[Bug c++/114265] New: Unhelpful message when var name is also a struct name

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114265 Bug ID: 114265 Summary: Unhelpful message when var name is also a struct name Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/114228] New: memset/memcpy loop not always recognised with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114228 Bug ID: 114228 Summary: memset/memcpy loop not always recognised with -Os Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug target/113269] New: X86_64 generates extra mov (and xchg) when passing struct with constant value to function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113269 Bug ID: 113269 Summary: X86_64 generates extra mov (and xchg) when passing struct with constant value to function Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/113268] New: (i + (i + 1) * CST) AND (i + i * CST + 1 * CST) not folded the same way

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113268 Bug ID: 113268 Summary: (i + (i + 1) * CST) AND (i + i * CST + 1 * CST) not folded the same way Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug rtl-optimization/113234] New: missing folding to builtin_isunordered if manual nan comparison is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113234 Bug ID: 113234 Summary: missing folding to builtin_isunordered if manual nan comparison is used Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug rtl-optimization/113231] New: x86_64 use MMX instructions for simple shift operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113231 Bug ID: 113231 Summary: x86_64 use MMX instructions for simple shift operations Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/108093] New: Quadratic error lines printed with missing include for template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108093 Bug ID: 108093 Summary: Quadratic error lines printed with missing include for template Product: gcc Version: 12.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/107991] New: Extra mov instructions with ternary on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107991 Bug ID: 107991 Summary: Extra mov instructions with ternary on x86 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/107859] New: Fail to optimize rot13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107859 Bug ID: 107859 Summary: Fail to optimize rot13 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/105883] New: Memcmp folded only when size is a power of two

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105883 Bug ID: 105883 Summary: Memcmp folded only when size is a power of two Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/105338] [12 Regression] Regression: jump or cmove generated for pattern (x ? CST : 0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105338 --- Comment #13 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- Thanks a lots. I have a question though: foo and bar are similar, foo produces a branchless code whereas bar uses a jump. int foo(int i) { return !i ? 0 : -2; } int bar(int i) {

[Bug rtl-optimization/105338] New: Regression: jump or cmove generated for pattern (x ? CST : 0)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105338 Bug ID: 105338 Summary: Regression: jump or cmove generated for pattern (x ? CST : 0) Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/105276] New: [12 Regression] executed once loop not optimized anymore

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105276 Bug ID: 105276 Summary: [12 Regression] executed once loop not optimized anymore Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/104645] New: [12 Regression] i ? i % 2 : 0 not optimized anymore

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104645 Bug ID: 104645 Summary: [12 Regression] i ? i % 2 : 0 not optimized anymore Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/104639] [12 Regression] Useless loop not fully optimized anymore

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104639 --- Comment #5 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- That peace of code seems related but does not need a loop unlike the original one. -- int foo(unsigned i) { return i ? i % 2 : 0; } -- With trunk 12

[Bug tree-optimization/104639] New: Useless loop not fully optimized anymore

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104639 Bug ID: 104639 Summary: Useless loop not fully optimized anymore Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/97968] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Unnecessary mov instruction with comparison and cmov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97968 --- Comment #3 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- This seems to be fixed for gcc12, unlike the code from pr-98303

[Bug tree-optimization/104106] Fail to remove stores to VLA inside loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104106 --- Comment #2 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- The missed optimisations are also present if the arrays are allocated with malloc or new.

[Bug tree-optimization/104106] New: Fail to remove some useless loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104106 Bug ID: 104106 Summary: Fail to remove some useless loop Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/104105] New: Unused nothrow new not optimized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104105 Bug ID: 104105 Summary: Unused nothrow new not optimized Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c/103647] New: constant array comparison not always folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103647 Bug ID: 103647 Summary: constant array comparison not always folded Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug tree-optimization/94802] Failure to recognize identities with __builtin_clz

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94802 denis.campredon at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||denis.campredon at

[Bug tree-optimization/98278] New: switch optimisation and -fstrict-enums

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98278 Bug ID: 98278 Summary: switch optimisation and -fstrict-enums Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/98236] x plus/minus y cmp 0 produces unoptimal code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98236 --- Comment #1 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 49734 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49734=edit assemble generated

[Bug tree-optimization/98236] New: x plus/minus y cmp 0 produces unoptimal code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98236 Bug ID: 98236 Summary: x plus/minus y cmp 0 produces unoptimal code Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug rtl-optimization/98212] New: X86 unoptimal code for float equallity comparison followed by jump

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98212 Bug ID: 98212 Summary: X86 unoptimal code for float equallity comparison followed by jump Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/98169] isnan pattern not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98169 --- Comment #2 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- This also applies to vector types. --- typedef float __attribute__((vector_size(8))) T; T f(T a) { return a != a; } --- Gcc could generate: -- f: xorps xmm1,

[Bug tree-optimization/98169] New: isnan pattern not folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98169 Bug ID: 98169 Summary: isnan pattern not folded Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/98028] New: __builtin_sub_overflow_p not folded to const when some constraints are known

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98028 Bug ID: 98028 Summary: __builtin_sub_overflow_p not folded to const when some constraints are known Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug tree-optimization/98026] New: optimization dependant on condition order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98026 Bug ID: 98026 Summary: optimization dependant on condition order Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug rtl-optimization/97968] New: Unnecessary mov instruction with comparison and cmov

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97968 Bug ID: 97968 Summary: Unnecessary mov instruction with comparison and cmov Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/97950] Unoptimal code generation with __builtin_*_overflow{,_p} for short and __int128

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97950 --- Comment #2 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- Thanks for your fast patch. I've opened PR97961 for the __int128 problem

[Bug tree-optimization/97961] New: unnecessary moves with __builtin_{add,sub}_overflow_p and __int128

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97961 Bug ID: 97961 Summary: unnecessary moves with __builtin_{add,sub}_overflow_p and __int128 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/97950] New: Unoptimal code generation with __builtin_*_overflow{,_p} for short and __int128

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97950 Bug ID: 97950 Summary: Unoptimal code generation with __builtin_*_overflow{,_p} for short and __int128 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: