On 8/19/2021 4:27 PM, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
This patch is on behalf of John Henning, who opened PR 101843:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101843
He proposed the following doc change, please take a look and let me know
whether this is Okay for commit?
I think we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101922
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f93f0868919ab32bfbc24adb40158298031a4d58
commit r12-3063-gf93f0868919ab32bfbc24adb40158298031a4d58
Author: Xi Ruoyao
Date: Fri Aug
Any feedback ?
Thanks
On 08/08/21 9:34 pm, François Dumont wrote:
After further testing here a fixed version which imply less changes.
Moreover I already commit the fixes unrelated with this patch.
libstdc++: [_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS] Activate basic debug checks
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
On 1/4/2021 6:18 AM, Tamar Christina wrote:
Hi All,
I am trying to get CSE to re-use constants already inside a vector rather than
re-materializing the constant again.
Basically consider the following case:
#include
#include
uint64_t
test (uint64_t a, uint64x2_t b, uint64x2_t* rt)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
Mingye Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur200126 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
On 7/26/2021 6:45 PM, Victor Tong via Gcc-patches wrote:
This change enables the "t1 != 0" check to be optimized away in this code:
int x1 = 0;
unsigned int x2 = 1;
int main ()
{
int t1 = x1*(1/(x2+x2));
if (t1 != 0) __builtin_abort();
return 0;
}
The change utilizes the VRP
Performance impact for the commit with option:
-march=x86-64 -O2 -ftree-vectorize -fvect-cost-model=very-cheap
SPEC2017 fprate
503.bwaves_rBuildSame
507.cactuBSSN_r -0.04
508.namd_r 0.14
510.parest_r-0.54
511.povray_r 0.10
519.lbm_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92494
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is fixed in GCC 10+.
We are not going to create a new devirtualization framework from
scratch, just hope it to be an enhancement on current speculative
devirtualization. The process does not need parse native code in
library, but only resort to existing lightweight symbol resolution
by LTO-prelinker. And C++ virtual
On 8/23/21 1:07 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 8/21/2021 9:10 PM, Jonathan Yong via Gcc-patches wrote:
Attached patch OK?
2021-08-22 Jonathan Yong <10wa...@gmail.com>
gcc/testsuite/ChangLog:
* gcc.c-torture/execute/gcc_tmpnam.h: Fix tmpnam case on Windows
where it can return a filename
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88162
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
ICC also rejects this at both -std=c++17 and -std=c++20:
(15): error: a nontype template parameter may not have class type
template class T> using nttp_t = typename decltype(
f(T()) )::type;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86959
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang ICEs with -std=c++20 :).
GCC ICEs starting in GCC 9:
: In substitution of 'template template using Alias
= Outer< >::Inner [with T = {void};
= void]':
:18:38: required from here
:8:11: internal
On 8/22/2021 8:50 AM, Roger Sayle wrote:
This patch implements support for TRUNC_MOD_EXPR and TRUNC_DIV_EXPR
in tree-ssa's bit CCP pass. This is mostly for completeness, as the
VRP pass already provides better bounds for these operations, but
seeing mask values of all_ones in my
On 8/20/2021 11:07 AM, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches wrote:
When -mloongson-mmi is enabled, SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED is turned off.
This causes untruncated immediate shift amount outputed into the asm,
and the GNU assembler refuses to assemble it.
Truncate immediate shift amount when outputing the
On 8/19/2021 5:18 PM, Roger Sayle wrote:
Whilst working on a backend patch, I noticed that the middle-end's
RTL optimizers weren't simplifying a truncation of a paradoxical
subreg extension, though it does transform closely related (more
complex) expressions. The main (first) part of this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86234
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
If I place "A t;" before main(), then ICC, clang and MSVC all accept the
code. That seems out a bit backwards for me but I don't know the C++ standard
really. But it might point out why GCC is accepting the
On 8/21/2021 9:10 PM, Jonathan Yong via Gcc-patches wrote:
Attached patch OK?
2021-08-22 Jonathan Yong <10wa...@gmail.com>
gcc/testsuite/ChangLog:
* gcc.c-torture/execute/gcc_tmpnam.h: Fix tmpnam case on Windows
where it can return a filename with "\" to indicate current
On 8/22/2021 6:25 PM, Roger Sayle wrote:
This short patch teaches fold that it is "safe" to change the sign
of a left shift, to reduce the number of type conversions in gimple.
As an example:
unsigned int foo(unsigned int i) {
return (int)i << 8;
}
is currently optimized to:
unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82947
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15272
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82947
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
In GCC 11+ we get:
: In instantiation of 'struct foo >':
:16:19: required from here
:8:29: error: type 'main()::' is not a base type for type
'foo >'
8 | using Ts::operator()...;
|
Thanks for the feedback. I updated the pattern and it passes all tests
(existing and the new ones I wrote). I added some brackets since there were
some warnings about missing brackets on the || and &&. Here's the updated
pattern:
(simplify
(minus (convert1? @0) (convert2? (minus@2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78753
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62227
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
C++17 and C++20 modes no longer print move since GCC 7.
