[Bug middle-end/53347] New: Duplicated redundant condition in compare-elim.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53347 Bug #: 53347 Summary: Duplicated redundant condition in compare-elim.c Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: trivial

[Bug middle-end/53454] New: [RX backend]: redundant insn being expanded for long long trivial arithmetic comparison

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53454 Bug #: 53454 Summary: [RX backend]: redundant insn being expanded for long long trivial arithmetic comparison Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3

[Bug c/16351] NULL dereference warnings

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16351 Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Paulo.Matos

[Bug middle-end/53917] New: Warning message line about variable points to place where variable doesn't occur

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53917 Bug #: 53917 Summary: Warning message line about variable points to place where variable doesn't occur Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3

[Bug middle-end/53917] Warning message line about variable points to place where variable doesn't occur

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53917 --- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-07-10 16:37:20 UTC --- Here's another example: void fn1 (); typedef struct { int hdr[0]; } foo; typedef enum { READ_WRITE } bar; typedef struct { struct

[Bug middle-end/53917] Warning message line about variable points to place where variable doesn't occur

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53917 --- Comment #2 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-07-10 16:38:22 UTC --- Created attachment 27772 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27772 Another testcase (inlining issue)

[Bug middle-end/54154] New: cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 Bug #: 54154 Summary: cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/54154] cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 --- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-08-01 14:34:48 UTC --- Created attachment 27923 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27923 After cprop_hardreg

[Bug middle-end/54154] cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 --- Comment #2 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-08-01 14:37:53 UTC --- Created attachment 27924 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27924 Add debug info when redundant insn is going to be generated Looking

[Bug middle-end/54154] cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug middle-end/54154] cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 --- Comment #4 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-08-01 15:01:29 UTC --- Due to my last comment I marked this as a request for enhancement.

[Bug middle-end/54154] cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 --- Comment #5 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-08-02 09:34:03 UTC --- I have now a patch for this which I will submit shortly.

[Bug middle-end/54154] cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 --- Comment #6 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-08-02 09:58:55 UTC --- Created attachment 27926 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27926 regcprop patch to remove redundant moves This patch seems to fix 54154. I

[Bug middle-end/54154] cprop_hardreg generates redundant instructions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54154 --- Comment #7 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-08-02 10:05:40 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) With send it to gcc-patches. 's/With/Will/'

[Bug middle-end/49801] df_live_verify_transfer_functions fails with to use of CC_REGNUM and checking enabled in rx backend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801 Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |major

[Bug c/50264] New: -Wdisabled-optimizations without -O generates strange errors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50264 Bug #: 50264 Summary: -Wdisabled-optimizations without -O generates strange errors Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.3.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug other/50345] New: Incomplete GCC Internals sentence on LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50345 Bug #: 50345 Summary: Incomplete GCC Internals sentence on LTO Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug other/50434] New: genmodes.c hardcodes size of CCmode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50434 Bug #: 50434 Summary: genmodes.c hardcodes size of CCmode Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug regression/50472] New: Volatile qualification in data is not enough to avoid optimization over pointer to data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50472 Bug #: 50472 Summary: Volatile qualification in data is not enough to avoid optimization over pointer to data Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1

[Bug regression/50472] Volatile qualification in data is not enough to avoid optimization over pointer to data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50472 --- Comment #2 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-09-23 13:18:10 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Duplicate of PR50078? Might be but I can't confirm. Surely we will know once Mat fixes PR50078.

[Bug tree-optimization/49601] [4.7 Regression] ICE at ipa-inline-analysis.c:1188

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49601 Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Paulo.Matos

[Bug regression/50472] Volatile qualification in data is not enough to avoid optimization over pointer to data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50472 Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Paulo.Matos

[Bug tree-optimization/49601] [4.7 Regression] ICE at ipa-inline-analysis.c:1188

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49601 --- Comment #4 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-09-23 13:22:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) Richard raised concerns about this PR being an old bug and already fixed. Initially I only confirmed it in 4.6.1 but I can

[Bug other/50582] New: Instruct GCC that added_clobbers_hard_reg_p shouldn't consider a specific register

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50582 Bug #: 50582 Summary: Instruct GCC that added_clobbers_hard_reg_p shouldn't consider a specific register Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1

[Bug other/50582] Instruct GCC that added_clobbers_hard_reg_p shouldn't consider a specific register

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50582 --- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-09-30 15:54:25 UTC --- I have implemented a fix to this using a new macro: NOT_REALLY_HARD_REGS which is an array of FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER length, with a 1 in position x

[Bug other/50582] Instruct GCC that added_clobbers_hard_reg_p shouldn't consider a specific register

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50582 --- Comment #2 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-09-30 15:57:21 UTC --- Created attachment 25389 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25389 Patch for GCC 4.6.1 implementing suggested enhancement

[Bug other/50582] Instruct GCC that added_clobbers_hard_reg_p shouldn't consider a specific register

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50582 --- Comment #3 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-10-05 10:53:06 UTC --- Created attachment 25420 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25420 Allows reload to remove trivial insn I noticed that reload was failing

[Bug middle-end/49801] df_live_verify_transfer_functions fails with to use of CC_REGNUM and checking enabled in rx backend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801 --- Comment #3 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-10-05 11:08:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) Is this bug still reproducible for you ? I tried building an rx-elf toolchain from the current 4.6 branch sources and I

[Bug target/50630] New: rx: sbb_flags doesn't call rx_match_ccmode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50630 Bug #: 50630 Summary: rx: sbb_flags doesn't call rx_match_ccmode Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug debug/40713] Overlapping .debug_ranges (C++)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40713 Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Paulo.Matos

[Bug debug/40713] Overlapping .debug_ranges (C++)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40713 --- Comment #6 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-10-11 11:48:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) As the home page says, 4.4.x is the oldest maintained branch.. Right! Sorry for the noise.

[Bug middle-end/49801] df_live_verify_transfer_functions fails with to use of CC_REGNUM and checking enabled in rx backend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801 --- Comment #12 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-10-17 15:26:51 UTC --- Sorry for the time taken to reply. I have tested snapshots of 4.6 and 4.7 and both seem happy now. Looks like it's sorted. Thanks.

[Bug middle-end/50706] Fold check failed (expected tree that contains 'typed' structure, have 'block' in fold_checksum_tree, at fold-const.c:13921)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50706 Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Paulo.Matos

[Bug middle-end/50706] Fold check failed (expected tree that contains 'typed' structure, have 'block' in fold_checksum_tree, at fold-const.c:13921)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50706 --- Comment #4 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-10-18 07:51:28 UTC --- Created attachment 25537 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25537 Another testcase.

[Bug target/50794] New: [picochip] incorrect implementation of ashrsi3 for negative numbers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50794 Bug #: 50794 Summary: [picochip] incorrect implementation of ashrsi3 for negative numbers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status:

[Bug c/49801] New: df_live_verify_transfer_functions fails with to use of CC_REGNUM and checking enabled in rx backend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801 Summary: df_live_verify_transfer_functions fails with to use of CC_REGNUM and checking enabled in rx backend Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c/49801] df_live_verify_transfer_functions fails with to use of CC_REGNUM and checking enabled in rx backend

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801 --- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-07-21 09:03:06 UTC --- I pinpointed this issue to the bitmaps computed in df_live_verify_transfer_functions (df-problems.c). bitmap saved_gen has no bit set while bb_info-gen has

[Bug rtl-optimization/49884] New: get_last_value in combine ignores register mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49884 Summary: get_last_value in combine ignores register mode Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: rtl-optimization

[Bug rtl-optimization/49884] get_last_value in combine ignores register mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49884 --- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-07-28 09:46:36 UTC --- Created attachment 24854 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24854 Fixes PR49884 Sent to gcc-patches.

[Bug middle-end/47782] New: Infinite cycle generates segmentation fault in targets without cbranch support

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47782 Summary: Infinite cycle generates segmentation fault in targets without cbranch support Product: gcc Version: 4.5.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority:

[Bug middle-end/47782] Infinite cycle generates segmentation fault in targets without cbranch support

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47782 --- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-02-17 11:55:32 UTC --- Created attachment 23379 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23379 source code to reproduce bug

[Bug middle-end/47782] Infinite cycle generates segmentation fault in targets without cbranch support

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47782 --- Comment #2 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-02-17 14:56:45 UTC --- Just a note to this... this bug assumes that cbranchmode4 is _not_ implemented. If cbranchmode4 is not an optional standard name to implement then this bug

[Bug middle-end/47782] Infinite cycle generates segmentation fault in targets without cbranch support

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47782 --- Comment #4 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-02-17 16:04:36 UTC --- Thanks Andy, was that documented anywhere? It would be interesting for me to know which other stuff became compulsory to implement in the backend.

[Bug middle-end/47782] Infinite cycle generates segmentation fault in targets without cbranch support

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47782 --- Comment #6 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2011-02-17 16:23:47 UTC --- Thanks Paolo, I will take a look at those patches.

[Bug rtl-optimization/52235] New: rtlanal: commutative_operand_precedence should prioritize regs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52235 Bug #: 52235 Summary: rtlanal: commutative_operand_precedence should prioritize regs Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/52235] rtlanal: commutative_operand_precedence should prioritize regs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52235 --- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-02-13 16:58:17 UTC --- Created attachment 26651 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26651 Patch to increase regs priority in commutative_operand_precedence

[Bug rtl-optimization/52235] rtlanal: commutative_operand_precedence should prioritize regs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52235 --- Comment #3 from Paulo J. Matos Paulo.Matos at csr dot com 2012-02-14 07:27:50 UTC --- Thanks for the reminder Steven. Now submitted.