: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
Unlike PR88686, it happens at -Og.
The correct value of j should be 5. At "-Og", gdb prints "j = 2" incorrectly.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Using built-in specs.
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88730
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
It appears to be a regression in 8.X.
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It incorrectly prints "l = 0" at -O1. CC'ing alex..
$ gcc-trunk -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc-trunk
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/absozero/trunk/root-g
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
I have reported this bug at gdb
bugzilla(https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24032). However, it
appears to be a gcc bug. I can reproduce the bug with &quo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88686
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
The output should be "j=0". However, it incorrectly prints "j=1" at -O1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89528
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qrzhang at gatech dot edu
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88730
--- Comment #4 from Qirun Zhang ---
Bisection points to r254888.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89791
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89792
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89530
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qrzhang at gatech dot edu
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #9 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> Patch posted here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg01192.html
>
> Some of your bugs might turn out as duplicates if they are fixed by that
> patch.
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects gcc-6 to gcc-trunk. gcc-5 works fine.
Bisect points to r222305.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 9.0.1 20190322 (experimental) [trunk revision 269869] (GCC)
$ gdb -v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
Bisection points to r216247.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89529
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qrzhang at gatech dot edu
--- Comment #3
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects gcc-8 to trunk. Gcc-7 works fine.
Bisection points to r247596.
The correct value is "i=830100328". However, with "-Og", gdb outputs
"i
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It bug affects the latest trunk.
It also affects gcc-8 to gcc-4.8.
With "-Og", it incorrectly prints "l=0".
$ gcc-trunk -v
Using built-in specs.
C
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It bug affects the latest trunk.
It also affects gcc-8 and gcc-7.
gcc-6 works fine.
With "-O3", it incorrectly prints "i=0".
$ gcc-trunk -v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> What is happening is the empty loop is being removed and not replaced with a
> debug statement say i is 6 afterwards. I don't know if this is a good idea
> to put
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #4 from Qirun Zhang ---
Bisect points to r151362.
commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
Author: aoliva
Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
* toplev.c (process_options): Enable var-tracking-assignments
by
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects gcc-4.6 to gcc-trunk. The expected output is "i=7" or . With "-O3", it outputs "i=0".
I am using two files since "noipa&qu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89454
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
Bisect points to r151362.
commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
Author: aoliva
Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
* toplev.c (process_options): Enable var-tracking-assignments
by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #5 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #4)
> Bisect points to r151362.
>
> commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
> Author: aoliva
> Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
>
> * toplev.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #6 from Qirun Zhang ---
As mentioned in my earlier comment, the revision should be between gcc-5 and
gcc-6.
Bisect points to r239357.
commit ec969ce4161538b561592a032eca6dcfaf513596
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Aug 11 09:02:04
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89454
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #1)
> Bisect points to r151362.
>
> commit ff79704e04af919c4fe501c7dceca8b21cced614
> Author: aoliva
> Date: Thu Sep 3 05:24:57 2009 +
>
> * toplev.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89792
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
This might be a latent issue.
Attaching my gcc version:
$ gcc-trunk -v
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.1 20190321 (experimental) [trunk revision 269832] (GCC)
$ gcc-7 -v
Thread model: posix
gcc version
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects gcc-8 and gcc-trunk. gcc-7 works fine.
The testcase looks similar to Bug 89463. But they affect different gcc versions
and bisect points to different revisions
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It seems to be a recent regression, starting at r269302.
It only affects "-O3" and trunk.
The correct value is "l=0". With -O3, it generates l=8.
$ gcc-
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It's a latent issue which affects 4.8-6, and 8-trunk. Gcc-7 works fine.
It happens at -O3 only. Bisect between gcc-7 and gcc-8 points to r255267.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 9.0.1 20190412
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90017
--- Comment #3 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #2)
> This odd behavior is an artifact of the way GCC lays out the basic blocks,
> and how GDB interprets the line number program.
>
> The blocks containing the
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
This is a recent regression. Gcc-8 works fine. Bisect points to r271553.
The expected value of "j" should be 8. With optimization, it prints "0".
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects the trunk at "-O3". The expected output is "105487". However, at
-O3, it prints "40369".
Bisect points to r270902.
$ gcc-trunk
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
This is a recent regression. Gcc-8 works fine. Bisect points to r260253.
The expected value of "l_90" should be 852. With optimization, it prints "-1
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
This issue is similar to bug 90074 --- same flag, same gcc versions. The
bisection also points to r255267. It appears that the issue remains after the
patch.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 9.0.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92444
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It seems to be a recent regression. gcc-9 works fine.
The expected output is 1. With "-O2" and "-O3", gdb outputs 8.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Suppo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92417
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92387
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It seems to be a recent regression. gcc-9 works fine.
The expected value of i should be 0 or opt-out. However, with "-O1", gdb
outputs "i=1".
$ gcc-t
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It happens at O2 only. "-O1" and "-O3" works fine. It's a recent regression
since "gcc-9 -O2" also works.
The expected value of l_1162[0][0]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92468
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects the trunk and both 8 and 9 releases. Gcc-7 works fine.
