-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following testcase emits a popcount which computes the final pointer value.
This is redundant given the loop already computes the pointer value. The
popcount causes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16996
Bug 16996 depends on bug 38570, which changed state.
Bug 38570 Summary: [arm] -mthumb generates sub-optimal prolog/epilog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38570
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38570
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38570
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12 from
||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #4 from Wilco ---
Works since at least GCC4.5.4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #9 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #7)
> Rather than unconditionally transforming mempcpy to memcpy I would prefer to
> see libc implementations of memccpy optimized. WG14 N2349 discusses a
> rationale for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #6 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #5)
> The discussion looks familiar to me. Isn't that PR70140, where I was
> suggesting something like:
>
> https://marc.info/?l=gcc-patches=150166433909242=2
>
> with a new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #18 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #14)
> Created attachment 46262 [details]
> Patch candidate
>
> Patch candidate that handles:
>
> $ cat ~/Programming/testcases/mempcpy.c
> int *mempcopy2 (int *p, int *q,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #17 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #16)
> (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #15)
> > I just noticed I have been misreading mempcpy as memccpy and so making no
> > sense. Sorry about that! Please ignore my
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90249
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #12 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #11)
> My concern is that transforming memccpy to memcpy would leave little
> incentive for libraries like glibc to provide a more optimal implementation.
> Would implementing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #16 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #15)
> I just noticed I have been misreading mempcpy as memccpy and so making no
> sense. Sorry about that! Please ignore my comments.
I see, yes we have too many and the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #20 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #19)
> Created attachment 46265 [details]
> Patch candidate v2
>
> Update patch that should be fine. Tests on x86_64 work except:
> FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87871
--- Comment #47 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #46)
> With all three patches together (Peter's, mine, Jakub's), I get a code size
> increase of only 0.047%, much more acceptable. Now looking what that diff
> really
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
While GCC now inlines fixed-size mempcpy like memcpy, GCC still emits calls to
mempcpy rather than converting to memcpy. Since most libraries, including
GLIBC, do not have optimized
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
GCC does not inline fixed-size memmoves. However memmove can be as easily
inlined as memcpy. The existing memcpy infrastructure could be reused/expanded
for this - all loads would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #2 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> As stated several times in the past, I strongly disagree.
Why? GCC already does this for bzero and bcopy.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90263
--- Comment #4 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Because then you penalize properly maintained targets which do have
> efficient mempcpy. And even if some targets don't have efficient mempcpy
> right now, that doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90883
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14 from
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The new gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-14.c test produces incorrect reduction due to the
vectorizer adding fmax (result, FLT_MAX):
float b[1024], a[1024];
__attribute__((noipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91096
--- Comment #3 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Created attachment 46561 [details]
> gcc10-pr91096.patch
>
> Does this fix it for you? Works for me with:
> make check-gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90883
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Since r273294 SPEC2000 176.gcc fails with -O3 -DSPEC_CPU2000_LP64
-DSPEC_CPU2000_LINUX -std=gnu89:
Running Benchmarks
Running 176.gcc ref base ab default
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78529
--- Comment #41 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Fri Jul 12 16:41:01 2019
New Revision: 273450
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273450=gcc=rev
Log:
Turn off ipa-ra in builtins test (PR91059)
The gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78529
--- Comment #42 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Fri Jul 12 17:00:40 2019
New Revision: 273452
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273452=gcc=rev
Log:
Turn off ipa-ra in builtins test (PR91059)
The gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78529
--- Comment #44 from Wilco ---
Backported fix to all active branches so this should never fail again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78529
--- Comment #43 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Fri Jul 12 17:15:13 2019
New Revision: 273453
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273453=gcc=rev
Log:
Turn off ipa-ra in builtins test (PR91059)
The gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
--- Comment #15 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> Yeah. It is
>
>[local count: 178992762]:
> arr = *.LC0;
> arr[0] = 5;
> vect__56.15_75 = MEM [(int *)];
>
> I'll fix that (well, I'll try).
Right, it's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #19 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91059
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #40 from Wilco ---
Fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91059
--- Comment #3 from Wilco ---
Confirmed it's the same memset register corruption issue. The fix is trivial:
add -fno-ipa-ra.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78529
--- Comment #39 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Mon Jul 8 17:02:35 2019
New Revision: 273238
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273238=gcc=rev
Log:
Turn of ipa-ra in builtins test (PR91059)
The gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91059
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Mon Jul 8 17:02:35 2019
New Revision: 273238
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273238=gcc=rev
Log:
Turn of ipa-ra in builtins test (PR91059)
The gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib directory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85711
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85711
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Mon Jul 15 11:00:48 2019
New Revision: 273491
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273491=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport fix for PR85711
Backport from mainline
2019-01-23 Bin Cheng
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88834
--- Comment #16 from Wilco ---
(In reply to kugan from comment #15)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #11)
> > There is also something odd with the way the loop iterates, this doesn't
> > look right:
> >
> > whilelo p0.s, x3, x4
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89190
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89222
--- Comment #10 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Jul 16 12:37:14 2019
New Revision: 273526
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273526=gcc=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix PR89222
The GCC optimizer can generate symbols with non-zero offset from simple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89222
--- Comment #11 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Jul 16 13:13:26 2019
New Revision: 273527
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273527=gcc=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix PR89222
The GCC optimizer can generate symbols with non-zero offset from simple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89190
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Jul 16 12:06:55 2019
New Revision: 273524
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273524=gcc=rev
Log:
Add missing testcase for PR89190
testsuite/
PR target/89190
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89222
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89190
--- Comment #7 from Wilco ---
Backported to GCC8 branch, and added missing testcase to trunk and GCC9. All
fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89190
--- Comment #6 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Jul 16 12:12:01 2019
New Revision: 273525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273525=gcc=rev
Log:
Add missing testcase for PR89190
testsuite/
PR target/89190
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89190
--- Comment #4 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Jul 16 12:00:42 2019
New Revision: 273523
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273523=gcc=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix Thumb-1 ldm (PR89190)
This patch fixes an ICE in the Thumb-1 LDM peepholer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89222
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |7.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90684
--- Comment #4 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Jul 16 16:17:39 2019
New Revision: 273533
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273533=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix alignment option parser (PR90684)
Fix the alignment option parser to always allow up
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90684
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91386
--- Comment #22 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #21)
> Fixed on trunk.
I ran an AArch64 bootstrap on GCC9 branch and that is fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
--- Comment #17 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Tue Aug 13 10:46:44 2019
New Revision: 274376
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274376=gcc=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Fix PR81800
PR81800 is about the lrint inline giving spurious FE_INEXACT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10 regression] on
|NEW
Last reconfirmed||2019-08-30
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Maxim Kuvyrkov from comment #2)
> Created attachm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83661
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83661
--- Comment #9 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Christophe Monat from comment #4)
> Hi Pratamesh,
>
> You're absolutely right - maybe it's more efficient when there is some
> hardware sincos available (Intel FSINCOS ?) but I would check also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
--- Comment #19 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Wed Sep 4 12:42:22 2019
New Revision: 275373
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275373=gcc=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Fix PR81800
PR81800 is about the lrint inline giving spurious FE_INEXACT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
--- Comment #20 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:06:55 2019
New Revision: 275374
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275374=gcc=rev
Log:
[AArch64] Fix PR81800
PR81800 is about the lrint inline giving spurious FE_INEXACT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
--- Comment #21 from Wilco ---
Backported to GCC8 and GCC9 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81800
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following small example fails with an ICE with -mcpu=cortex-a57:
typedef struct { int a, b, c; } S;
void g (S *s);
void bug1 (void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91684
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91753
--- Comment #4 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > > lower-subreg should have be able to help here. I wonder why it did not
> > >
: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following example shows that register allocation of types which require
multiple registers is quite non-optimal:
#include
#include
void neon_transform_nada(const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #2 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #1)
> Oh, nice, could you say what config options you use?
The full set I used:
${src}/configure --disable-libsanitizer --enable-languages=c,c++
--prefix=${install}
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Arm bootstrap still fails with latest trunk when configured with
--with-cpu=cortex-a57:
gcc/gcc/real.c:5240:1: internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #11 from Wilco ---
Created attachment 46862
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46862=edit
Reproducer
g++ -mcpu=cortex-a57 -mfpu=fp-armv8 out.c -O2 -c reproduces the issue outside
of a bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #13 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #12)
> Created attachment 46863 [details]
> untested patch
>
> That was easy :-)
> I have been there before...
Great! That bootstraps successfully now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91776
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91766
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91766
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575
--- Comment #20 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #19)
> (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #18)
> > This is still wrong with current trunk.
>
> I don't see it happening since expansion of DImode instructions improved.
> The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91690
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #8 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #7)
> without looking in detail, this could
> be another middle-end error or the back-end
> generating an invalid instruction where no assertions
> are, then lra can rewrite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #4)
> (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #3)
> > I will try to reproduce with building of a cross for this target.
>
> FWIW, cross-build looked fine for me at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #18 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #17)
> So do we have a testcase that shows the problem on older compilers?
Yes, the same testcase shows the same incorrect substitution in older
compilers. I tried GCC9,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91776
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #20 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #19)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #18)
> > (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #17)
> > > So do we have a testcase that shows the problem on older compilers?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #22 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #21)
> But dropping in a char* will give a more restrictive alias set, so that
> isn't wrong, even if it is suboptimal
The alias set could be anything given CSE changes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91738
--- Comment #2 from Wilco ---
Author: wilco
Date: Wed Sep 18 19:52:09 2019
New Revision: 275907
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275907=gcc=rev
Log:
[ARM] Add logical DImode expanders
We currently use default mid-end expanders for logical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #16 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #15)
> So is this now fixed?
On trunk yes. This is quite a nasty alias bug in CSE, so it will need to be
backported.
||2019-09-11
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91386
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91386
--- Comment #14 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #13)
> >
> > The key question is how does one dump rtl with -flto? It doesn't work at
> > all, making debugging this difficult...
>
> It does, look:
>
>
||2019-08-09
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #7 from Wilco ---
I'll have a look at this, I think it could easily be done in match.pd if we add
support for matching array
||2019-08-09
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91144
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The new alias-4_0.C fails on Arm. Without LTO it also fails with -O2 on
AArch64, but it fails with -O2 and -O3 on Arm, so something must be different.
Unfortunately even
dot gnu.org |wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|[7/8/9/10] ICE for arm |[7/8/9] ICE for arm sha1h
|sha1h and wrong |and wrong optimisations on
|optimisations on|sha1h/c/m/p
|sha1h/c/m/p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90883
--- Comment #17 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #16)
> The issue here (of course) is that aarch64 has a different set of defaults
> for when to open-code vs loop vs function call. My attempts to pick a
> better size for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91176
--- Comment #2 from Wilco ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #1)
> Dramantic differences in file size are expected, since stage2 is built with
> -gtoggle (to suppress debug info) whereas stage 3 is built normally. One of
> the
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Since r273479 bootstrap fails with this error on AArch64:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/aarch64.o differs
gcc/dwarf2out.o differs
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91738
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Wilco ---
Fixed
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
gcc.c-torture/execute/pr31448-2.c generates incorrect code due to a recent
change with -O2 -mbig-endian on AArch64. fre3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92425
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92294
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92294
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91927
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from
401 - 500 of 701 matches
Mail list logo
