https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94591
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
I'll take a look, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
--- Comment #6 from Alex Coplan ---
I have a patch, just testing it now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96475
--- Comment #15 from Alex Coplan ---
> there are similar ICEs while running the GCC testsuite for aarch64-elf
Confirmed, seeing these ICEs when running the testsuite on
aarch64-none-linux-gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
--- Comment #5 from Alex Coplan ---
This just looks like a missing pattern which we've started noticing since the
new canonicalisation was introduced.
I imagine reinstating the *add__multp2 pattern and rewriting it to
use shifts instead will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
Ok, the following reduced testcase ICEs at -O2:
int h(void);
struct c d;
struct c {
int e[1];
};
void f(void) {
int g;
for (;; g = h()) {
int *i = [g];
asm("" : "=Q"(*i));
}
}
|1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |acoplan at gcc dot
gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
Confirmed. GCC trunk ICEs on AArch64 when compiling kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c.
Seems to happen when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
--- Comment #7 from Alex Coplan ---
Patch up for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/553605.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96796
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
Adding -fcommon, I can reproduce this ICE on trunk. The default changed in GCC
10 (as of 6271dd984d7f920d4fb17ad37af6a1f8e6b796dc).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96796
--- Comment #5 from Alex Coplan ---
Started with this change:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=8eaff6ef97836100801f7b40dc03f77fbebe03ac
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following C program:
__attribute__ ((noinline))
void f(char *p, char x)
{
if (x != 1)
__builtin_abort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97161
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
Ah, apologies for the noise - thanks for clarifying.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97079
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
Ah, yes, the ICE re-appears immediately prior to
r11-3095-g47ddf4c7b1d4471cb9534f27844ab5e4279c2168, so the bug was temporarily
hidden on trunk.
I'll do another bisect, thanks.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following testcase:
int a, b, c, d;
short e, g;
unsigned short f;
void h() {
for (; d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97079
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
It seems this was introduced with
r11-2817-gcdb2e365fc0dba2ee052827e5ca65234ca82d605:
commit cdb2e365fc0dba2ee052827e5ca65234ca82d605
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Fri Jul 31 09:53:39 2020
SLP: support
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following testcase:
void g(void);
long a;
signed char b(int c, int d) { return c + d; }
void e(void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94591
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
|ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |acoplan at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Alex Coplan ---
Re-opening to track backporting progress.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following testcase:
int a, b, c, d;
short e;
void f() {
unsigned g;
for (; d; d++) {
g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97104
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following testcase:
int a;
short b, c;
short d(short e, short f) { return e + f; }
void
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following testcase:
long c;
long *d =
int a, e, f;
int main(void) {
for (; f <= 5; f++) {
e = 0;
for (
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following testcase:
int a, b = 5, c = 3;
char d;
char e[1];
int f[] = {0, 0, 1};
short g
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Since r11-3148-g8d3767c30240c901a493d82d9d20f306b2f0152d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95498
--- Comment #5 from Alex Coplan ---
Created attachment 48867
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48867=edit
Minimal reproducer
I've done some exhaustive testing of which combinations of casts are allowed.
It seems that any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96044
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
I left the updated version running for ~1 hour and it didn't finish compiling.
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
On the following code:
void f(void)
{
__builtin_jn(7,7);
}
GCC since 4.3 hangs in a tight loop inside MPFR code trying
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96044
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
Ah, it appears I just wasn't being patient enough. It seems you can make the
constant folding take longer (arbitrarily long?) by adding another digit to the
arguments.
This code:
void f(void) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95676
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95526
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
Ok, bootstrap and test looks good. Cleaned up a bunch of recent testsuite
failures:
+PASS: gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-3 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o
execute
+PASS: gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95526
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95056
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09
Status|UNCONFIRMED
|--- |FIXED
CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan ---
Hi Christophe, see PR95526: this should be fixed by
ab56390384cd5168b548ff07e6f0c9c4d41420fb.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95526
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95055
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
With the following C code:
void foo(unsigned short a, unsigned short b, unsigned short *ptr)
{
*ptr = a + b;
}
AArch64 GCC at -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95650
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
I think clang's optimisation is sound here.
C says that we add two shorts as int and then truncate to short (i.e. reduce
mod 16).
The question is whether the top bits being set (which the ABI allows) can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95526
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
I'm happy to test the fix.
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Commit eb72dc663e9070b281be83a80f6f838a3a878822 introduces a wrong code bug on
AArch64.
This causes the test case gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/complex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69435
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97317
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build||x86_64-linux-gnu
Target Milestone|---
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following testcase:
struct a {
unsigned c : 17;
};
struct a b;
int d(void) {
short e = b.c;
return e ? 0 : b.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97315
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
char a, b;
long c;
short d, e;
long *f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97440
--- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan ---
Created attachment 49377
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49377=edit
broken assembly at r7-1513
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 49376
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49376=edit
working assembly at r7-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dr.duncan.p.simpson at gmail
dot c
||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
Dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 96998 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
--- Comment #9 from Alex Coplan ---
So the plan is to fix this with a patch to combine. Waiting on a review from
Segher for https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/555158.html
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 49364
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49364=edit
assembly generated at r10-3906
AArch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97400
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97457
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.0
Keywords|
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
int a;
long c;
signed char d(char e, char f) { return e + f; }
int main(void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97457
--- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan ---
To be clear, the second beq .L8 is in the body of the main loop is not taken
either in the execution described here. The lack of a comment there might have
suggested otherwise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97457
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
For the similar testcase:
long a;
short b;
signed char c(char d, char e) { return d + e; }
int main(void) {
a = -30;
for (; a < 24; a = c(a, 5)) {
short *f =
(*f)--;
}
if (b != -11)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97421
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Known to fail|
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
int a, b, d, e;
int *volatile c =
__attribute__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97421
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
> So maybe try bisecting/reproducing with -fno-strict-aliasing?
Ah, yes, I can reproduce before that revision with -fno-strict-aliasing. I'll
re-bisect, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97079
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
Related testcase that gives a similar ICE:
int c, d;
int e[1];
void a(int *);
void f(void) {
while (d);
int g[5];
for (; d < 2; d++)
e[d] = c;
for (; d; d++)
g[d] = (long)e;
a(g);
}
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97421
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] aarch64: |aarch64: Wrong code with
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Since r10-7193-g63c8f7d6a082b1cd0519fe06d4ed506b04280921, GCC ICEs compiling
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pure-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97251
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
Fixed on trunk. Needs backporting to GCC 10.
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Since r10-7293-g3eff57aacfef6e05f55e9dd6ecae3ef8568aaac4, AArch32 GCC ICEs
compiling
||2020-09-30
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |acoplan at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97252
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97251
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97526
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96998
--- Comment #11 from Alex Coplan ---
The patch series has been restructured to first fix the AArch64 bug, and then
restore code quality with a patch to combine.
The AArch64 patch
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Here is an error-recovery ICE:
$ cat test.c
int f() {
int g(x) int x;
int a[x];
}
$ aarch64-elf-gcc -c test.c
test.c: In function 'g':
test.c:4:1: error: expected declaration specifiers
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following fails:
$ cat test.c
int a() {
int *b;
asm goto("" : "=mk"(b) : : : c);
d:
c:
}
$ aarch64-elf-gcc -c test.c
test.c: In function 'a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following fails:
$ cat a.c
int a;
int *p =
void
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
_Bool a[34];
int main() {
for (long b = 0; b < 2; ++b)
for (l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98119
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SVE: Wrong code with -O1|[10/11 Regression] SVE:
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For the following C++ testcase:
int a, b;
short c;
void d(long e) {
for (int f = 0; f < b; f += 1)
for (short g = 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98177
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98199
--- Comment #4 from Alex Coplan ---
Ah, yeah, apologies: looks like I messed up the bisect here, scratch that.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
static unsigned long long a;
static long b;
static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98196
--- Comment #3 from Alex Coplan ---
@Martin: I originally saw the issue with a testcase generated by YARPGen
(https://github.com/intel/yarpgen), but this only hit the bug with LTO.
I reduced that with cvise and then manually tweaked the
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC ICEs on the following testcase:
struct b {
long a;
short d;
int c;
int f;
int e;
int g;
};
struct h {
int a;
int i;
short j;
struct b k
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
GCC miscompiles the following C++ testcase at -O3 (reproduced on both x86 and
aarch64):
const int (const int , const int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97960
--- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan ---
C testcase:
const int *c(const int *p, const int *q)
{
if (*p < *q)
return q;
return p;
}
short a[575];
unsigned b[25];
unsigned char g;
int main()
{
for (int e = 0; e < 23; ++e)
a[e * 23] =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98214
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
Summary|SVE: Wrong code
: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
long c;
int a;
int e[14];
short b[14];
void d(long *f, long h) { *f ^= h + *f; }
int main() {
e[2] = 1;
for (int g = 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98271
--- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan ---
On further investigation, it seems we ICE when align-loop-iterations is 2^31
and above (i.e. if it's negative, treated as a 32-bit signed integer).
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following fails:
$ cat test.c
void a() {
for (;;)
;
}
$ aarch64-elf-gcc -c -O --param=align
mal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following fails:
$ cat test.c
int a() {}
$ aarch64-elf-gcc test.c -c -O --param=hot-bb-frequency-fraction=2147483
MED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
$ cat test.c
int a;
int c(void);
int b() { a && c(); }
$ aarch64-elf-gcc -c -Os --param=gcse-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092
--- Comment #9 from Alex Coplan ---
Thanks for fixing this Andrea! FWIW I can reproduce the ICE with the same
testcase and options on the head of the GCC 10 branch (contrary to my first
message).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98302
--- Comment #10 from Alex Coplan ---
Reduced to:
int c = 1705;
char a;
long f = 50887638;
unsigned long long *h(unsigned long long *k, unsigned long long *l) {
return *k ? k : l;
}
void aa() {}
int main() {
long d = f;
for (char g = 0; g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97141
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
Adding -fno-tree-forwprop gives us an ICE in LRA instead:
$ aarch64-elf-gcc -c pr97141.c -O3 -march=armv8.2-a+sve -fno-tree-forwprop
during RTL pass: reload
pr97141.c: In function 'g':
pr97141.c:8:1:
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
unsigned long long b;
_Bool a;
unsigned char c[3][22];
unsigned char (*h)[22] = c;
int j
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98248
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
CC|
|1
CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org,
||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-18
--- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan ---
Confirmed. Presumably started with g
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC ICEs on the following testcase:
int a, b, c, d;
static int e(int f) { return a == 0 ? 0 : f
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 ICEs on the following C++ testcase:
unsigned long a, d;
extern int b[];
char c;
void e(int f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97850
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97849
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.0
Keywords|
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
AArch64 GCC miscompiles the following testcase:
int a, b, c;
short d;
void e(void) {
unsigned f = 0;
for (; f <
1 - 100 of 620 matches
Mail list logo