The expected output is k=0 or opt-out. With O2 and O3, gdb outputs k=1.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression.
My bisect points to g:82e8e335f917b9ce40801838c (needs double check).
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1 20200225 (experimental
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression. Gcc-9 works fine. It happens at -Og only.
Bisection points to g:ec8ac265ff21fb379ac072848561a91e4990c47f
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a regression in gcc-9.
bisection points to g:36f6476b80ca559ff0fc436d2ab84130b
The value of l at line 11 is 153. At -Og it generates l=0. O3 and O2 works
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93954
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> >Bisection points to g:bd2b9f1e2d67ec8e88c977154ecfee
>
> My bet is if you put a break point at "i--;" you would get the incorrect
> answer before that patch.
>
: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a regression in gcc-8. The code is pretty self-explanatory.
Bisection points to g:bd2b9f1e2d67ec8e88c977154ecfee
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93586
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> (In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #0)
> > commit ede31f6ffe73357705e95016046e77c7e3d6ad13
> > Author: Jan Hubicka
> > Date: Tue Oct 1 21:46:09 2019 +0200
>
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
The master branch version of gcc miscompiles the code at -O1 and above.
It seems to be a recent regression. gcc-9 works fine.
Bisection points to:
commit
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a regression in 9.x. Gcc-8.3 works fine.
Bisection points to: g:be43a8877e2f2f4590ba667b27a24a0cfdf8141d
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1 20200218
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a regression in 8.X. Gcc-7.4 works fine.
Bisection points to: g:a57776a11369621f9e9e8a8a3db6cb406c8bf27b
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1 20200216
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
A recent regression. Gcc-9 works fine.
Bisection points to g:6271dd984d7f920d4fb17ad37af6a1f8e6b796dc
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1 20200219 (experimental) [master
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a regression in 9. Gcc-8.3 works fine.
Bisection points to g:8f70fdc31a7b0099e7322d0aba94830fb08f4c88
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1 20200310
: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It's a recent regression. Bisection points to g:529ea7d9596b26ba103578eeab
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1 20200411 (experimental) [master revision
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It happens at -O0. gcc-9 works fine.
Bisection points to g:ca6c722561ce9b9dc7b59cfd9d2
The correct output is 1.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 10.0.1 20200422
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
Recent regression. Bisection points to g:b6ff3ddecfa93d53867afaaa078f85f
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 11.0.0 20200516 (experimental) [master revision
53b4d52f114
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
Recent regression. Bisection points to g:283cb9ea6293e813e4
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 11.0.0 20200510 (experimental) [master revision
4ae915cdbf0:8eedda9eef3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101025
--- Comment #8 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Fixed on trunk sofar. Keep more testcases coming ;) (I have a hunch this
> code has more issues...)
Thanks, Richard. Will do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101173
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:fbdec14e80e9399cd301ed3
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects gcc-8 to the trunk. Gcc-7.5.0 works.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210622 (experimental) [master revision
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It affects gcc-8 to the trunk. Gcc-7 works fine.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 12.0.0 20210609 (experimental) [master revision
174e75a2107:3b61ba37fe1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101105
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:f75211822f8d84bb706421
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a regression in 11.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/nethome/qzhang414/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression.
Bisection points to g:128f43cf679e51564202b41f23fae4146347f93d
$ gcc-trunk -v
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210611 (experimental) [master revision
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101031
Qirun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #1
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a regression in gcc-9. gcc-8 works fine.
$ gcc-trunk -O2 abc.c ; ./a.out
0
$ gcc-trunk abc.c ; ./a.out
30
$ gcc-8 -O2 abc.c ; ./a.out
30
$ cat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101972
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:a81e2c6240655f60a49c16e0d8bbfd2ba40bba51
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
Seems to be a recent regression.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 12.0.0 20210831 (experimental) [master revision
5e57bacf6f3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102149
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:89f33f44addbf9853bc3e6677d
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression. Note that -O2 works fine.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210713 (experimental
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101445
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:f75211822f8d84bb706421d3692e
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears a regression in gcc-10. gcc-9 works fine.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 12.0.0 20210812 (experimental) [master revision
01f8a8b48e5:0eb7800d242
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101885
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:529ea7d9596b26ba103578eeab448e9862a2d2c5
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression. Gcc-10 works fine.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 12.0.0 20210718 (experimental) [master revision
0103d18dfc9:a1cef02c5e3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101501
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:287522613d661b4c5ba8403b051eb470c1674cba
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
It appears to be a recent regression.
$ gcc-trunk -v
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210724 (experimental) [master revision
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101615
--- Comment #1 from Qirun Zhang ---
My bisection points to g:6df6055d5c666e669890ff8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108845
--- Comment #4 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> > I'm not convinced it is a good idea.
> > Sure, in the above case it is obvious it will never trigger, but if we say
: sanitizer
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at
gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone
Component: sanitizer
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at
gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone
Component: sanitizer
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at
gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108845
--- Comment #3 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> I'm not convinced it is a good idea.
> Sure, in the above case it is obvious it will never trigger, but if we say
> use ranger to decide if the operation can or
82 matches
Mail list logo
