[Bug fortran/95373] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in build_reference_type, at tree.c:7942

2020-05-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95373 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/95406] New: [11 regression] vshift-5.c fails since g:e31cd607e999ca6ab47b7e65a7045b1594e4fba4

2020-05-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since g:e31cd607e999ca6ab47b7e65a7045b1594e4fba4 I've noticed gcc.dg/vshift-5.c (internal compiler error

[Bug tree-optimization/95363] New: [11 regression] bb-slp-pr95271.c fails on arm since gc0e27f72358794692e367363940c6383e9ad1e45

2020-05-27 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since gc0e27f72358794692e367363940c6383e9ad1e45, I've noticed that gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-pr95271.c

[Bug other/95362] [11 regression] pr34457-1.c and pr92088-1.c fail on arm and aarch64 since ga746f952abb78af9db28a7f3bce442e113877c9c

2020-05-27 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95362 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[11 regression] pr34457-1.c |[11 regression] pr34457-1.c

[Bug other/95362] New: [11 regression] pr34457-1.c fails on arm since ga746f952abb78af9db28a7f3bce442e113877c9c

2020-05-27 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, since ga746f952abb78af9db28a7f3bce442e113877c9c, I've noticed that pr34457-1.c fails on arm and aarch64

[Bug tree-optimization/95273] [11 regression] many ICEs after r11-564

2020-05-26 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95273 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-14 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #19 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #8) > Patch sent: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/544872.html > > This is a simple improvement, hopefully simple enough for stage 4, yet >

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-14 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #18 from Christophe Lyon --- > I'm working on this, and just realized that this also means saving FPSR. It > seems there's no support for that yet in arm.md (unlike aarch64.md), am I > missing something? > Sorry, I see it's called

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-13 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #17 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #10) > (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #9) > > > My initial thoughts are along the lines of... > > > Only try to save FP registers that this function

[Bug target/95056] New: slp-perm-9.c fails on aarch64 after gbc484e250990393e887f7239157cc85ce6fadcce

2020-05-11 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, I've noticed that FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-9.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-times vect "permut

[Bug target/95055] New: gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-3 fails on aarch64 after r11-165-geb72dc663e9070b281be83a80f6f838a3a878822

2020-05-11 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, After r11-165-geb72dc663e9070b281be83a80f6f838a3a878822, I've noticed that scalar-by-value-3

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-05 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #16 from Christophe Lyon --- Another potential issue just came to my mind: what if the IRQ handler is compiled with -mfloat-abi=soft but calls a function compiled with -mfloat-abi=softfp? We have no way to guess that the FP registers

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-05 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon --- > Well obviously that won't work. But if you build the interrupt routine with > a d16 system and then call a function from it that requires d32 then that > should still work if running on a d32 CPU.

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-04 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon --- > > Why do we need a library function for that? It would have to be special with > > the stack: push FP registers, but do not restore SP, so that the dual > > restore function can pop them and restore

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-04 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #11 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #10) > (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #9) > > > My initial thoughts are along the lines of... > > > Only try to save FP registers that this function

[Bug c++/94896] [10/11 regression] ICE: canonical types differ for identical types

2020-05-04 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94896 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-05-04 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon --- > My initial thoughts are along the lines of... > Only try to save FP registers that this function directly clobbers. What's the point of saving these if a callee clobbers other registers? Shouldn't that

[Bug target/94538] [9/10 Regression] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2223 (insn does not satisfy its constraints) with -mcpu=cortex-m23 -mslow-flash-data

2020-04-30 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||9.2.0 --- Comment #18 from Christophe

[Bug testsuite/94763] UNRESOLVED scan assembler tests on arm-none-eabi

2020-04-30 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94763 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to vvinayag from comment #2) > Sorry for the late reply. > The tests appear to pass when I invoke them locally. They only failed as > part of our buildbot run tests. It could be a glitch in our

[Bug target/57002] ARM back end has extra entries in attribute interrupt array.

2020-04-30 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57002 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-04-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- Patch sent: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/544872.html This is a simple

[Bug target/57002] ARM back end has extra entries in attribute interrupt array.

2020-04-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57002 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-04-28 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- If we consider the initial testcase, it doesn't clobber any FP register directly, but the compiler inserts a call to memcpy which does. So IIUC your 1st suggestion, it would mean: - save no FP register in

[Bug target/94820] New: pr94780.c fails with ICE on aarch64

2020-04-28 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, The new gcc.dg/pr94780.c test causes an ICE on aarch64: /gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr94780.c: In function 'foo': /gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr94780.c:8:1: internal compiler error

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-04-28 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-04-28 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- Maybe we could - save the VFP registers as needed by default - emit a warning "IRQ handler 'foo' saves VFP registers because it is not a leaf function. If you know none of the callees will clobber the VFP

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-04-27 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- I have a preliminary patch which generates: vpush.64{d0, d1, d2, d3, d4, d5, d6, d7} vpush.64{d16, d17, d18, d19, d20, d21, d22, d23, d24, d25, d26, d27, d28, d29, d30, d31}

[Bug target/94743] IRQ handler doesn't save scratch VFP registers

2020-04-27 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- clang has implemented a warning for this case: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28820

[Bug target/94697] aarch64: bti j at function start instead of bti c

2020-04-27 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94697 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug testsuite/94763] UNRESOLVED scan assembler tests on arm-none-eabi

2020-04-26 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94763 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/94743] New: IRQ handler implementation wrong when using __attribute__ ((interrupt("IRQ")))

2020-04-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, As described in https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5614: IRQ implementation when using __attribute__ (

[Bug rtl-optimization/70164] [8/9/10 Regression] Code/performance regression due to poor register allocation on Cortex-M0

2020-04-21 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70164 --- Comment #26 from Christophe Lyon --- For what CPU did you configure GCC? With today's trunk I still see the same code as in comment #24. I can get the same code as you have in comment #25 if I force -mcpu=cortex-a9. The bug report is about

[Bug target/94604] support for the ETSI basic operations

2020-04-21 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94604 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- I think this is provided by arm_acle.h: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob;f=gcc/config/arm/arm_acle.h;h=6b08ffd4174c8d829fe5730f99cd8f28e300afab;hb=HEAD You can see that saturating and DSP

[Bug target/94538] [10 Regression] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2223 (insn does not satisfy its constraints) with -mcpu=cortex-m23 -mslow-flash-data

2020-04-16 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538 --- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #14) > (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #11) > > (In reply to Wilco from comment #10) > > > Right, but the code is functional. > > It doesn't avoid the literal

[Bug target/94538] [10 Regression] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2223 (insn does not satisfy its constraints) with -mcpu=cortex-m23 -mslow-flash-data

2020-04-16 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538 --- Comment #12 from Christophe Lyon --- I've posted a patch to fix the regression for your f3() examples: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/543993.html

[Bug c++/94608] New: Fix for PR94426 causes a regression in g++.dg/lto/pr83720 on arm

2020-04-15 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, The recent fix for PR94426 (g8d213cbbe1856e6088282aa0076646cec694b030) causes regressions on arm: g++.dg/lto/pr83720

[Bug target/94538] [10 Regression] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2223 (insn does not satisfy its constraints) with -mcpu=cortex-m23 -mslow-flash-data

2020-04-14 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538 --- Comment #11 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Wilco from comment #10) > > For example: > > int x; > int f1 (void) { return x; } > > with eg. -O2 -mcpu=cortex-m0 -mpure-code I get: > > movsr3, #:upper8_15:#.LC1 >

[Bug target/94595] New: gcc.target/arm/thumb2-cond-cmp-*.c fail for cortex-m

2020-04-14 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that gcc.target/arm/thumb2-cond-cmp-*.c fail when targeting cortex-M CPUs. For thumb2-cond-cmp-1.c, the code generated at svn r196196 for cortex-m3 was: f

[Bug target/94576] Regression build newlib for Arm

2020-04-14 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94576 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Target|aarch64 |arm Summary|Regression

[Bug target/94538] [10 Regression] ICE: in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2223 (insn does not satisfy its constraints) with -mcpu=cortex-m23 -mslow-flash-data

2020-04-14 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- > Adding Christophe. I'm thinking the best approach right now is to revert > given -mpure-code doesn't work at all on Thumb-1 targets - it still emits > literal pools, switch tables etc. That's not pure

[Bug target/94576] Regression build newlib for Arm64

2020-04-14 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94576 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/82038] Very poor optimization of constant multiply on ARM Cortex-M7

2020-04-10 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82038 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/70164] [8/9/10 Regression] Code/performance regression due to poor register allocation on Cortex-M0

2020-04-10 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70164 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/56550] cortex-m3: incorrect write to member of volatile packed structure

2020-04-10 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56550 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug testsuite/94547] New: gcc.target/arm/acle/cde.c fails on armeb

2020-04-10 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
: testsuite Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that gcc.target/arm/acle/cde.c fails on armeb-none-linux-gnueabihf. gcc.target/arm/acle/cde.c -O1 check-function-bodies test_cde_cx1da gcc.target/arm

[Bug target/52565] __builtin_va_arg(va, double); may fail on cortex-m3

2020-04-09 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Ravaz from comment #0) [...] > The instruction at 0x810c forces the address used for the ldrd to be > alligned to an 8 bytes bo