Most likely due to the patches to implement p0135.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0135r1.html
This short patch teaches fold that it is "safe" to change the sign
of a left shift, to reduce the number of type conversions in gimple.
As an example:
unsigned int foo(unsigned int i) {
return (int)i << 8;
}
is currently optimized to:
unsigned int foo (unsigned int i)
{
int i.0_1;
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16191
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like the resolution of DR1710 (though it was supposed to be C++17+)
causes the code without the template to be accepted which means this should be
rejected for C++98, C++03, C++11 and C++14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94057
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.4 |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16191
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, this code started be accepted in GCC 10+; I suspect by the fix for PR
94057.
was that really expected?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30484
--- Comment #12 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #10)
> There is still a bug for the -fwrapv case, where clearly both INT_MIN / -1
> and INT_MIN % -1 should be well defined, but probably the extra checks
> if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|struct containing default |[DR1454] struct containing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61991
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
GCC, clang and ICC all have this same behavior in that if y is not used, the y
is not initialized or deconstructed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92073
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59994
Bug 59994 depends on bug 60673, which changed state.
Bug 60673 Summary: c++11 static thread_local members may cause a segfault when
accessed via 'this->'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60673
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60702
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||michael at ensslin dot cc
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60673
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15533
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at cordes dot ca
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60673
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> This seems to be fixed in GCC 5 onwards (and recent Clang versions).
It was not fixed until GCC 7.5, 8.4 and 9+.
Here is a reduced testcase which shows it was
Snapshot gcc-12-20210822 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20210822/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81880
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
extern "C" void abort(void);
struct tt
{
int *tt1 = new int{1};
int bucket_count() const {return *tt1;}
};
struct A {
template thread_local static tt m;
};
template thread_local tt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101949
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #16)
> On Linux/x86-64 with -m32, r12-3059 gave
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr101949 c_lto_pr101949_0.o-c_lto_pr101949_1.o execute -O2
> -fipa-pta -flto -flto-partition=1to1
It also
Am Donnerstag, den 12.08.2021, 16:58 + schrieb Joseph Myers:
> On Mon, 24 May 2021, Uecker, Martin wrote:
>
> > - else if (VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (type1))
> > - && !TYPE_ATOMIC (TREE_TYPE (type1)))
> > - {
> > - if ((TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (type2)) == ARRAY_TYPE)
> > -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44613
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98397
Martin Uecker changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82940
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at cordes dot ca
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98397
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Uecker :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:972eab51f53d1db26864ec7d62d40c2ff83407ec
commit r12-3060-g972eab51f53d1db26864ec7d62d40c2ff83407ec
Author: Martin Uecker
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55885
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Eric.Deplagne at nerim dot net
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29511
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55885
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note PR 30484 is for the -fwrapv issue with %.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55885
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jens.seifert at de dot ibm.com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93013
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #8 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101949
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #16
On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 10:32 AM Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > Thanks for looking into this bug - it is interesting that ipa-pta
> > requires !EAF_NOCLOBBER when function is called...
> >
> > I have some work done on teaching ipa-modref (and other propagation
> > passes) to use ipa-devirt info when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89979
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
LLVM's libc++ does not go into the 0 loop but still does not do a good job:
4294967295 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 4294967295 1
0 0 0 0 0 4294967295 4294967295 1
0 0 0 0 4294967295 4294967295
Gabriel Ravier wrote:
> On 8/21/21 10:19 PM, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
[...]
>>> GCC doesn't do value range propagation of floating point values, not even
>>> the special ones like NaNs, infinities, +/- zeros etc., and without that the
>>> earlier ifs aren't taken into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87312
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102015
--- Comment #2 from Kamil Kaznowski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66573773/is-there-a-reason-for-8-bytes-
> of-size-overhead-in-libstdc-stdmultiset-map
This is my post, I forgot to post a
Nice work once again, just to let you know about the little bit of
duplication I think the name resolver needs a little bit of thought to
handle forward declared items within a block like this:
https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs/issues/531. It might be as simple as
calling ResolveToplevelItems when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79334
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #4)
> When you have the tree optimization bug fixed, this becomes an rtl
> optimization bug since rtl pre does the same as tree pre..
GCSE was fixed with PR 78812. So
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77312
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77312
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is fixed in GCC 8:
if (SAVE_EXPR <(struct LambdaHolder *) this> != 0B)
{
try
{
LambdaHolder::~LambdaHolder (SAVE_EXPR <(struct LambdaHolder *)
this>);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57448
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lucenadeveloper at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70889
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57448
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |sandra at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70889
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Testcase:
#include
#include
std::atomic seq_;
std::size_t value;
auto load()
{
std::size_t copy;
std::size_t seq0;
do
{
seq0 = seq_.load();
if (!seq0) continue;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97836
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101257
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101296
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
"every access" means that we no longer track individual bases+offsets+sizes and
everything matching the base/ref alias set will be considered conflicting.
I planned to implement smarter merging of accesses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102015
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66573773/is-there-a-reason-for-8-bytes-of-size-overhead-in-libstdc-stdmultiset-map
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101949
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9b08f7764cecd16cba84944f2a8b67a7f73a7ce7
commit r12-3059-g9b08f7764cecd16cba84944f2a8b67a7f73a7ce7
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Sun
On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, 06:38 Gabriel Ravier wrote:
> On 8/21/21 10:19 PM, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> > I don't have a bugzilla account, and I don't use GCC for anything
> serious.
> >
> > Stefan
>
> It's *that* demanding for you to create a Bugzilla account ? From my
> experience, creating a Bugzilla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58897
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kamkaz at windowslive dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102014
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49001
--- Comment #6 from Mingye Wang ---
FWIW, the ticket about doing stuff to align the stack in the prologue is bug
54412. Apologies for the noisy emails, but thing is I can't do the see-also
thing here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49001
Mingye Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur200126 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102015
Bug ID: 102015
Summary: [missed optimization] Small memory overhead in
_Rb_tree_impl (fix would require ABI break)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
> Thanks for looking into this bug - it is interesting that ipa-pta
> requires !EAF_NOCLOBBER when function is called...
>
> I have some work done on teaching ipa-modref (and other propagation
> passes) to use ipa-devirt info when the full set of callees is known.
> This goes oposite way.
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102014
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102011
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102014
Bug ID: 102014
Summary: [missed optimization] __uint128_t % uint64_t emits a
call to __umodti3 instead of div instruction
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status:
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 03:55:47PM +, build...@builder.wildebeest.org wrote:
> The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder gccrust-debian-arm64 while
> building gccrust.
> Full details are available at:
> https://builder.wildebeest.org/buildbot/#builders/58/builds/355
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102013
Bug ID: 102013
Summary: Incorrect aggregate initialization of union
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder gccrust-debian-arm64 while
building gccrust.
Full details are available at:
https://builder.wildebeest.org/buildbot/#builders/58/builds/355
Buildbot URL: https://builder.wildebeest.org/buildbot/
Worker for this Build: debian-arm64
Build
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 09:19:38AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 3:41 AM Hongyu Wang wrote:
> >
> > > Hongyue, please collect code size differences on SPEC CPU 2017 and
> > > eembc.
> >
> > Here is code size difference for this patch
>
> Thanks, nothing too bad although
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102012
Bug ID: 102012
Summary: GCC accepts any non-bool atomic constraint type
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
This patch implements support for TRUNC_MOD_EXPR and TRUNC_DIV_EXPR
in tree-ssa's bit CCP pass. This is mostly for completeness, as the
VRP pass already provides better bounds for these operations, but
seeing mask values of all_ones in my debugging/instrumentation logs
seemed overly pessimistic.
This patch is the next in the series to improve bit bounds in tree-ssa's
bit CCP pass, this time: bounds for shifts and rotates by unknown amounts.
This allows us to optimize expressions such as ((x&15)<<(y&24))&64.
In this case, the expression (y&24) contains only two unknown bits,
and can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100532
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] ICE: tree |ICE: tree check: expected
>
> for gcc/ChangeLog
>
> * ipa-modref.c (analyze_function): Skip debug stmts.
> * tree-inline.c (estimate_num_insn): Consider builtins even
> without a cgraph_node.
OK, thanks for looking into this issue!
(for mainline and release brances bit later)
> ---
> gcc/ipa-modref.c
> Good hint. I added hash based on object file name (I don't want to handle
> proper string escaping) and -frandom-seed.
>
> What do you think about the patch?
Sorry for taking so long - I remember I was sending reply earlier but it
seems I only wrote it and never sent.
> Thanks,
> Martin
> From
> Good hint. I added hash based on object file name (I don't want to handle
> proper string escaping) and -frandom-seed.
>
> What do you think about the patch?
Sorry for taking so long - I remember I was sending reply earlier but it
seems I only wrote it and never sent.
> Thanks,
> Martin
> From
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43147
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
In vetor move pattern, replace nonimmediate_or_sse_const_operand with
nonimmediate_or_sse_const_vector_operand to allow vector load from
non-uniform CONST_VECTOR. Non-uniform CONST_VECTOR is enabled only in
the combine pass since other RTL optimizers work better with constant
pool.
gcc/
> Hello.
>
> As showed in the PR, returning (EAF_NOCLOBBER | EAF_NOESCAPE) for an argument
> that is a function pointer is problematic. Doing such a function call is a
> clobber.
>
> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
>
> Ready to be installed?
> Thanks,
>
> Hi.
>
> We already have a IPA modref debug counter, but it's only used in
> tree-ssa-alias,
> which is only a part of what IPA modref does. I used the dbg counter in
> isolation
> of PR101949.
>
> Ready for master?
OK,
thanks!
Honza
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * dbgcnt.def
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101666
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |iains at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102011
Bug ID: 102011
Summary: Infinite loop in heron iteration when optimization is
enabled with gfortran 10.3.0
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98877
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|11.0|12.0
--- Comment #5 from Tamar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98877
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98877
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is another example where GCC messes up:
#include "arm_neon.h"
uint8x16_t g(void);
uint8x16_t fun(uint8x16_t lo, uint8x16_t hi, uint8x16_t idx) {
uint8x16x2_t tab = { .val = {g(), g()} };
uint8x16_t
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
