http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55350
--- Comment #2 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-18
15:04:27 UTC ---
I'm on vacation this week, but I'll have a look when I get back on the 26th.
Sorry for the delay!
Bill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55975
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55975
--- Comment #37 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-24 13:30:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #36)
Bill, tests in Instrumentation/AddressSanitizer are compiler-only tests
and thus are mostly platform independent
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56843
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Oct 21 21:40:14 2013
New Revision: 203910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203910root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc:
2013-10-21 Bill Schmidt wschm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
vect-96.c is still broken per
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2013-10/msg02115.html.
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect Vectorizing an unaligned
access 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks, Richi -- yes, I'll give this a try later today (lots of meetings in the
way but I'll get to it sooner or later).
Bill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #14 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Richi,
Passes bootstrap on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu and fixes this test, but breaks
two others:
57,60c57,68
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks, testing in progress.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Initial news is not good -- I am seeing a lot of ICEs go by as the testing
proceeds, including in vect-96.c and vect-42.c.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #18 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
spawn /home/wschmidt/gcc/build/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/xgcc -B/home/wschmidt/gcc
/build/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/ /home/wschmidt/gcc/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/testsu
ite/gcc.dg/vect/vect
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50180
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50181
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54211
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54211
--- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-09
21:06:22 UTC ---
Ah, actually we're generating a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR when a PLUS_EXPR is called
for. I see what's going on, shouldn't be hard to fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54211
--- Comment #4 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-10
01:14:41 UTC ---
The following patch is tested and awaiting approval:
Index: gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54215
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54211
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54211
--- Comment #6 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-10
12:16:11 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Aug 10 12:16:04 2012
New Revision: 190294
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190294
Log:
gcc:
2012-08-10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54211
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54211
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
--- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-13
14:14:59 UTC ---
Odd, I don't know. I'll have to go back and look at the tests when I get a
moment and investigate that. Peculiar.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
--- Comment #5 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-13
14:24:48 UTC ---
Well, I'm embarrassed. The tests I wrote for this functionality never got into
the test suite -- I apparently forgot to submit them with the patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54245
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
--- Comment #7 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-13
20:39:59 UTC ---
Something else is broken, too, as the optab handlers for cmov on powerpc64
appear to have gone missing. I'll get one of our back-end specialists
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
--- Comment #9 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-14
11:44:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
(In reply to comment #7)
Something else is broken, too, as the optab handlers for cmov on powerpc64
appear to have gone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54245
--- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-14
12:34:24 UTC ---
I'm putting together a for-now patch that disables the optimization when a
widening cast produces the stride. In the long run this can be re-enabled
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
--- Comment #11 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-14 19:48:40 UTC ---
Well. It turns out that cmov_optab was a red herring. Apparently no ports are
generating this, and actually movcc_optab is what's being used instead
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
--- Comment #12 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-15 13:17:47 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Aug 15 13:17:42 2012
New Revision: 190411
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190411
Log:
gcc:
2012-08-15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54240
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54245
--- Comment #4 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-15
13:27:38 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Aug 15 13:27:29 2012
New Revision: 190412
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190412
Log:
gcc:
2012-08-15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54245
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54245
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54492
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54563
--- Comment #6 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-14
18:25:52 UTC ---
I tend to agree; this isn't the only place in the middle-end this could cause
trouble. The handling of pow/powf in reassociation comes to mind
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54674
--- Comment #6 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-24
01:38:37 UTC ---
Andrew, thanks for chasing this down. I'll have a look.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54674
--- Comment #7 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-24
18:35:41 UTC ---
I'm working on a patch to avoid introducing a multiply by a pointer type, such
as happened here.
The interesting thing is that this doesn't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54674
--- Comment #9 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-24
20:32:34 UTC ---
To be clear, SLSR doesn't rely on mult costs being greater than int costs -- it
simply trusts that the given costs are accurate and makes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54674
--- Comment #11 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-09-26 16:49:45 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Sep 26 16:49:32 2012
New Revision: 191765
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=191765
Log:
2012
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54674
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55008
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55008
--- Comment #4 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-22
15:41:41 UTC ---
Simple enough. The statement has two interpretations and one looks like a
basis for the other. Surprised this never came up before. Adding
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55008
--- Comment #5 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-22
22:09:29 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Oct 22 22:09:22 2012
New Revision: 192696
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192696
Log:
gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55008
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
--- Comment #5 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-14
14:43:29 UTC ---
Actually I might be wrong about that, now that I think about it -- probably
this was done in 4.8. It seems longer ago than that. ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
--- Comment #6 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-14
20:11:32 UTC ---
Odd. Reassociation makes a correct and profitable transformation into
foo (int n)
{
double _2;
double _5;
double _6;
double _7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
--- Comment #10 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-15 15:13:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
(In reply to comment #7)
I see. The problem is a memory VUSE on the return statement that no longer
has
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56321
--- Comment #11 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-02-15 15:49:03 UTC ---
OK, got it. I was on the right track, there were just several locations where
it could happen and I missed one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56605
Bug #: 56605
Summary: Redundant branch introduced during loop2 phases
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35308
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56843
Bug #: 56843
Summary: PowerPC Newton-Raphson reciprocal estimates can be
improved
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56843
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-04
16:12:31 UTC ---
Regarding the last point, I found this in the user manual:
The double-precision square root estimate instructions are not generated by
default
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56843
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-05
15:03:26 UTC ---
Looks like we can improve performance for three cases on P6 and later machines:
- 32-bit reciprocal square root: remove two instructions
- 32-bit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56843
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56933
Bug #: 56933
Summary: [4.9 Regression] Vectorizer missing read-write
dependency for interleaved accesses
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56962
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-15
13:19:53 UTC ---
The fix looks correct to me. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56605
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56605
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56864
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56864
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-01
20:13:35 UTC ---
If possible, please check whether this began failing with r196872. That commit
looks suspicious for at least one other test. I'm stabbing in the dark
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-02
15:27:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Correct. Dumping order is affected by the patch though, thus if
we previously disabled vectorization at some point
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-02
15:29:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 30001
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30001
Vectorization details dump for r196871
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-02
15:29:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 30002
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30002
Vectorization details dump for r196872
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56864
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57154
Bug #: 57154
Summary: [4.9 Regression] Bootstrap broken for
powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57154
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-03
11:45:06 UTC ---
There is a powerpc64 pool machine available. I believe it's gcc110.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57154
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-03
17:32:05 UTC ---
Teresa, thanks for the prompt fix!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57154
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57192
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-07
18:23:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 30047
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30047
Proposed patch
Hi Joost,
Can you please apply the proposed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57192
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57192
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-07
20:13:10 UTC ---
Ah, and thanks for noting the compile warning. I would have expected that to
get caught in bootstrap, odd. I'll fix that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57203
--- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-05-08
17:52:20 UTC ---
I can't reproduce this with an x86_64 cross-compiler today, using r198713.
Could you please verify this still fails natively with at least r198709? I
hope
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57192
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #0)
when compiled at -O3 . Compiling with 4.8 branch, or 4.9 and -O2 doesn't
cause this behavior.
I just want to point out that SLSR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57192
--- Comment #14 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Of course, there can be secondary effects that cause SLSR to kick in with
different intermediate code, but it's something to consider.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57192
--- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I was able to download your code, and I can't reproduce the problem on
powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu with current trunk.
-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
Host: powerpc*-*-*
Target: powerpc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57309
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
Can you isolate a testcase for the worst loop?
Not yet. It's one of these horrible gargantuan functions (leslie3d is one big
file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47197
--- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-24
01:12:07 UTC ---
Thanks, Joseph -- I'll get that fixed up. Appreciate the help.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47197
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |wschmidt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47197
--- Comment #4 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-24
15:52:04 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Tue Apr 24 15:51:58 2012
New Revision: 186771
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186771
Log:
gcc:
2012-04-24
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47197
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41743
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53106
--- Comment #8 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-03
15:16:39 UTC ---
FWIW, I verified that Honza's proposed patch fixes the build problems for
483.xlancbmk and 32-bit 447.dealII on powerpc-linux. Any ETA for getting
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53217
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53217
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53217
--- Comment #5 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-16
14:39:40 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed May 16 14:39:32 2012
New Revision: 187595
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187595
Log:
gcc:
2012-05-16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53217
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
Bug #: 53385
Summary: Error: operand out of range after changes for
LSHIFT_EXPR in vrp.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53388
Bug #: 53388
Summary: Removal of build_min_nt breaks bootstrap for objc++
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
--- Comment #8 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-18
03:42:46 UTC ---
I suspect you're right. I'll have a look at it tomorrow.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
--- Comment #12 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-18 14:05:06 UTC ---
Created attachment 27433
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27433
Tentative patch
Tentative patch following Jakub's suggestion
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53438
--- Comment #1 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-21
15:17:49 UTC ---
Created attachment 27462
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27462
Unreduced testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53438
--- Comment #2 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-21
15:21:19 UTC ---
Whoops, left off the compile command:
g++ -o YarrPattern.o -S -O3 ./YarrPattern.ii
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53438
Bug #: 53438
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Bitfield store replaced with
full-byte store
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
1 - 100 of 1696 matches
Mail list logo
