[Bug tree-optimization/100934] [9/10/11/12 Regression] wrong code at -O3 during unrolling since r9-6299

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100934 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So when we're finding jump threads we know if we thread through the loop latch and we note when that's going to create an irreducible region. We generally suppress threading through the latch before the

[Bug other/100735] -fno-trampolines doc wrongly implies it affects C, C++ etc.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100735 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/96674] Failure to optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96674 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/19987] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987 Bug 19987 depends on bug 96674, which changed state. Bug 96674 Summary: Failure to optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96674 What|Removed |Added

[Bug bootstrap/100730] h8300-linux: unused parameter, statement may fall through, control reaches end of non-void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100730 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at

[Bug tree-optimization/100727] New: [12 Regression] Recent change to WITH_SIZE_EXPR handling breaks mn10300-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100727 Bug ID: 100727 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change to WITH_SIZE_EXPR handling breaks mn10300-elf Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/100727] [12 Regression] Recent change to WITH_SIZE_EXPR handling breaks mn10300-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100727 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/100727] [12 Regression] Recent change to WITH_SIZE_EXPR handling breaks mn10300-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100727 --- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law --- The v850-elf port is also seeing these failures in some of its multilib configurations.

[Bug bootstrap/100730] h8300-linux: unused parameter, statement may fall through, control reaches end of non-void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100730 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/100499] Different results with -fpeel-loops -ftree-loop-vectorize options

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100499 --- Comment #22 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I have vague memories of it, but it wasn't my code. It was actually Craig Burley. It's original purpose was merely to allow converting *_DIV_EXPR into EXACT_DIV_EXPR which presumably was important for

[Bug target/101200] Unneeded AND after shift

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101200 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- FWIW, it might be worth considering using a mode iterator for the shift count to allow multiple modes.

[Bug tree-optimization/101186] predictable comparison of integer variables not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101186 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug tree-optimization/94092] Code size and performance degradations after -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns was enabled at -O[2s]+

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94092 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #14

[Bug rtl-optimization/98791] [11 Regression] ICE in paradoxical_subreg_p (in ira) with SVE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98791 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug target/95636] ICE in sched2: in create_block_for_bookkeeping, at sel-sched.c:4549

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95636 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/99347] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in create_block_for_bookkeeping, at sel-sched.c:4549 since r9-6859-g25eafae67f186cfa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99347 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||qianchao9 at huawei dot com ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/98791] [10 Regression] ICE in paradoxical_subreg_p (in ira) with SVE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98791 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[11 Regression] ICE in |[10 Regression] ICE in

[Bug rtl-optimization/98973] [11 regression] Wrong code with gcse store motion pass

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98973 --- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law --- IIRC LSM is quite restricted in the types of MEM expressions it will optimize. In particular I think they have to be SYMBOL_REFs which severely limits LSM's effectiveness. I would support removing it

[Bug target/101697] [11/12 regression] ICE compiling uClibc-ng for h8300-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101697 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug target/101697] [11/12 regression] ICE compiling uClibc-ng for h8300-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101697 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/101895] New: [11/12 Regression] SLP Vectorizer change pushes VEC_PERM_EXPR into bad location spoiling further optimization opportunities

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101895 Bug ID: 101895 Summary: [11/12 Regression] SLP Vectorizer change pushes VEC_PERM_EXPR into bad location spoiling further optimization opportunities Product: gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/101895] [11/12 Regression] SLP Vectorizer change pushes VEC_PERM_EXPR into bad location spoiling further optimization opportunities

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101895 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Understood WRT phase ordering. That was fully expected. What I still don't understand is why moving the permute down is profitable here or generally why moving a permute into a dependency chain is

[Bug tree-optimization/102152] [12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst in cprop_operand, at tree-ssa-dom.c:1715

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102152 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- We're just missing an update_stmt to ensure the operand cache is properly updated. Testing in progress.

