[Bug bootstrap/97319] New: LTO profiledbootstrap (C/C++/Fotran only) fails with a segfault in selftest

2020-10-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97319 Bug ID: 97319 Summary: LTO profiledbootstrap (C/C++/Fotran only) fails with a segfault in selftest Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug ipa/96394] [10/11 Regression] ICE in add_new_edges_to_heap, at ipa-inline.c:1746 (-O3 PGO)

2020-10-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/97456] [10/11 Regression] An incorrect optimization causes a function to always return the same value when using -flto

2020-10-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- And indeed the following avoids the issue: diff --git a/gcc/tree-complex.c b/gcc/tree-complex.c index 2e54bbb917c..71ad7c18523 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-complex.c +++ b/gcc/tree-complex.c @@ -570,8 +570,10 @@

[Bug ipa/97456] [10/11 Regression] An incorrect optimization causes a function to always return the same value when using -flto

2020-10-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- Looking at Martin's reduced testcase (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Confirmed with -fwhole-program -O3 IPA SRA messes things up here cloning > wrong > and producing the strange > >

[Bug ipa/97456] [10/11 Regression] An incorrect optimization causes a function to always return the same value when using -flto

2020-10-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456 --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor --- I have posted the patch to the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/556399.html

[Bug tree-optimization/97456] [10/11 Regression] An incorrect optimization causes a function to always return the same value when using -flto

2020-10-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|ipa |tree-optimization --- Comment #7 from

[Bug tree-optimization/96818] [11 Regression] ICE: in decompose, at wide-int.h:984 at -O since r11-2883

2020-10-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96818 --- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor --- Is this bug still "WAITING" for something?

[Bug ipa/96394] [10/11 Regression] ICE in add_new_edges_to_heap, at ipa-inline.c:1746 (-O3 PGO)

2020-09-25 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394 --- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor --- I can confirm the analysis, except that I see the edge we're trying to add to the heap as already inlined (as a speculative edge it got inlined even its caller was). Also just not adding an edge with

[Bug ipa/96394] [10/11 Regression] ICE in add_new_edges_to_heap, at ipa-inline.c:1746 (-O3 PGO)

2020-09-25 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394 --- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor --- so after Martin asked some good questions, it turns out this should probably be avoided in ipa-prop, after all, as with, for example (untested): diff --git a/gcc/ipa-prop.c b/gcc/ipa-prop.c index

[Bug ipa/96394] [10/11 Regression] ICE in add_new_edges_to_heap, at ipa-inline.c:1746 (-O3 PGO)

2020-10-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394 --- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor --- I proposed the patch on the mailing list (I guess I should put Martin's name at least to the testsuite ChangeLog and probably to both): https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555284.html

[Bug tree-optimization/97456] [10/11 Regression] An incorrect optimization causes a function to always return the same value when using -flto

2020-10-26 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97456 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/45791] Missed devirtualization

2021-01-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45791 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug lto/45375] [meta-bug] Issues with building Mozilla (i.e. Firefox) with LTO

2021-01-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 Bug 45375 depends on bug 45791, which changed state. Bug 45791 Summary: Missed devirtualization https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45791 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/97980] [10/11 Regression] wrong code with "-O3 -fno-dce -fno-inline-functions-called-once -fno-inline-small-functions -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-dce -fno-tree-vrp" since r10-3311-g

2020-11-26 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97980 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/93385] [10/11 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce

2020-11-26 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385 --- Comment #38 from Martin Jambor --- *** Bug 97980 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug ipa/97816] [11 Regression] ICE in good_cloning_opportunity_p, at ipa-cp.c:3266 since r11-4949-gb86aedb0cc083efe712e530a723f1237051a6b56

2020-12-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97816 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

2020-12-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 97816, which changed state. Bug 97816 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in good_cloning_opportunity_p, at ipa-cp.c:3266 since r11-4949-gb86aedb0cc083efe712e530a723f1237051a6b56

[Bug tree-optimization/94406] 503.bwaves_r is 11% slower on Zen2 CPUs than GCC 9 with -Ofast -march=native

2020-12-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94406 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

2020-12-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 94406, which changed state. Bug 94406 Summary: 503.bwaves_r is 11% slower on Zen2 CPUs than GCC 9 with -Ofast -march=native https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94406 What|Removed

[Bug ipa/97816] [11 Regression] ICE in good_cloning_opportunity_p, at ipa-cp.c:3266 since r11-4949-gb86aedb0cc083efe712e530a723f1237051a6b56

2020-11-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97816 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug ipa/97816] [11 Regression] ICE in good_cloning_opportunity_p, at ipa-cp.c:3266 since r11-4949-gb86aedb0cc083efe712e530a723f1237051a6b56

2020-11-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97816 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- As noted in the commit message above, the ICE will go away but the underlying issue stays so please keep this opened until I fix it, hopefully no later than next week.

[Bug ipa/97695] [11 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu since r11-4587-gae7a23a3fab74.

2020-11-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97695 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- It is a clone materialization problem. IPA-CP clones f.part.0 twice and the second time tree_function_versioning receives NULL tree_map.

[Bug ipa/97695] [11 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu since r11-4587-gae7a23a3fab74.

2020-11-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97695 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- And the reason is not copying tree_map in cgraph_node::create_clone (when called from clone_inlined_nodes). The following should fix it. In theory we need a mechanism for create_virtual_clone to

[Bug ipa/97695] [11 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu since r11-4587-gae7a23a3fab74.

2020-11-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97695 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #5) > I see you have patch, too :) > However we do not want to copy clone info to every inline clone (since > the body is materialized just once). The problem is that

[Bug c/97578] ice during IPA pass: inline

2020-11-02 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97578 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/80689] 128 bit loads generated for structure copying with gcc 7.1.0 and leads to STLF stalls in avx2 targets.

2021-01-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80689 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|jamborm at gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/47059] compiler fails to coalesce loads/stores

2021-01-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47059 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/47059] compiler fails to coalesce loads/stores

2021-01-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47059 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/58243] Suboptimal structure initialization with tree-sra

2021-01-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58243 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/36602] memset should be optimized into an empty CONSTRUCTOR

2021-01-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36602 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug ipa/98744] [11 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3246 since r11-6735-g424deca72b63e644

2021-01-20 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98744 --- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor --- That cannot be the problem. IPA-SRA re-creates the call statements and builds them with gimple_build_call_vec (callee_decl, vargs); where calle_decl is the new function which has had its type adjusted and

[Bug c++/98744] [11 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3246 since r11-6735-g424deca72b63e644

2021-01-20 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98744 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|ipa |c++ --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor

[Bug ipa/98078] ICE in cgraph_add_edge_to_call_site_hash, at cgraph.c:698 since r6-1705-gd88511aec7338a93

2021-01-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98078 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- Actually no, that would be papering over a bigger problem. After looking at the issue a bit more, I proposed a patch on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/563962.html

[Bug tree-optimization/98255] [10/11 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above with -fPIC on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2021-01-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98255 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- Right, the issue is that SRA depends on get_ref_base_and_extent to figure out what is being accessed (and so whether it is safe) and that function believes the load is safely from within the array.

[Bug tree-optimization/98255] [10/11 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above with -fPIC on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2021-01-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98255 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- Even our constant folding thinks the unsigned expression wraps around. If I tell SRA to fold the expression if the base is a string_cst, the invalid dereference is avoided. My experiment was (I am not

[Bug tree-optimization/98255] [10/11 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above with -fPIC on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2021-01-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98255 --- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor --- OK, adding an additional check whether tree_could_trap_p is of course easy. I'll wait a little while if the discussion about get_ref_base_and_extent perhaps leads to a different solution but if not, I will

[Bug tree-optimization/98255] [10/11 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above with -fPIC on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2021-01-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98255 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- So SRA sees statements: n[0][2] = "\t\x02\b"; and later _11 = n[0][3][4294967294]; The latter loads a scalar sitting inside what the store above initialized (according to get_ref_base_and_extent) and so

[Bug ipa/98222] [11 Regression] ICE at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu: verify_cgraph_node failed since r11-4267-g0e590b68fa374365

2021-01-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98222 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/97588] Overzealous SRA of boolean bitfields

2021-01-22 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97588 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug ipa/98078] ICE in cgraph_add_edge_to_call_site_hash, at cgraph.c:698 since r6-1705-gd88511aec7338a93

2021-01-18 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98078 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- Here is what happens. An IPA-CP clone for a particular devirtualziation context is created but all devirtualziations based on it are speculative. Then the clone is inlined at one of its call sites and the

[Bug ipa/98690] [10/11 Regression] unexpected "'removed_return.213' may be used uninitialized in this function" causes crash since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797d6

2021-01-18 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98690 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a patch on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/563790.html

[Bug ipa/98222] [11 Regression] ICE at -O3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu: verify_cgraph_node failed since r11-4267-g0e590b68fa374365

2021-01-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98222 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug ipa/79966] [9/10/11 Regression] run time more than twice slower when using -fipa-cp-clone

2021-01-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79966 --- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor --- I can confirm this, even on current trunk. The reason is that runtptests/3 -> tp_sum/5 is not inlined because it exceeds max-inline-insns-auto. I have to set the param to 43 - the default is 15 - for the

[Bug ipa/79966] [9/10/11 Regression] Test gfortran.dg/pr79966.f90 slow again, inliner hits max-inline-insns-auto

2021-01-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79966 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9/10/11 Regression] run|[9/10/11 Regression] Test

[Bug lto/50430] Constructors of static external vars are throwed away leading to missed optimizations (and ipa-cp ICE).

2021-01-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50430 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- Am I correct thinking that this has been addressed (long time ago)? The entire optimized dump of the testcase from comment #3 is now the following, so no missed devirtualization there: void

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 94400, which changed state. Bug 94400 Summary: 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94400 What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/94400] 531.deepsjeng_r is 7% slower at -O2 -march=znver2 than GCC 9

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94400 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/100453] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above since r12-434

2021-06-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100453 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/90404] No warning on attempts to modify a const object

2021-06-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90404 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug ipa/101066] [10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code after fixup_cfg3 since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797d6

2021-06-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101066 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/573338.html

[Bug tree-optimization/100453] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above since r12-434

2021-06-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100453 --- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor --- Another attempt to fix this: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/572814.html

[Bug tree-optimization/101066] [10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code after fixup_cfg3 since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797d6

2021-06-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101066 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/100453] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above since r12-434

2021-05-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100453 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- I proposed a patch to address this on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-May/570267.html

[Bug ipa/100491] [11/12 Regression] IPA-SRA is not happening any more

2021-05-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100491 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/100453] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above since r12-434

2021-05-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100453 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/100597] [12 Regression] Ada bootstrap fails

2021-05-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100597 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/100453] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above since r12-434

2021-05-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100453 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |--- Status|RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/100453] [12 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above since r12-434

2021-05-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100453 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug ipa/100539] [10/11/12 Regression] wrong code at -Os and above with "-fno-dce -fno-inline-small-functions -fno-tree-dce" since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797d6

2021-05-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100539 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|rtl-optimization|ipa Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/93385] [10/11/12 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce

2021-05-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch ---

[Bug target/101296] New: Addition of x86 addsub SLP patterned slowed down 433.milc by 12% on znver2 with -Ofast -flto

2021-07-02 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101296 Bug ID: 101296 Summary: Addition of x86 addsub SLP patterned slowed down 433.milc by 12% on znver2 with -Ofast -flto Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/101242] Segfault in SLP vectorizor after 2ad71efb5de

2021-06-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101242 --- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor --- For the reference, this is the backtrace: mjambor@virgil:/tmp/bbb$ ~/gcc/trunk/inst/bin/gcc -S -Ofast test.i during GIMPLE pass: slp test.i: In function ‘check_su3’: test.i:11:5: internal compiler error:

[Bug tree-optimization/101242] New: Segfault in SLP vectorizor after 2ad71efb5de

2021-06-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101242 Bug ID: 101242 Summary: Segfault in SLP vectorizor after 2ad71efb5de Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug ipa/93385] [10/11 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce

2021-06-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] wrong |[10/11 Regression] wrong

[Bug tree-optimization/101242] Segfault in SLP vectorizor after g:2ad71efb5de

2021-06-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101242 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- Profiled LTO bootstrap also fails with a segfault with the same backtrace.

[Bug debug/101398] Multiple DW_TAG_formal_parameter DIEs for the same parameter

2021-07-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101398 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug ipa/93385] [10/11/12 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce

2021-04-27 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385 --- Comment #43 from Martin Jambor --- I have re-tested and re-posted the latest patch series to the mailing list: - https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-April/568810.html -

[Bug target/94373] 548.exchange2_r run time is 16-35% worse than GCC 9 at -O2 and generic march/mtune

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94373 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 94375, which changed state. Bug 94375 Summary: 548.exchange2_r run time is 8-18% worse than GCC 9 at -Ofast -march=native https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94375 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/53947] [meta-bug] vectorizer missed-optimizations

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947 Bug 53947 depends on bug 94375, which changed state. Bug 94375 Summary: 548.exchange2_r run time is 8-18% worse than GCC 9 at -Ofast -march=native https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94375 What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/94375] 548.exchange2_r run time is 8-18% worse than GCC 9 at -Ofast -march=native

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94375 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/93385] [10/11 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce

2021-03-30 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385 --- Comment #41 from Martin Jambor --- I reworked the series in order to avoid the biggest objection and posted them as https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/567471.html and

[Bug tree-optimization/97009] [9 Regression] Inlining with non-standard selected_int_kind leads to errors

2021-04-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97009 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9/10/11 Regression]|[9 Regression] Inlining

[Bug tree-optimization/97009] [9/10/11 Regression] Inlining with non-standard selected_int_kind leads to errors

2021-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97009 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- I am about to test this patch. I think this should be P1 and I would really like to get this fix to GCC 10.3. Sorry for getting to this so late. diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c index

[Bug tree-optimization/97009] [9/10/11 Regression] Inlining with non-standard selected_int_kind leads to errors

2021-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97009 --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 50492 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50492=edit C testcase C testcase.

[Bug tree-optimization/97009] [9/10/11 Regression] Inlining with non-standard selected_int_kind leads to errors

2021-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97009 --- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed the patch on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/567553.html

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-03-29 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #29 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #28) > So fixed for GCC 11 now? Yes, it should be fixed in GCC 11. We talked about backporting the patches to GCC 10 with Richi on IRC today and decided to wait for

[Bug ipa/98078] ICE in cgraph_add_edge_to_call_site_hash, at cgraph.c:698 since r6-1705-gd88511aec7338a93

2021-03-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98078 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/93385] [10/11 Regression] wrong code with u128 modulo at -O2 -fno-dce -fno-ipa-cp -fno-tree-dce

2021-03-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385 --- Comment #40 from Martin Jambor --- I have adjusted the patches a little and re-posted them as https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/566681.html and https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/566682.html .

[Bug ipa/99194] [11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733 since r11-38-g375a77925c320a27

2021-03-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99194 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-03-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #24 from Martin Jambor --- *** Bug 99194 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug ipa/98834] [10/11 Regression] Code path incorrectly determined to be unreachable

2021-03-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98834 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/99083] Big run-time regressions of 519.lbm_r with LTO

2021-02-23 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99083 --- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor --- For the record, I have benchmarked the patches from comment #4 and comment #10 on top of commit 6b1633378b7 (for which I already have unpatched benchmark results) and the regression of 519.lbm_r compiled

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-03-05 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a patch for the IPA-CP part on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/566333.html

[Bug ipa/98078] ICE in cgraph_add_edge_to_call_site_hash, at cgraph.c:698 since r6-1705-gd88511aec7338a93

2021-03-05 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98078 --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor --- Fixed on master so far (both gcc-10 and gcc-9 branches remain affected).

[Bug tree-optimization/97009] [9 Regression] Inlining with non-standard selected_int_kind leads to errors

2021-04-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97009 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/96825] [11 Regression] Commit r11-2645 degrades CPU2017 548.exchange2_r by 35%

2021-04-09 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96825 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- I have not benchmark results from Power, but the reported regression has been fixed/mitigated on Zens, see: https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=275.407.0=397.407.0=294.407.0; or

[Bug ipa/99951] Dead return value after modify_call() is not released

2021-04-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99951 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-02-18 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor --- I think that you want to disable inlining in the case when the callee has a formal parameter which is a VLA (as opposed to a VLA actual argument of a call), probably in inline_forbidden_p. When just the

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-02-18 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor --- Like with the following, which seems to work as far as inlining is concerned, but the latest Jakub's example ICEs when cloning for IPA-CP :-/ (I am also not sure if the predicate to identify VLAs is the

[Bug debug/95343] IPA-SRA can result in wrong debug info about removed function arguments

2021-02-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95343 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-02-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- With the patch from comment #3, the following sequence with the problematic call: x.1_26 = __builtin_alloca_with_align (_24, 8); g (WITH_SIZE_EXPR <*x.1_26, _22>, WITH_SIZE_EXPR <*x.1_26, _22>);

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-02-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- Looking at how expr.c deals with WITH_SIZE_EXPR, perhaps we should do something like the following: diff --git a/gcc/tree-inline.c b/gcc/tree-inline.c index a710fa59027..cdabeb6bafd 100644 ---

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-02-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > That could perhaps work for the #c0 testcase where the function actually has > a non-VL parameter and so garbage in garbage out. > But would that work also for

[Bug target/90234] 503.bwaves_r is 6% slower on Zen1/Zen2 CPUs at -Ofast with native march/mtune than with generic ones

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90234 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

2021-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 90234, which changed state. Bug 90234 Summary: 503.bwaves_r is 6% slower on Zen1/Zen2 CPUs at -Ofast with native march/mtune than with generic ones https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90234 What

[Bug target/99083] New: Big run-time regressions of 519.lbm_r with LTO

2021-02-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99083 Bug ID: 99083 Summary: Big run-time regressions of 519.lbm_r with LTO Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/99083] Big run-time regressions of 519.lbm_r with LTO

2021-02-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99083 --- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor --- I will benchmark the patch later this week, just so that we know, but I agree that reverting the patch and applying it again at the beginning of stage1 is probably the best.

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-02-19 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #19 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #17) > there's variably_modified_type_p (you can pass NULL_TREE for the fndecl) > which is more to the point. Otherwise it looks reasonable. Does IPA CP > do

[Bug ipa/99122] [10/11 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:733

2021-02-18 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122 --- Comment #16 from Martin Jambor --- For the IPA-CP ICE, I am still running some tests, but I am currently leaning towards the following. It might in theory disable IPA-CP in some strange K corner cases (I am searching for those with the

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >