https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.2
--- Comment #13 from Xi Ruoyao ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #11 from chenglulu ---
> Otherwise LGTM. As the port maintainer you can push it directly into
> master. Normally we should bootstrap and regtest before applying a patch,
> but currently the bootstrap is blocked by PR106096 :(.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #10 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to chenglulu from comment #9)
> Created attachment 53206 [details]
> use LU52I_B and LU32I_B instead of hard coding those long
> + codes[cost].value = (value & LU32I_B)
> + | (sign51 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #9 from chenglulu ---
Created attachment 53206
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53206=edit
use LU52I_B and LU32I_B instead of hard coding those long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #8 from chenglulu ---
> You can reuse LU32I_B and LU52I_B instead of hard coding those long
> constants :).
I have fixed it, thanks！:)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #7 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to chenglulu from comment #6)
> Created attachment 53205 [details]
> 0001-Fix-bug-for-PR16097.patch
You can reuse LU32I_B and LU52I_B instead of hard coding those long constants
:).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #6 from chenglulu ---
Created attachment 53205
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53205=edit
0001-Fix-bug-for-PR16097.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #4 from Xi Ruoyao ---
BTW I found this issue trying to triage PR106096, but I think it's not related
to this one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao ---
And it actually does not need a reproducer: "x << 32 >> 32" for sign-extension
is undefined by C++ standard if x is negative:
> The value of E1 << E2 is E1 left-shifted E2 bit positions; vacated bits are
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #3 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> by using the --with-build-config=bootstrap-ubsan option at configure time or
> BUILD_CONFIG variable to build time.
>
> See https://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
by using the --with-build-config=bootstrap-ubsan option at configure time or
BUILD_CONFIG variable to build time.
See https://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
--- Comment #1 from chenglulu ---
How can I reproduce the problem?
Thanks!
Lulu Cheng
13 matches
Mail list logo
