https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100941
Bug ID: 100941
Summary: wrong code with __builtin_shufflevector() with
-mavx512f
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54835
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #21 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88770
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
Shouldn't pass_store_merging be better place to handle such optimization?
currently store-merging only merges .a and .b, fails to merge .c and .d
202t.store-merging
void caller ()
{
struct guu D.4030;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100885
--- Comment #8 from Hongtao.liu ---
Fixed in trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100940
Bug ID: 100940
Summary: views::take and views::drop should not define
_S_has_simple_extra_args
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100885
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c064e787b10069e3de56bd3d0d1a34a1a09086ea
commit r11-8517-gc064e787b10069e3de56bd3d0d1a34a1a09086ea
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100939
Bug ID: 100939
Summary: Missing warning with misplaced attribute declaration
in struct, enum, or union definition
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100885
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:be5efe9c12cb852c788f74f8555e6ab8d755479b
commit r12-1254-gbe5efe9c12cb852c788f74f8555e6ab8d755479b
Author: liuhongt
Date: Thu Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100931
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100938
Bug ID: 100938
Summary: [GCOV] Coverage changes when a statement is divided in
multiple lines
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69199
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
I can confirm it has already been fixed by r7-104
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #19 from Hongtao.liu ---
Fixed in GCC12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9a90b311f22956addaf4f5f9bdb3592afd45083f
commit r12-1253-g9a90b311f22956addaf4f5f9bdb3592afd45083f
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82735
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:16465ceb06cc1f65cfca3c0eb2c1ee27ab03bdfd
commit r12-1252-g16465ceb06cc1f65cfca3c0eb2c1ee27ab03bdfd
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100475
--- Comment #7 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to CVS Commits from comment #6)
> The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fe993b469c528230d9a01e1ae2208610f960dd9f
>
> commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100937
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Also your patch did not change the documentation of the option.
Plus the documentation is clear that changing the default is most likely not
wanted at all:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100937
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100937
Fangrui Song changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100937
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100937
Bug ID: 100937
Summary: configure: Add --enable-default-semantic-interposition
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100929
--- Comment #3 from Denis Yaroshevskiy ---
> Please attach your testcases to the bug report.
Is what @Andrew Pinski copied enough? I can attach the same code as file.
> I don't know if there would be issues for comparisons (with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100936
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Proposed patch:
--cut here--
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 04649b42122..0773a4a9ba8 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -13531,7 +13531,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100936
Bug ID: 100936
Summary: %p and %P modifiers should not emit segment overrides
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100935
Bug ID: 100935
Summary: d: T.alignof ignores explicit align(N) type alignment
Product: gcc
Version: 9.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100934
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100923
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
So FRE thinks:
*e.2_6 = f.3_7;
Does not modify:
_9 = *l.1_4;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100930
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100923
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong code at -O2 and above |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100923
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong code at -Os and above |wrong code at -O2 and above
model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210606 (experimental) [master revision
28c62475050:a6bc26893ec:a589877a0036fc2f66b7a957859940c53efdc7c9] (GCC)
[584] %
[584] % gcctk -O2 small.c; ./a.out
[585] %
[585] % gcctk -O3 small.c
[586] % ./a.out
Segmentation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100933
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100932
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |bootstrap
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100931
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
SLP is happening.
This is just a cost model issue as -mtune=intel works.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100929
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Original x86_64 testcase:
#include
__m256 if_else(__m256 x, __m256 y) {
__m256 mask = _mm256_cmp_ps(y, x, _CMP_LT_OQ);
return _mm256_blendv_ps(x, y, mask);
}
__m256 min(__m256 x, __m256 y) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95405
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
GIMPLE doesn't know about calling conventions, that's something that only
"appears" during expansion to RTL.
Still, I don't claim to understand what is going on here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95405
--- Comment #4 from Gabriel Ravier ---
Ah, I see. Didn't think there was a constructor involved and/or that GIMPLE
would keep it implicit like this...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95405
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
For a self-contained version, see below. Notice how the extra constructor in
_Optional_payload_base changes the generated code, or storing directly a
_Optional_payload_base instead of _Optional_payload in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100902
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7fa4db39b6bcd207bd2b52023ff6b155bd15
commit r12-1246-g7fa4db39b6bcd207bd2b52023ff6b155bd15
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100593
--- Comment #13 from Fangrui Song ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #12)
> We should handle it in the whole Linux software stack:
>
> https://gitlab.com/x86-psABIs/x86-64-ABI/-/issues/8
>
> not just in compiler.
It is great that you have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100933
Bug ID: 100933
Summary: install cannot stat include-fixed/limits.h
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67829
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100932
Bug ID: 100932
Summary: autoconf error: possibly undefined macro:
GCC_AC_ENABLE_DECIMAL_FLOAT
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100909
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100907
--- Comment #6 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa ---
> Shouldn't the C11 standard headers be provide by GCC12?
>
AFAIK gcc uses the system's libc. In Linux the default will be GNU libc "glibc"
in Mas OS the default libc will be BSD libc which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95405
Gabriel Ravier changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gabravier at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100593
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100929
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10) |11.1.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100929
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Please attach your testcases to the bug report. godbolt links are nice
complements, but not considered sufficient here.
We don't lower the comparison or the blend in GIMPLE (yet). I think Hongtao Liu
is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100931
Bug ID: 100931
Summary: [x86-64] Failure to optimize 2 32-bit stores converted
to a 64-bit store into using movabs instead of loading
from a constant
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69471
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.5 |9.3
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100907
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> It seems that Mac OS doesn't have the full set of C11 standard headers... :-(
Shouldn't the C11 standard headers be provide by GCC12?
Nevertheless the test compiles with the new version of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29482
Nicolas Boulenguez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas at debian dot org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40772
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100930
Bug ID: 100930
Summary: PPC: Missing builtins for P9 vextsb2w, vextsb2w,
vextsb2d, vextsh2d, vextsw2d
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:002745ca3668fc5e87c22acc81caaeaaadf9c47a
commit r11-8515-g002745ca3668fc5e87c22acc81caaeaaadf9c47a
Author: Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100920
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100920
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a589877a0036fc2f66b7a957859940c53efdc7c9
commit r12-1242-ga589877a0036fc2f66b7a957859940c53efdc7c9
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100929
Bug ID: 100929
Summary: gcc fails to optimize less to min for SIMD code
Product: gcc
Version: og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10)
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100855
--- Comment #10 from Nadav Halahmi ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> I don't know if the test is coming from a real world problem. The modified
> test
>
> program power
> implicit none
>
> real :: sum, sum1, n,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42117
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42195
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
61 matches
Mail list logo