[Bug tree-optimization/102152] [12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have integer_cst in cprop_operand, at tree-ssa-dom.c:1715

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102152 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug testsuite/100748] [12 regression] 30_threads/jthread/95989.cc fails after r12-843

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100748 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Bernd E. analyzed this in the thread referenced in c#1. The test links staticly and we're pulling in the weak definition of pthread_join. I'm not sure why we're linking statically. Reverting to normal

[Bug target/101697] [11/12 regression] ICE compiling uClibc-ng for h8300-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101697 --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I can't reproduce this on the trunk or with the referenced git hashes. (insn 1444 1443 164 31 (parallel [ (set (mem/f:SI (pre_dec:SI (reg/f:SI 7 sp)) [3 S4 A32]) (reg/f:SI 7

[Bug tree-optimization/102436] New: [11/12 Regression] Lost Load/Store Motion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102436 Bug ID: 102436 Summary: [11/12 Regression] Lost Load/Store Motion Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/102706] New: [12 regression] -O2 vectorization causes regression in Warray-bounds-48.c on many targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102706 Bug ID: 102706 Summary: [12 regression] -O2 vectorization causes regression in Warray-bounds-48.c on many targets Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug other/102663] add an install-dvi Makefile target to the toplevel Makefile and all subdirectories

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102663 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug tree-optimization/102744] New: [12 regression] -O2 vectorization causes Wzero-length-array-bounds-2.c to fail on arc-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102744 Bug ID: 102744 Summary: [12 regression] -O2 vectorization causes Wzero-length-array-bounds-2.c to fail on arc-elf Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/102844] [9/10/11/12 Regression] DOM jump threading not copying block that became non-empty

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844 --- Comment #23 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Invalid is invalid. Full stop. I'll have to put it under a debugger, but I would have expected the nocopy block to turn into a forwarder -- why do we end up putting statements in here?

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- No worries. This is why we have testing systems.

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 --- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law --- gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr45427.c shows the same issue.

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] New: [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 Bug ID: 102752 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/102756] New: [12 Regression] Vectorizer change creates poor code for c-c++-common/torture/vector-compare-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102756 Bug ID: 102756 Summary: [12 Regression] Vectorizer change creates poor code for c-c++-common/torture/vector-compare-2.c Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-10-14 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug rtl-optimization/102785] New: [12 Regression] {smul,umul}_highpart changes break bfin-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102785 Bug ID: 102785 Summary: [12 Regression] {smul,umul}_highpart changes break bfin-elf Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/102785] [12 Regression] {smul,umul}_highpart changes break bfin-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102785 --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Yea, it could well be a representational problem in the RTL. I didn't try to debug it at all beyond reduction and noting that cse1 was where the two compilers diverged in behavior. I don't personally

[Bug testsuite/100748] [12 regression] 30_threads/jthread/95989.cc fails after r12-843

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100748 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Jon -- you might want to sync with the glibc folks. IIUC they're rolled libpthread into libc in glibc-2.34 which may make this is a non-issue going forward, which I can certainly live with.

[Bug tree-optimization/98950] jump threading memory leak

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98950 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/102756] [12 Regression] Complete unrolling is too senative to PRE; c-c++-common/torture/vector-compare-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102756 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So if we consider the behavior as-expected and that this was just a case where we crossed a heuristic border, I'd be comfortable closing.

[Bug middle-end/102519] [12 Regression] VRP Jump threader memory explosion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102519 --- Comment #17 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Consider that pre-approved.

[Bug tree-optimization/102608] New: [12 regression] Recent change to VN causes bogus Wuninitialized warnings & kernel build failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102608 Bug ID: 102608 Summary: [12 regression] Recent change to VN causes bogus Wuninitialized warnings & kernel build failures Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/19987] [meta-bug] fold missing optimizations in general

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987 Bug 19987 depends on bug 96779, which changed state. Bug 96779 Summary: Failure to optimize comparison of negative version of self https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96779 What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/103278] [12 Regression] Recent change to cddce inhibits switch optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103278 --- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Adjusting the threshold didn't help the tests on the other targets. I'll have to dig a little deeper into those.

[Bug tree-optimization/96779] Failure to optimize comparison of negative version of self

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96779 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/103226] [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/103388] [12 Regression] missed optimization for dead code elimination at -O3 (vs. -O2)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103388 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |law at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/103226] [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226 --- Comment #15 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Re: c#13. You were so close :-) Add "-msim" to your command line. THat's one of the things the baseboards file does for you when you run things under dejagnu on bfin-elf... I've sent Aldy

[Bug tree-optimization/103278] [12 Regression] Recent change to cddce inhibits switch optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103278 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Note we also see these regressions: rl78-elf if-to-switch-5 if-to-switch-9 xstormy16-elf if-to-switch-9 sh3-linux-gnu sh3eb-linux-gnu gcc.target/sh/pr51244-19.c, but I think this is fixable with

[Bug tree-optimization/103226] [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226 --- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Aldy, the trick is to not build the C++ runtime ;-) So instead of "make" use "make all-gcc && make all-target-libgcc" to build the compiler and libgcc runtime. Then use "make install-gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/102756] [12 Regression] Complete unrolling is too senative to PRE; c-c++-common/torture/vector-compare-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102756 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I could also set up a toolchain ready-to-debug in an AWS instance that you could use if that would be helpful.