[Bug target/94531] New: gcc.target/arm/its.c fails for cortex-m3

2020-04-08 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that gcc.target/arm/its.c fails when targetting cortex-m3 or m33, but that's probably true with all cortex-m versions. The code generated at r206697 (just before

[Bug tree-optimization/91322] [10 regression] alias-4 test failure

2020-04-03 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48185 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48185=edit qemu execution trace

[Bug tree-optimization/91322] [10 regression] alias-4 test failure

2020-04-03 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48184 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48184=edit GCC passes dumps

[Bug tree-optimization/91322] [10 regression] alias-4 test failure

2020-04-03 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322 --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48183 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48183=edit executable asm from objdump

[Bug tree-optimization/94043] [9 Regression] ICE in superloop_at_depth, at cfgloop.c:78

2020-04-02 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94043 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/94456] New: ICE in aarch64/sve/pr87815.c since r10-7491

2020-04-02 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Since r10-7491, I've noticed a regression with an ICE: FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/pr87815.c -march=armv8.2-a+sve (internal compiler error) /gcc/testsuite

[Bug target/94445] gcc.target/arm/cmse/cmse-15.c fails for cortex-m33

2020-04-02 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94445 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- I also checked that arm_handle_cmse_nonsecure_call correctly duplicates the type.

[Bug target/94445] New: gcc.target/arm/cmse/cmse-15.c fails for cortex-m33

2020-04-01 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that when GCC is configured --target arm-none-abi --with-mode=thumb --with-cpu=cortex-m33, the cmse-15.c test fails: FAIL: gcc.target/arm/cmse/cmse-15.c

[Bug tree-optimization/94401] pr92420.c fails on aarch64 since r10-7415

2020-03-30 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94401 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- The defaults are OK (either native or cross aarch64)

[Bug tree-optimization/90332] New test case gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-sad-2.c in r270847 fails

2020-03-30 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90332 --- Comment #12 from Christophe Lyon --- > Can you open a new bugreport? Sure, I filed PR94401

[Bug tree-optimization/94401] New: pr92420.c fails on aarch64 since r10-7415

2020-03-30 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I've noticed that the fix for PR90332 caused a regression on aarch64: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92420.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92420.c

[Bug tree-optimization/90332] New test case gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-sad-2.c in r270847 fails

2020-03-30 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90332 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/94339] [10 regression] ICE in tree_class_check_failed

2020-03-26 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94339 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 48123 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48123=edit ada-lang.ii.xz

[Bug middle-end/94339] New: [10 regression] ICE in tree_class_check_failed

2020-03-26 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Hi, I've noticed this ICE while building GDB with recent GCC trunk, it appeared between: r10-7336 and r10-7346 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-g++ -g -O2 -c ada-lang.ii

[Bug target/94317] gcc/config/arm/arm_mve.h:13907: strange assignment ?

2020-03-25 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94317 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/90378] [9/10 regression] -Os -flto miscompiles 454.calculix after r266385 on Arm

2020-03-13 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90378 --- Comment #10 from Christophe Lyon --- I checked the stack settings on the ARMv7 and ARMv8 machines: ARMv7: beced000-bed0e000 rw-p 00:00 0 [stack] ARMv8: fff12000-fff33000 rw-p 00:00 0 [stack] In both cases

[Bug rtl-optimization/90378] [9/10 regression] -Os -flto miscompiles 454.calculix after r266385 on Arm

2020-03-12 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90378 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- I also tried to run the program under QEMU, it works (doesn't crash)

[Bug rtl-optimization/90378] [9/10 regression] -Os -flto miscompiles 454.calculix after r266385 on Arm

2020-03-11 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- I am able to reproduce the failure with the same commit mentioned by Maxim in comment #3. Using a more

[Bug fortran/89661] FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_61.f90 -O (internal compiler error)

2020-02-28 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89661 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

2020-02-18 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- I added --enable-default-pie to my configure options, and it's still successful.

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

2020-02-18 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- It worked for me with gcc-8-branch at g:9eba9635f653291804ecb832eebe1ed96e3346ba Using: ../gcc/configure --with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16 --with-float=hard --with-mode=thumb

[Bug analyzer/93375] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3258

2020-02-10 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93375 --- Comment #8 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #7) > Does the patch in comment #6 fix the remaining test failures for everyone? It's OK for me on arm, thanks.

[Bug rtl-optimization/91333] [9/10 Regression] suboptimal register allocation for inline asm

2020-02-03 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91333 --- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #12) > (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #10) > > (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #9) > > > Fixed by Vlad's patch on the trunk. > > > > This

[Bug rtl-optimization/91333] [9/10 Regression] suboptimal register allocation for inline asm

2020-02-01 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91333 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/92706] SRA confuses FRE

2020-01-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92706 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/93473] ICE on valid with long module + submodule names

2020-01-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93473 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug analyzer/93375] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at gimple.h:3258

2020-01-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93375 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug testsuite/93391] [10 regression] new test cases c-c++-common/Wconversion-pr40752.c and pr40752a.c fail

2020-01-23 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93391 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/40752] -Wconversion generates false warnings for operands not larger than target type

2020-01-22 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40752 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/93263] [9/10 Regression] -fno-automatic and RECURSIVE

2020-01-20 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263 --- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon --- > Seen on arm too, both master and gcc-9 And aarch64 too.

[Bug fortran/93263] [9/10 Regression] -fno-automatic and RECURSIVE

2020-01-20 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/93135] New: g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist118.C fails on aarch64

2020-01-02 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- The test fails on aarch64: g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist118.C -std=c++14 (internal compiler error) g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist118.C -std=c++14 (test for excess errors) g++.dg

[Bug c/36941] gcc does not reject invalid cast

2019-12-06 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36941 --- Comment #11 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Fri Dec 6 10:54:46 2019 New Revision: 279039 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279039=gcc=rev Log: [testsuite][aarch64] type_redef_11.c: Update expected diagnostics. After the

[Bug c/88827] Rejects valid program using &* operator combination.

2019-12-06 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88827 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- Author: clyon Date: Fri Dec 6 10:54:46 2019 New Revision: 279039 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279039=gcc=rev Log: [testsuite][aarch64] type_redef_11.c: Update expected diagnostics. After the fix

[Bug tree-optimization/92822] New: regressions on aarch64 after r278938

2019-12-05 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- After commit r278938, I've noticed regressions on aarch64: FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/fmla_intrinsic_1.c scan-assembler-times fmla\\tv[0-9]+.2s, v[0-9]+.2s, v[0-9]+.2s\\[[0-9

[Bug tree-optimization/91975] worse code for small array copy using pointer arithmetic than array indexing

2019-11-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91975 Bug 91975 depends on bug 92047, which changed state. Bug 92047 Summary: [10 regression] aarch64 regressions after r276645 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92047 What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/92047] [10 regression] aarch64 regressions after r276645

2019-11-29 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92047 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/91612] [10 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/aapcs/align4.c ICE after r274986

2019-11-22 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91612 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/91613] [10 regression][arm] gcc.dg/pr83930.c ICE since r274986

2019-11-22 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91613 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/91615] [10 regression][armeb] ICEs since r274986

2019-11-22 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91615 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/92473] test pr92324-2.c fails on arm and aarch64

2019-11-12 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92473 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47218 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47218=edit Execution trace for arm

[Bug target/92473] test pr92324-2.c fails on arm and aarch64

2019-11-12 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92473 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47217 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47217=edit Execution trace for aarch64

[Bug target/92473] New: test pr92324-2.c fails on arm and aarch64

2019-11-12 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- The test pr92324-2.c introduced at r277958 fails on arm and aarch64: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92324-2.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr92324-2.c execution

[Bug middle-end/92333] missing variable name referencing VLA in warnings

2019-11-07 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92333 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/92208] [9/10 Regression] internal compile error, character array of dynamic length returned from function and passed to subroutine

2019-11-05 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92208 --- Comment #9 from Christophe Lyon --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #8) > (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #7) > > On gcc-9, the patch introduced regressions, seen on arm and aarch64: > > On trunk, the following was needed

[Bug fortran/92208] [9/10 Regression] internal compile error, character array of dynamic length returned from function and passed to subroutine

2019-11-05 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92208 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/61761] [C++11] std::proj returns incorrect values

2019-11-04 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61761 --- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon --- It's still failing on trunk: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2019-11/msg00131.html

[Bug libstdc++/61761] [C++11] std::proj returns incorrect values

2019-11-04 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61761 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/92207] [10 Regression] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

2019-10-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- When single-stepping in the r277178 executable, the final => 0x18bc0 <_malloc_r+1092>:str r3, [r2, #4] succeeds and (gdb) p /x $r2 $2 = 0x804aa40

[Bug target/92207] [10 Regression] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

2019-10-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- In particular, the execution continues after the last block dumped by qemu: 0x00018e40: e5974008 ldr r4, [r7, #8] 0x00018e44: e0898008 add r8, sb, r8 0x00018e48: e3888001 orr r8, r8,

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

2019-10-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47104 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47104=edit Execution trace for r277178

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

2019-10-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47105 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47105=edit Execution trace for r277179

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

2019-10-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47103 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47103=edit Executable from r277179

[Bug target/92207] pr36449.C fails on arm after r277179

2019-10-24 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92207 --- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 47102 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47102=edit Executable from r277178

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >