https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87306
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Revision: 268003
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Thu Jan 17 03:24:27 2019
--
--- svn:log (original)
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87306
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Thu Jan 17 03:03:38 2019
New Revision: 268003
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268003=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/87306
* gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-pow-1.c: Modify to reflect that
the
||2019-01-15
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87306
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
Confirmed.
This issue is power7 and below only, since it implicitly sets
-mno-allow-movmisalign, which disallow unaligned load/store in vectorization.
The proposed fix to guard the case under vect_hw_misalig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87306
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 45432
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45432=edit
Similar to the patch fixing pr65484
Referring to pr65484.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87306
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86683
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #22 from Kewen Lin ---
As the discussion above, on Power any IV should have an extend (sign/zero) if
its width is less than the GPR width (POINTER_SIZE equivalent here). Although
we don't model this precisely on Power, in most cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #24 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to bin cheng from comment #23)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #22)
> > As the discussion above, on Power any IV should have an extend (sign/zero)
> > if its width is less than the GPR width
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88497
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
As Kelvin mentioned in the last comment, there is some thing we teach reassoc
to get the below code better, although it's in low priority.
double foo (double accumulator, vector double arg2[], vector double
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88497
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90513
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62147
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62147
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 46478
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46478=edit
one simple patch
It can generate expected codes with the patch draft:
>---subf 9,10,9
>---addi 9,9,-4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #25 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Tue Jun 18 05:08:02 2019
New Revision: 272405
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272405=gcc=rev
Log:
Add one target hook predict_doloop_p, it return true if we can predict it
is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88497
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88497
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Mon Jul 15 05:12:05 2019
New Revision: 273490
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273490=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
2019-07-15 Kewen Lin
PR tree-optimization/88497
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #26 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Sat Sep 14 09:01:21 2019
New Revision: 275713
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275713=gcc=rev
Log:
Consider doloop IV in IVOPTs:
For the targets supporting low-overhead loops,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #33 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #27)
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2019, linkw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
> >
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
--- Comment #18 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 46687
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46687=edit
Powerpc case on vector rotation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62147
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Thu Jun 27 05:24:00 2019
New Revision: 272731
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272731=gcc=rev
Log:
Call finite_loop_p in RTL to get better finiteness information.
gcc/ChangeLog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62147
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Thu Jun 27 05:33:15 2019
New Revision: 272732
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272732=gcc=rev
Log:
One line change onto r272731
PR target/62147
* gcc/loop-iv.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62147
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92127
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87306
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Revision: 268003
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Tue Nov 5 02:26:38 2019
--
--- svn:log (original)
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92127
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Revision: 277704
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Tue Nov 5 02:36:58 2019
--
--- svn:log (original)
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92132
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Fri Nov 8 07:37:07 2019
New Revision: 277947
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277947=gcc=rev
Log:
[rs6000]Fix PR92132 by adding vec_cmp and vcond_mask supports
To support full
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92132
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92127
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Fri Nov 1 07:11:12 2019
New Revision: 277704
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277704=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-11-01 Kewen Lin
PR testsuite/92127
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92127
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92074
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92464
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92464
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Thu Nov 14 05:57:12 2019
New Revision: 278195
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278195=gcc=rev
Log:
[testsuite] Fix PR92464 by adjust test case loop bound
The recent vectorization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92464
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92464
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #2)
> What is the testcase testing? Whether we can properly vectorize this
> code, right? And for p7 we now do it correctly, but thought it was
> too expensive
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Great! I was thinking there whether exists some array to map from mode to
vector, but missed this one. Good to know we have this kind of function!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks for your confirmation and notes! Yes, the realignment codes won't take
effect from Power8 which supports unaligned vector load/store. I'll learn the
code, follow your suggestion and cook some patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47306|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92618
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
Sorry that I didn't catch the bugzilla mails timely, thanks for fixing this!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47325|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
Yes, you are right, it's fine to drop it. Since the previous code will early
return if it's under (!TARGET_ALTIVEC && !TARGET_VSX), I was thinking it may be
good to put an early return there. I'm fine to remove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
--- Comment #12 from Kewen Lin ---
FWIW, I did some statistics collection with regression testing on P8 machine,
the #hits on early return is 516, while the other # is 1147412. So the
conclusion is that early return is useless (at least for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92760
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #15 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Tue Dec 10 12:54:21 2019
New Revision: 279166
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279166=gcc=rev
Log:
[PATCH] Fix PR91790 by considering different first_stmt_info for realign
As PR91790
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92132
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
Powerpc already support vcond where A and B are in the same mode or the
same size mode. As Richard pointed out, this case requires some packs, it
requires powerpc supports vec_cmpv2dfv2di and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92162
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92185
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 92074, which changed state.
Bug 92074 Summary: [10 regression] 26% performance regression on Spec2017
548.exchange2_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92074
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92074
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
TESTCASE:
#include "tree-vect.h"
extern void abort (void) __attribute__ ((noreturn));
#define N 27
uns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92185
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Hmm, I can't reproduce this, I tried ppc64le and x86_64.
Sorry, my local codebase is on r277221, trying latest trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47295|0 |1
is obsolete|
||2019-11-19
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
Currently we guard V2DImode under
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 47295
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47295=edit
Guard V2DImode and V1TImode under VSX and P8VECTOR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 47357
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47357=edit
Defer vect_setup_realignment for different first_stmt_info
Verified the fix on P7 BE, still bootstrapping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
Oops, sorry, the above comment should be for PR91790.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
This issue won't be reproduced with latest trunk but I still can reproduce with
the original reported revision. I checked the dumpings, it changes starting
from inlining, the bg() doesn't have the loop of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47357|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #12 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Wed Nov 27 09:08:20 2019
New Revision: 278760
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278760=gcc=rev
Log:
[PATCH] Fix PR91790 by considering different first_stmt_info for realign
As PR91790
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
--- Comment #13 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Thu Nov 28 06:34:31 2019
New Revision: 278800
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278800=gcc=rev
Log:
[rs6000] Fix PR92566 by checking VECTOR_UNIT_NONE_P
As Segher pointed out in PR92566,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #14 from Kewen Lin ---
Yes, I'd like to wait for two weeks to ensure it's safe enough and then
backport to gcc9. Does it sound good?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92464
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
By the way, if I removed the check_vect and result verification code, the
vectorized version perform very slightly better than non-vectorized version.
And yes, I think it was a bit off before.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91057
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91057
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks for the prompt fix, it works well!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91775
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
>
> probably also a missed-optimization for the new doloop stuff?
Thanks for the information!
This looks a good case with zero doloop_cost_for_address, but the
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
We found r276516 caused 26% performance degradation on SPEC2017 548.exchange2_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92760
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
Author: linkw
Date: Wed Dec 4 05:10:46 2019
New Revision: 278955
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278955=gcc=rev
Log:
[rs6000] Fix PR92760 by checking VECTOR_MEM_NONE_P instead
PR92760 exposed one issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92760
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91052
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93935
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
||2020-03-04
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
It's a power7 specific test case
||2020-03-04
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
Yes, this is another one which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91052
--- Comment #11 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks a lot for Martin's help on reproduction. I can reproduce this ICE and
confirmed that if commenting out my patch r272731 in loop-iv.c, it can pass. I
can also reproduce it on powerpc64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91052
--- Comment #13 from Kewen Lin ---
> “The newly generated doesn't look incorrect since some semantic changes as
> below.”
Sorry, typo, it should be "The newly generated insn doesn't look correct since
some semantic changes as below."
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91052
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
,
||segher at gcc dot gnu.org,
||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks for your comments Alan! I've updated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91052
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
Sorry, I just saw this bug was starting to fail with my commit. Thanks for @ing
me! My commit is just to pass the finiteness information down to RTL phase. The
loops in that case are simple and have only an exit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91052
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
I can't reproduce this on both powerpc64le-linux-gnu
(edabbec31e3bfc9a9757f80c8610706ed00e5a1a) and ppc64-redhat-linux (r278916),
IIUC I need the powerpc-e300c3 environment header/library as sysroot for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62147
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
|--- |DUPLICATE
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
With the fix of PR62147, we can generate bdnz for this loop now.
With -O2 -mcpu=power7 -mno-vsx:
3c: 00 00 42 60 ori r2,r2,0
40: 08 00 04 cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90332
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94079
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94043
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks for reporting, should be duplicated as the symptom.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 94443 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94443
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94043
--- Comment #12 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 48122
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48122=edit
ppc64le tested patch
Thanks Richi!
A patch draft attached to ensure on the right track, also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90332
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 94443, which changed state.
Bug 94443 Summary: [10 Regression] 510.parest_r and 526.blender_r ICE:
verify_ssa failed since r10-7491-gbd0f22a8d5caea8905f38ff1fafce31c1b7d33ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94451
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94443
--- Comment #15 from Kewen Lin ---
*** Bug 94451 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94443
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94401
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 48150
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48150=edit
untested patch
This can fix the REG failures on aarch64.
1 - 100 of 880 matches
Mail list logo