[Bug tree-optimization/102756] [12 Regression] Complete unrolling is too senative to PRE; c-c++-common/torture/vector-compare-2.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102756 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Ignore last comment. Meant for a different BZ.

[Bug tree-optimization/103226] [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Aldy, I could also set up a cross toolchain, ready for debugging in an AWS instance if that would be helpful.

[Bug tree-optimization/102436] [11 Regression] Lost Load/Store Motion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102436 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Sounds reasonable (not backporting, but holding bug open for now). I'll probably do some testing with it internally, so if you end up wanting to revisit the backporting question, reach out I may have

[Bug go/79281] gccgo: Binaries using goroutines crash on m68k

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79281 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/103182] [12 Regression] Recent change causes code correctness regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103182 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law --- And just to be clear, Andrew's c#1 is correct. It's 45967-2.c.

[Bug tree-optimization/103226] [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226 --- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Agreed on P1 until we understand. If it's target specific P4 seems appropriate. I don't see this failure on any other target in the tester.

[Bug tree-optimization/103226] New: [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226 Bug ID: 103226 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/103192] [12 Regression] ICE on libgomp target-in-reduction-2.{C,c}

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103192 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/103235] New: [12 Regression] Recent change to atomics triggers ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103235 Bug ID: 103235 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change to atomics triggers ICE Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/103278] New: [12 Regression] Recent change to cddce inhibits switch optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103278 Bug ID: 103278 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change to cddce inhibits switch optimization Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/103235] [12 Regression] Recent change to atomics triggers ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103235 --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Can you please double-check? It just reproduced for me. Perhaps you were missing -I./ which is sometimes needed for cross toolchains to *-linux. [jlaw@dl360p gcc]$ ./cc1 -O2 pthread_cancel.i -I./ -quiet

[Bug tree-optimization/103231] [12 Regression] ICE (nondeterministic/stack overflow) on valid code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault since r12-5014-g6b8b959675a3e14c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103231 --- Comment #15 from Jeffrey A. Law --- And a note, aarch64_be successfully built a linux kernel which had previously been triggering the same crazy deep call chains.

[Bug tree-optimization/103226] [12 Regression] Recent change to copy-headers causes execution failure for gcc.dg/torture/pr80974

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P1 |P4 --- Comment #20 from Jeffrey A.

[Bug tree-optimization/103182] New: [12 Regression] Recent change causes code correctness regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103182 Bug ID: 103182 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change causes code correctness regression Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/103161] New: [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103161 Bug ID: 103161 Summary: [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/103161] [12 Regression] Better ranges cause builtin-sprintf-warn-16.c failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103161 --- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I suspect the same underlying issue is affecting the test on line #243 as well.

[Bug tree-optimization/102981] [12 Regression] Dead Code Elimination Regression at -O3 (trunk vs 11.2.0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102981 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #22

[Bug other/103011] fatal error: process.h: No such file or directory when canadian compile x86_64-w64-mingw32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103011 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9

[Bug target/103470] GNU-stack section not emitted on MIPS hard-float targets with MUSL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103470 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/82090] Bogus warning: ‘magic_p’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82090 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I never explored the idea, but Bodik has a discussion of recording infeasible paths in the CFG which would seem to address this issue. He was using the concept in the context of coverage analysis -- the

[Bug tree-optimization/95663] static_cast checks for null even when the pointer is dereferenced

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95663 --- Comment #21 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with treating 0 + small offset similarly to 0 when it comes to -fdelete-null-pointer-checks. I suspect it'll break some poorly written low level code,

[Bug target/103722] [12 Regression] ICE in extract_constrain_insn building glibc for SH4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103722 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/103977] [12 Regression] ice in try_vectorize_loop_1 since r12-6420-gd3ff7420e941931d32ce2e332e7968fe67ba20af

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103977 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- And just to follow-up. With the patch that was committed to the trunk, the 30+ targets that were previously failing are now working. A few are still building, but I expect them to succeed. mips* is

[Bug c++/78655] gcc doesn't exploit the fact that the result of pointer addition can not be nullptr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78655 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law --- We can assume that the result of a POINTER_PLUS is non-null if either argument is non-null. So X + constant is always non-null. X + Y would be non-null if either X or Y is known to be non-null. If we

[Bug bootstrap/103974] [12 Regression] ICE in ira_flattening building libstdc++ with r12-6415-g01f3e6a40e72

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103974 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug bootstrap/103974] [12 Regression] ICE in ira_flattening building libstdc++ with r12-6415-g01f3e6a40e72

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103974 --- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law --- ACK. I wandered through the tester this morning, the vast majority of the current failures are the ira_flattening ICE. Though I think there's likely one other ICE in IRA (frv-elf, ICE in

[Bug middle-end/104067] [12 Regression] wrong code compiling QEMU since r12-4790-g4b3a325f07acebf4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104067 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I briefly looked at the other BZ last week, but didn't make much headway. The first thing that stood out was why are we threading around the loop. I thought that was disabled. Anyway, Aldy and/or I will

[Bug tree-optimization/103977] [12 Regression] ice in try_vectorize_loop_1 since r12-6420-gd3ff7420e941931d32ce2e332e7968fe67ba20af

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103977 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug rtl-optimization/104154] [12 Regression] Another ICE due to recent ifcvt changes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104154 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/104153] [12 Regression] ICE due to recent ifcvt changes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/104154] [12 Regression] Another ICE due to recent ifcvt changes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104154 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Created attachment 52432 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52432=edit Testcase #2

[Bug rtl-optimization/104400] [12 Regression] v850e lra/reload failure after recent change

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104400 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/101895] [11 Regression] SLP Vectorizer change pushes VEC_PERM_EXPR into bad location spoiling further optimization opportunities

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101895 --- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Yea, no need to backport this.

[Bug tree-optimization/40073] Vector short/char shifts generate sub-optimal code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073 --- Comment #19 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I stumbled over this as well as some point. One thing I started playing with, but had to set aside was making vect_get_range_info smarter. In particular the case I was looking at VAR would have a single

[Bug tree-optimization/101895] [11 Regression] SLP Vectorizer change pushes VEC_PERM_EXPR into bad location spoiling further optimization opportunities

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101895 --- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law --- And just an FYI. As expected this resolves the regression on our internal target. Thanks Roger!

[Bug rtl-optimization/104154] [12 Regression] Another ICE due to recent ifcvt changes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104154 --- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So the updated patch fixes the arc build regressions. I haven't looked at the thread with Segher, but I will as soon as I can. Mostly just wanted to let you know that the updated patch does indeed get

[Bug target/97040] incorrect fused multiply add/subtract instruction generated from C code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97040 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug rtl-optimization/104154] [12 Regression] Another ICE due to recent ifcvt changes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104154 --- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Just to confirm. Yes, that patch fixed the problem.

[Bug tree-optimization/104987] New: [12 Regression] Recent change causing vrp13.c regressions on several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104987 Bug ID: 104987 Summary: [12 Regression] Recent change causing vrp13.c regressions on several targets Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libgcc/86224] [m68k] textrels in libgcc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86224 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/104987] [12 Regression] Recent change causing vrp13.c regressions on several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104987 --- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law --- For the v850 at least, I'm starting to think this is a simulator bug. In particular the simulator code doesn't look safe on a 64bit host for a signed input to the MUL instruction.

[Bug tree-optimization/104987] [12 Regression] Recent change causing vrp13.c regressions on several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104987 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Highly confident this is a simulator bug for the v850. I hiaven't looked at iq2000-elf yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if that turns out to be something similar.

[Bug tree-optimization/104987] [12 Regression] Recent change causing vrp13.c regressions on several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104987 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Target|iq2000-elf, v850e-elf |iq2000-elf Priority|P3

[Bug target/104987] [12 Regression] Recent change causing vrp13.c regressions on several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104987 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/104987] [12 Regression] Recent change causing vrp13.c regressions on several targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104987 --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law --- It does trigger execution failures on those targets. I guess it's possible it's merely exposing existing bugs on those targets. If we were inlining before, we may have collapsed the test away completely.

[Bug target/103771] [12 Regression] Missed vectorization under -mavx512f -mavx512vl after r12-5489

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771 --- Comment #34 from Jeffrey A. Law --- I've always wanted to see us be able to push something like those matched conversions down through the PHI. That would make the code look like: if (x.1_1 > 255) goto ; [INV] else goto ;

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >