.
Bug 80776 Summary: -Wformat-overflow false positive for %d on integer bounded
by __builtin_unreachable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110295
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
Jürgen Reuter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Summary|[gfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109689
--- Comment #7 from Zhendong Su ---
Another related and smaller reproducer:
[514] % gcctk -O3 -fno-tree-loop-ivcanon small.c
during GIMPLE pass: ch_vect
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:3:5: internal compiler error: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109541
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13 regression] ICE in |[12 regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110309
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> I think the two
>
> (define_expand "maskload"
> [(set (match_operand:V48H_AVX512VL 0 "register_operand")
> (vec_merge:V48H_AVX512VL
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #1 from Jürgen Reuter ---
It looks like there were no specific changes in the fortran backend or the
libgfortran but a lot of optimization in the middle-end. Maybe that is
responsible for this issue. Need to see what is going on.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110316
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110295
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:963f87f8a65ec82f503ac4334a3da83b0a8a43b2
commit r14-1958-g963f87f8a65ec82f503ac4334a3da83b0a8a43b2
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #11)
> Actually mine
>
> template<::std::unsigned_integral T>
> inline constexpr T add_carry(T a,T b,T carryin,T& carryout) noexcept
> {
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110011
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bccc9960eb728bfd890c9388593bd166efcd0591
commit r11-10865-gbccc9960eb728bfd890c9388593bd166efcd0591
Author: Kewen Lin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92887
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #6)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #5)
> > (In reply to anlauf from comment #4)
> > > @@ -6396,7 +6399,28 @@ gfc_conv_procedure_call (gfc_se * se, gfc_symbol *
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110312
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109932
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:db291447877aae67979ce3655fcc6fc877f57c6a
commit r11-10866-gdb291447877aae67979ce3655fcc6fc877f57c6a
Author: Kewen Lin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> This looks like the same issue as PR110309. We have
>
> (insn 38 35 39 3 (set (mem:V16SI (plus:DI (reg:DI 40 r12 [orig:90 _22 ] [90])
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
--- Comment #4 from Neil Carlson ---
Hi Paul,
> !x%var_ptr() = 2.0 ! THIS IS NOT REJECTED AS EXPECTED
I could have phrased the comment better. I expected that assignment to be okay
(i.e., not rejected) and it wasn't. Sorry for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110317
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |13.1.1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110319
Bug ID: 110319
Summary: Performance slowdown using a pointer to perform a
reduction vs. using a normal variable
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110318
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #83 from Alexander Klepikov
---
Created attachment 55367
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55367=edit
Collapsed libcall and additional loop move invariants patch v3
I digged other targets and I found that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
--- Comment #5 from Neil Carlson ---
>> !x%var_ptr() = 2.0 ! THIS IS NOT REJECTED AS EXPECTED
>
> I could have phrased the comment better. I expected that assignment to be okay
> (i.e., not rejected) and it wasn't. Sorry for the confusion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
>
> --- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108961
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 55368
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55368=edit
Fix for this PR
I couldn't see what the problem was initially and so I put this PR to one side.
I still have it in my
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78405
Artem S. Tashkinov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79704
Bug 79704 depends on bug 78405, which changed state.
Bug 78405 Summary: OpenSSL v1.0.1g RSA 4096 test is 20% slower under GCC 6.2
than under Clang 3.9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78405
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91804
Ajit Kumar Agarwal changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110307
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
It's not necessary yet for this particular bug, but might be helpful for future
bugs (if disk space is not an issue).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109932
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110308
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110251
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.carlotti at arm dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110177
--- Comment #3 from Theodoros Theodoridis ---
I think the correct bisection is: r11-3063-gfcae5121154 (or its parent
r11-3062-g90e88fd376b)
I can't build its parent but with its grandparent r11-3061-g1644d7f4c1c the
call to foo is eliminated:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110228
--- Comment #17 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Phiopt does this:
> ```
> v_13 == 1 ? 1 : LookupFlags_6
> Matching expression match.pd:1990, gimple-match-5.cc:23
> Matching expression match.pd:1990,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Stubbs ---
This ICE also affect the following standalone test failures (raw amdgcn, no
offloading):
gfortran.dg/assumed_rank_21.f90
gfortran.dg/finalize_38.f90
gfortran.dg/finalize_38a.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109932
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98763feef24b58573fa9e6c6eedaccc1e932bb46
commit r10-11455-g98763feef24b58573fa9e6c6eedaccc1e932bb46
Author: Kewen Lin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Stubbs ---
It's curious that this affects the Fiji target only, and not the newer targets
at all.
There are some additional register options for multiply instructions, some
differences to atomics, but mostly the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Hi Neil,
Thanks for posting this bug report.
> !x%var_ptr() = 2.0 ! THIS IS NOT REJECTED AS EXPECTED
Why do you think that this should be rejected? As I understood it, this was
permitted by the
: zlib
gcc version 14.0.0 20230620 (experimental) [master r14-924-gd709841ae0f] (GCC)
[512] %
[512] % gcctk -O2 -fno-tree-pre -fno-tree-dce -fno-tree-dse
-fselective-scheduling2 small.c
during RTL pass: sched2
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:19:1: internal compiler error: in move_exprs_to_bounda
1 - 100 of 171 matches
Mail list logo
