https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96129
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
As the regressed failures, it's highly suspected to be duplicated of PR96376.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
--- Comment #32 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #31)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #29)
> > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #28)
> > > > Probably you can try to tweak it in ix86_add_stmt_cost? when the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97075
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
--- Comment #18 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #9)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> > > (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #7)
> > > > Two questions in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
--- Comment #19 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #17)
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2020, linkw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
> >
> > --- Comment #15 from Kewen Lin ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
--- Comment #29 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #28)
> > Probably you can try to tweak it in ix86_add_stmt_cost? when the statement
>
> Yes, it's the place.
>
> > is UB to UH conversion statement, further check if the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
--- Comment #25 from Kewen Lin ---
> >
> > Got it! For
> >
> > else if (vect_nop_conversion_p (stmt_info))
> > continue;
> >
> > Is it a good idea to change it to call record_stmt_cost like the others?
> > 1) introduce one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
--- Comment #26 from Kewen Lin ---
> > By following this idea, to release the restriction on loop_outer
> > (loop_father) when setting the father_bbs, I can see FRE works as
> > expectedly. But it actually does the rpo_vn from cfun's entry to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
--- Comment #27 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #22)
> >One of my workmates found that if we disable vectorization for SPEC2017
> >>525.x264_r function sub4x4_dct in source file x264_src/common/dct.c with
> >?>explicit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98138
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> Starting from the loads is not how SLP discovery works so there will be
> zero re-use of code. Sure - the only important thing is you end up
> with a valid SLP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98138
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 49942
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49942=edit
vectorized with altivec built-in functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98138
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> So the expected vectorization builds vectors
>
> { tmp[0][0], tmp[1][0], tmp[2][0], tmp[3][0] }
>
> that's not SLP, SLP tries to build the
>
> { tmp[i][0],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98113
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenther at suse dot de
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98113
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #1)
> (In reply to Ilya Leoshkevich from comment #0)
> > s390's vxe/popcount-1.c began to fail after PR96789 fix.
>
> Sorry to see this regression.
>
> ...
>
> >
> > that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98138
Bug ID: 98138
Summary: BB vect fail to SLP one case
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98138
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
Similar case is x264_pixel_satd_8x4 in x264
https://github.com/mirror/x264/blob/4121277b40a667665d4eea1726aefdc55d12d110/common/pixel.c#L288
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98437
Bug ID: 98437
Summary: confusing wording in the description of option
-fsanitize=address
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97744
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
The additional pass fre4 run triggers this, to disable fre4 can make it pass
(but to disable dse3 can't separately, so it's unrelated), further narrowing
down shows fre4 on the function MG3XDEMO is responsible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97744
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
btw, this is power7 specific, I found it can pass with -mcpu=power8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97744
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97705
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97744
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97705
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96376
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96129
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96376
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 96789, which changed state.
Bug 96789 Summary: x264: sub4x4_dct() improves when vectorization is disabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96789
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97705
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
I think my commit just exposed one bug in ira. The newly introduced function
remove_scratches can bump the max_regno, then the data structures
regstat_n_sets_and_refs and reg_info_p which are allocated according
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96933
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97594
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> > Mine, I see a strange error:
> >
> > $ Program received signal SIGBUS, Bus error.
> > 0x3fffb7ceddbc in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97705
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
The "-DMASK=2" dumping has more lines for register 282, which is introduced in
ira. Something weird causes ira to dump more contexts.
$ diff dump1/dump-noaddr.c.289r.ira dump2/dump-noaddr.c.289r.ira
107a108
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464
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=98138
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #3)
>
> IIUC, in current implementation, we get four grouped stores:
> { tmp[i][0], tmp[i][1], tmp[i][2], tmp[i][3] } /i=0,1,2,3/ independently
>
> When all these tryings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89126
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98138
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #4)
> One rough idea seems:
> 1) Relax this condition all_uniform_p somehow to get SLP instance building
> to go deeper and get those p1/p2 loads as SLP nodes.
> 2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|linkw at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> But this
>
> sprime = eliminate_avail (gimple_bb (SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (use)), use);
>
> should make it more conservative (compared to the more desirable use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9)
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2021, linkw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464
> >
> > --- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #2)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #1)
> > Created attachment 50715 [details]
> > ira:consider matching cstr in all alternatives
> >
> > With little
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99398
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
Thanks for the comments!
> There's predictive commoning which can do similar transforms and runs after
> vectorization. It might be it doesn't handle these
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #3)
> On Fri, 28 May 2021, linkw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
> >
> > --- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
Bug ID: 100794
Summary: suboptimal code due to missing pre2 when vectorization
fails
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 50894
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50894=edit
Method 1, implicitly enable pcom without unrolling once loop vectorization is
enabled but pcom isn't set explicitly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 50896
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50896=edit
M1 M2 SPEC2017 P9 eval result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 50895
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50895=edit
Method 2, let pre generate loop carried dependence for very cheap and cheap
cost model.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5)
> On Fri, 28 May 2021, linkw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100794
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101291
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101291
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #1)
> Hi Jeff, what's the option and stanza?
The reason why I asked is that I can't simply reproduce it locally at O2, with
C compiler it likely runs forever. I guess what
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #7)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #6)
> > Created attachment 51066 [details]
> > aarch64 XPASS failure list
> >
> > The patch v3 bootstrapped and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101235
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
Will backport the fix after 2021 July 7th (two weeks since it's into trunk) if
this isn't urgent meanwhile got the backport approval.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101235
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 51066
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51066=edit
aarch64 XPASS failure list
The patch v3 bootstrapped and regression-tested on x86_64-redhat-linux and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 51065
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51065=edit
ira: Consider matching constraint heavily with some parameter v3
The mentioned only one aarch64-linux-gnu "PASS->FAIL"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101235
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 50715
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50715=edit
ira:consider matching cstr in all alternatives
With little understanding on ira, I am not quite sure this patch is on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
Bug ID: 100328
Summary: IRA doesn't model dup num constraint well
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99398
Bug ID: 99398
Summary: Miss to optimize vector permutation fed by CTOR and
CTOR/CST
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99398
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99398
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 50329
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50329=edit
tested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101944
Bug ID: 101944
Summary: suboptimal SLP for reduced case from namd_r
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101944
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
Back to the optimized IR, I thought the problem is that the vectorized
version has longer critical path for the reduc_plus result (latency in total).
For vectorized version,
_51 = diffa_41(D) *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101944
--- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin ---
The original costing shows the vectorized version wins, by checking
the costings, it missed to model the cost of lane extraction, the
patch was posted in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101944
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> On x86 we even have
>
> Vector cost: 136
> Scalar cost: 196
>
> note that we seem to vectorize the reduction but that only happens with
> -ffast-math, not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #20 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks for the detailed explanation, Mike!
The fusion related flags have been considered in the posted patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/578552.html.
One RFC/Patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102054
Bug ID: 102054
Summary: slightly worse code as PRE on some code got disabled
for loop vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102054
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
One more reduced test case:
fail cmd: gcc -c -O2 -flto -mcpu=power8
pass cmd: gcc -c -O2 -flto -mcpu=power8 -mno-htm -mno-power8-fusion
--
__attribute__((always_inline)) int foo(int *b) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #13 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> OPTION_MASK_P8_FUSION is purely optimization and shouldn't prevent inlining,
> no?
>
> As of HTM it would make the testcase a user error - when using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #14 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> Note that x86 uses for example
>
> else if (caller_opts->x_ix86_fpmath != callee_opts->x_ix86_fpmath
>/* If the calle doesn't use FP expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #15 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #12)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> > As of HTM it would make the testcase a user error - when using -mcpu=power10
> > it would require building with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #17 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 51357
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51357=edit
Fix some issues in rs6000_can_inline_p
As Martin pointed out, currently function rs6000_can_inline_p just returns true
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #18 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> >
> > Thanks for the example, it looks useful! Now the field fp_expressions is
> > generic, one target specific summary class seems required then. And not sure
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102062
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102054
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin ---
Yet another reduced test case from 526.blender_r.
#include
typedef struct QMCSampler {
struct QMCSampler *next, *prev;
int type;
int tot;
int used;
double *samp2d;
double offs[1][2];
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102347
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102347
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
I found i386 port seems doesn't have this issue.
#include
#include
typedef union
{
__m128 x;
float a[4];
} union128;
#pragma GCC target("sse")
int main() {
union128 u;
__m128 a = _mm_set_ps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102383
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102347
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
This seems not a target specific issue. I noticed the target_option tree node
is created expectedly when seeing target pragma, it explains why it works well
without lto. When lto does streaming out, it does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #23 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Chip Kerchner from comment #22)
> (In reply to Chip Kerchner from comment #21) - Forgot one line of code
> > --
> > #pragma GCC target "cpu=power10"
> > int main() {
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102347
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #7)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> > Quickly looking at the rs6000 code, it fails here:
> >
> > #1 0x11a0993c in rs6000_invalid_builtin
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102347
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102440
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> The other option handling bug report I saw dealing with the awk script was
> recorded as other.
Thanks Andrew! I just found there is a "other", how blind I am!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102658
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
r12-4273 caused some new expected failures:
FAIL: c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c -Wc++-compat (test for excess
errors)
FAIL: c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c -std=gnu++14 (test for excess
errors)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102713
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102658
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
*** Bug 102713 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102658
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
There are some discussions [1] to improve the fixing way for the test cases in
g++.dg and c-c++-common. So I hold the changes adding powerpc*-*-* onto them,
just updated the testcases under gcc.target/powerpc/.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102658
--- Comment #11 from Kewen Lin ---
> > For the failure:
> > FAIL: libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-8.c scan-tree-dump-times graphite "5
> > loops carried no dependency" 1
> >
> > It's not a target specific failure, Hongtao already posted one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102658
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 51576
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51576=edit
rs6000-test-Adjust-test-cases-due-to-O2-vect
Tested successfully on P9LE, note that it relies on r12-4273.
Still
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102847
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102847
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
> index 9cbc1af4cc9..8f527452bd0 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
> @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102789
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102789
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
1 - 100 of 722 matches
Mail list logo
