https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101347
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] ICE in |[11/12 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101256
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93619
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|pinskia at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101335
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-05
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101039
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101237
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101335
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101326
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-05
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101353
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101354
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://godbolt.org/z/4T4x8 |
|eb4f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101352
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101024
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/phi-opt-20.c is another case which is missing right now, it
deals with EQ_EXPR/NE_EXPR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29333
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101256
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101351
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101394
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101024
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #0)
> You will notice this is not caught by phiopt1 even though it should be while
> it is caught now (on the trunk) by phiopt2 (match-and-simplify). That is
> the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101399
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
tab is not part of Fortran character set.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101390
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101404
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92335
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101396
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101404
Bug ID: 101404
Summary: cond_removal_in_popcount_clz_ctz_pattern and
factor_out_conditional_conversion do a similar
transformation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56223
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I did submit a patch
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/574892.html) for:
int abs0(int a, int b)
{
int c = a - b;
if (c <= 0) c = b - a;
return c;
}
But this is unrelated to your
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong code at -Os and above |[11/12 Regression] wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 51064
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51064=edit
Patch which I am testing
Patch which is in testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101234
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like the testsuite is incorrect, it should have been 'en_US.ISO8859-15'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101241
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |MOVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Right before we have:
popping range for c.0_1, restoring int VARYING
But still don't see how we could get [0, 0] for the range there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101258
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the v in is_integral_v stands for value :).
GCC's job is also not to teach you C++, though the documentation and warnings
can help.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54571
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Confirmed. The natural place to optimize this is the tree level phiopt pass.
>
> :
> _3 = x_2(D) & 2;
> if (_3 != 0)
> goto ;
> else
> goto ;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101339
Bug ID: 101339
Summary: (bit_and (negate (convert thurth_value@1))
integer_onep) is not optimized to just @1
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70547
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25290
--- Comment #25 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #22)
So an update on this
> * abs_replacement: needs PROP_gimple_lswitch so we don't change if
> statements early enough
> ** I think majority of the abs handling is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101326
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> and yes, if it would have had TImode we could expand it to a register pair
> but it has BLKmode because it's TYPE_NEEDS_CONSTRUCTING(?), the type
> isn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59424
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49959
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42117
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|42195 |
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101339
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101312
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE with -g: ‘verify_type’ |ICE with -g and may_alias
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100253
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3)
> > I think SLP did not mark the load as unaligned even though it knows it is
> > one:
> But gimple tree is marked as aligned.
Right and we are saying the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95922
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100257
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> for vec_init, if higher part is zero, we can use vmovd/vmovq instead of
> vector concat.
That is related to PR 94680 if not the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100258
Bug ID: 100258
Summary: constant store pulled out of the loop causes an extra
memory load
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100257
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like a few missed optimizations at the tree level (and a target issue of
the store):
memcpy (, src_33, 6);
_1 = pixel.b;
_2 = pixel.g;
_3 = pixel.r;
val_2.0_21 = (short int) _1;
val_1.1_22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98710
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97952
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94893
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94893
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96702
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95923
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96172
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987
Bug 19987 depends on bug 95914, which changed state.
Bug 95914 Summary: Failure to optimize saturated add properly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95914
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95914
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95738
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Failure to optimize |Failure to optimize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95404
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94916
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95408
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94898
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100257
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94806
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94930
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94870
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94863
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100345
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
You are going to have to provide the whole build log to figure out why this is
happening.
Are you using a network mounted drive? If so do they have the time syncronized
between them.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100345
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |bootstrap
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100360
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100363
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note in the tar file there is only:
inffast2.s inffast2.s.aarch64.gcc10.O3 inffast2.s.aarch64.gcc9.O3
inffast2.s.arc.gcc10.O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100363
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100363
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100363
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100377
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||94173, 90216
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100377
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
OTOH, things seems OK on ppc64:
and x86_64:
Because both of those have redzones in their stack ABI.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100379
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Please also report this upstream.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100378
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[Regression 9/10/11/12] |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100378
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-05-02
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100386
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100190
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||f4bug at amsat dot org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85185
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
--- Comment #11 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100178
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |inline-asm
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100190
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
#define S390EP 0x10008
memset((char *)S390EP, 0, 6);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100305
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is one slightly more reduced testcase:typedef struct {
int g[3];
int h[3];
} i;
i j;
double k;
int l;
void w(void *);
void x(char);
void u(void *, void *);
void m() {
char a[4096], o[4096],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100301
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97756
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dushistov at mail dot ru
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100305
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100253
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100241
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #6)
> Fixed by r11-7864. Not sure if we want this test. It doesn't contain
> __fp16 like the test in r11-7864.
PR 99787 also has a testcase that could be done too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100240
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://www.frisky.world/20 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100363
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Vineet Gupta from comment #15)
> The problem is is indeed gone. I need to analyze the assembly fully how it
> prevents the bad case. e.g. I'm still not comfortable seeing the loop
> entered
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100403
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note, the following condition in the if statement
if (x.rec <= msg && msg < x.rec + sizeof(x))
Is undefined if msg is not in the range of x.rec[0]...x.rec[RECLEN] .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100391
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Component|target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100411
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100410
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think you need align(1) also and not just packed attribute.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100317
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95810
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
Summary|Spurious UBSan
601 - 700 of 23689 matches
Mail list logo