https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64406
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64410
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There are a number of things that make it complicated.
1) gcc doesn't like to vectorize when the number of iterations is not known at
compile time.
2) gcc doesn't vectorize anything
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
Bug ID: 64411
Summary: ICE: in verify_target_availability, at
sel-sched.c:1577 with -Os -mcmodel=medium -fPIC
-fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64410
--- Comment #2 from Conrad conradsand.arma at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
3) the ABI for complex uses 2 separate double instead of a vector of 2
double.
Technically yes, but in practice aren't the 2 separate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64412
Bug ID: 64412
Summary: [regression] ICE in offload compiler: in extract_insn,
at recog.c:2327
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63923
iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64410
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Conrad from comment #2)
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
3) the ABI for complex uses 2 separate double instead of a vector of 2
double.
Technically yes,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
For the record a patch has been submitted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-03/msg00165.html.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60507
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
What is the status of the patch in comment 4?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63743
Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ysrumyan at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #17 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com paul.richard.thomas
at gmail dot com ---
However, it is a patch that doesn't do the job.
Cheers
Paul
On Dec 26, 2014 2:35 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
However, it is a patch that doesn't do the job.
Cheers
Paul
Almost!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
--- Comment #9 from Matthew Woehlke mw_triad at users dot sourceforge.net ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
No, really, that's not how make_unique works. You do not use 'new' with
make_unique, that's the whole point [...]
D'oh,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64413
Bug ID: 64413
Summary: [AArch64/ARMv7] ICE in copy_to_mode_reg, at
explow.c:654
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
--- Comment #4 from Steven Noonan steven at uplinklabs dot net ---
Ahh, didn't even think about an x32/ms_abi compatibility problems. That totally
makes sense. It probably shouldn't work anyway, but an ICE is obviously not the
right reaction from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.5
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64412
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64414
Bug ID: 64414
Summary: cc1plus: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.7
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64412
--- Comment #2 from iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
(In reply to iverbin from comment #0)
To reproduce using Intel Xeon Phi emulation:
1. Build offload and host compilers as described in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64414
--- Comment #1 from Jason Pyeron jpyeron at pdinc dot us ---
In an attempt to be lazy, I added a .h file to refer to a .h file in the parent
directory.
2154b9ff583610a5ab97821ed6b45646df2f4e2b:src/Main/Unix/System.h:
#include ../System.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36557
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool segher at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Still happens. It now does
cntlzw 3,3
srwi 3,3,5
xori 3,3,0x1
rldicl 3,3,0,63
blr
which is better but not exactly ideal yet.
../../gcc-5/gcc/passes.c:1947
0x8712dfe do_per_function
../../gcc-5/gcc/passes.c:1632
0x8713e85 execute_todo
../../gcc-5/gcc/passes.c:1997
GCC 5.0.0 20141226 (experimental) /r219070/.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64416
Bug ID: 64416
Summary: RFE: Support REAL128 on arm
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
26 matches
Mail list logo
