From: chenglulu
gcc/
* common/config/loongarch/loongarch-common.cc: New file.
* config/loongarch/genopts/genstr.sh: New file.
* config/loongarch/genopts/loongarch-strings: New file.
* config/loongarch/genopts/loongarch.opt.in: New file.
*
From: chenglulu
libgomp/
* configure.tgt: Add LoongArch triplet.
---
libgomp/configure.tgt | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libgomp/configure.tgt b/libgomp/configure.tgt
index d4f1e741b5a..2cd7272fcd8 100644
--- a/libgomp/configure.tgt
+++ b/libgomp/configure.tgt
From: chenglulu
---
libgcc/configure | 5 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/libgcc/configure b/libgcc/configure
index 4919a56f518..ce04c4f529f 100755
--- a/libgcc/configure
+++ b/libgcc/configure
@@ -2412,6 +2412,9 @@ case "${host}" in
# sets the default
From: chenglulu
gcc/
*config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc
---
gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc | 109
1 file changed, 109 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc
diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc
From: chenglulu
---
gcc/configure | 66 ++-
1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/configure b/gcc/configure
index bd4d4721868..3823bc4e783 100755
--- a/gcc/configure
+++ b/gcc/configure
@@ -5442,6 +5442,9 @@ case
From: chenglulu
* config/picflag.m4: Default add build option '-fpic' for LoongArch.
* configure: Add LoongArch tuples.
* configure.ac: Like wise.
---
config/picflag.m4 | 3 +++
configure | 10 +-
configure.ac | 10 +-
3 files changed, 21
The LoongArch architecture (LoongArch) is an Instruction Set
Architecture (ISA) that has a Reduced Instruction Set Computer (RISC)
style.
The documents are on
https://loongson.github.io/LoongArch-Documentation/README-EN.html
The ELF ABI Documents are on:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104179
Bug ID: 104179
Summary: Truncated representation of character arrays as
non-type template parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104178
--- Comment #1 from Chengnian Sun ---
Sorry for the long test case. I tried my best to reduce it. The reported test
program is the best I could get.
o --enable-checking-yes --enable-multiarch
--prefix=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.1 20220121 (experimental) [master -gcaca8eddd] (GCC)
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
See the discussion at
https://www.mail-archive.com/cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org/msg222834.html
I wonder what this means for GCC here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
Oh:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2014r0.pdf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note LLVM/clang has the same issue and there was a patch for the issue here:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D106248
I don't see the followup patch though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
so I think you might have found a defect in the C++ standard dealing with
coroutines. I looked and there is no mention of alignment when it comes to the
state of the coroutine at all even.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[diagnostic] basic.align#9 |coroutine frame is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|12.0|11.1.1
--- Comment #7 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
So this works for me on the trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103763
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103763
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Meissner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abe3a4f0e9c461789b689e78d6116b1efffc1b5b
commit r12-6814-gabe3a4f0e9c461789b689e78d6116b1efffc1b5b
Author: Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
Fixed in commit f9063d12633c62a089115df032a19295854d8b06 on January 21, 2022.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
What I am trying to say is there is a bug in gcc when dealing with alignas with
coroutines. I don't think there is a dup of this bug in the database.
I am also saying is this should work. When I get in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104156
--- Comment #7 from Chengnian Sun ---
A quick question. Besides the flags `-fcompare-debug -g3 -O3`, are there any
other flags I should enable to better/faster find such -fcompare-debug
failures?
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #4 from Luke Dalessandro ---
Oh, that would be great. I tried relatively hard to find a bug like that, but I
have previously shown a surprising level of incompetence with bugzilla search.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> It should be supported. There might be a dup copying the alignment though
> for the coroutines.
Bug not dup. Autocorrect got to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104173
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
It should be supported. There might be a dup copying the alignment though for
the coroutines.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #1 from Luke Dalessandro ---
Also described in
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66546906/is-it-defined-behavior-to-place-exotically-aligned-objects-in-the-coroutine-stat.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
Bug ID: 104177
Summary: [diagnostic] basic.align#9 should emit diagnostic for
unsupported alignas
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104176
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104176
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104028
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104176
Bug ID: 104176
Summary: opts-global.cc:420:62: error: unquoted option name
'--enable-plugin' in format
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104065
--- Comment #7 from Gaius Mulley ---
All fixed now (I think), see mailing list entry
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2022-January/359679.html
In summary $(CC) is only used to compile flex generated source. $(CXX) is used
instead. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail|
Hi!
This patch on top of the previously posted option handling changes patch
allows specifying -fconvert=swap,r16_ieee etc. (but will error on it
when not on powerpc64le because in the library such swapping is only
implemented for HAVE_REAL_17).
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104175
Bug ID: 104175
Summary: Enum Class Bit Fields Brace-enclosed Initializer List
fails to compile
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
Hi!
This is incremental patch to fix up -fsanitize-coverage= option
handling, allow -fno-sanitize-coverage= again, allow both
options together in one option or make
-fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc -fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp
actually enable both suboptions rather than the last one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104174
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] |[12 Regression]
Hi!
The following patch is infrastructure support for at least 3 different
options that need changes:
1) PR104158 talks about a regression with the -fsanitizer-coverage=
option; in GCC 11 and older and on trunk prior to r12-1177, this
option behaved similarly to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104174
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.2.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104174
Bug ID: 104174
Summary: [12 Regression] unordered_map fails
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104170
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Hi.
Here's the updated patch.
See comments below.
Le mardi 18 janvier 2022 à 18:06 -0500, David Malcolm a écrit :
> On Mon, 2022-01-17 at 19:30 -0500, Antoni Boucher via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > I was missing the define, so I added it.
> > Here's the new patch with it.
>
> Thanks for the patch.
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 2:56 PM Michael Meissner wrote:
>
> Ping patch
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/587924.html
>
> | Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 16:05:53 -0500
> | From: Michael Meissner
> | Subject: [PATCH] PR 103763, Fix fold-vec-splat-floatdouble on power10.
> |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Meissner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9063d12633c62a089115df032a19295854d8b06
commit r12-6812-gf9063d12633c62a089115df032a19295854d8b06
Author: Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103782
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:48ef652689b96f4305d5a9c30c4c9f2008cbd4d8
commit r10-10412-g48ef652689b96f4305d5a9c30c4c9f2008cbd4d8
Author: Harald Anlauf
Snapshot gcc-10-20220121 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20220121/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104170
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:60953a23d57b13a672f751bec0c6eefc059eb1ab
commit r12-6811-g60953a23d57b13a672f751bec0c6eefc059eb1ab
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri Jan 21
Hi Andre,
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 12:23 PM Andre Vieira (lists) via Gcc-patches <
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> On 13/01/2022 14:56, Christophe Lyon via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm-simd-builtin-types.def
>
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 01:57:57PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Revert x86 changes in
>
> commit c163647ffbc9a20c8feb6e079dbecccfe016c82e
> Author: Soren Tempel
> Date: Fri Jan 21 19:22:46 2022 +
>
> Disable -fsplit-stack support on non-glibc targets
>
> and change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104128
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The issue in comment#3 is likely unrelated to TRANSFER:
program p
implicit none
! integer, parameter :: k = 1
integer, parameter :: k = 4
character(kind=k,len=2), parameter :: z = k_"FG"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104172
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104173
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 10:42:03PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 01:31:32PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:18:41PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 08:16:11PM +0100, soeren--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104173
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104173
Bug ID: 104173
Summary: [12 Regression] wrong overload resolution for
ref-qualifiers
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 12:51 PM Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 04:56:59PM -0600, Noah Goldstein wrote:
> > The goal is that the new interfaces will be usable as an optimization
> > by compilers if a program uses the return value of the non "eq"
> > variant as a boolean.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104172
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f36efe71bef8ddf72306aca313d28759434cf97a
commit r12-6810-gf36efe71bef8ddf72306aca313d28759434cf97a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 01:31:32PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:18:41PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 08:16:11PM +0100, soeren--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > >
> > > * common/config/s390/s390-common.c
On Fri, 21 Jan 2022, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> 2022-01-21 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR c++/104148
> * c-common.h (check_function_arguments_recurse): Add for_format
> arg.
> * c-common.cc (check_function_nonnull): Pass false to
>
Hi!
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 02:49:26PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> If you compile module_advect_em.F90 with -Ofast -mcpu=power10, one module
> is large enough that we can't use a single conditional jump to span the
> function. Instead, GCC has to reverse the condition, and do a conditional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104172
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
E.g. I think all the libstdc++ work is only in GCC 11, so yes, one could use
C++, but couldn't use the standard C++ library in GCC 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104170
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101831
kim.walisch at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kim.walisch at gmail dot
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:18:41PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 08:16:11PM +0100, soeren--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * common/config/s390/s390-common.c (s390_supports_split_stack):
> > Only support split-stack on glibc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104172
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Was -mabi=ieeelongdouble support even remotely usable in GCC 8 (do we really
need to care about compatibility with it)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104172
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104172
Bug ID: 104172
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ppc64le mangling ICE with
-flto -ffat-lto-objects
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104171
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104160
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
The error message from clang is:
:28:19: note: function parameter 'JSONValue' with unknown value cannot
be used in a constant expression
if constexpr (JSONValue.isArray()) {
^
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104160
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, MSVC accepts this code just like GCC.
ICC does too.
Only clang rejects it.
If Value was not marked as a constexpr, then GCC rejects it too.
I do have wonder if clang is right to reject this or not.
: /tmp/tmp.OLkXuGPSxC-gcc-builder/gcc/configure
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto --enable-checking-yes --enable-multiarch
--prefix=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.1 20220121 (experimental) [master -gcaca8eddd] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104160
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104160
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
struct Array {
static constexpr bool isArray() noexcept { return true; }
};
template
constexpr void buggyImpl(const JSONVariant& JSONValue) noexcept {
constexpr bool t =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153
--- Comment #3 from rdapp at linux dot ibm.com ---
Both of your guesses are correct :) or1k_expand_compare () indeed modifies the
condition/comparison in-place. As I use cc_cmp directly from the condition of
the jump it is changed but never
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104128
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> with TRANSFER between different integer kinds. E.g.
oops, that should read: character kinds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104128
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Keywords|
"H.J. Lu" wrote:
> OPTION_GLIBC can't be used here since OPTION_GLIBC is
> evaluated at run-time:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-regression/2022-January/076271.html
Oops, my bad, sorry! This accidentally broke in one of the two cleanup
commits. Originally I justed use TARGET_GLIBC_MAJOR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66005
Serge Belyshev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104169
--- Comment #2 from Luís Ferreira ---
Thanks for the information. Just cross-referencing here:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28803 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 08:16:11PM +0100, soeren--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * common/config/s390/s390-common.c (s390_supports_split_stack):
> Only support split-stack on glibc targets.
> * config/i386/gnu-user-common.h (STACK_CHECK_STATIC_BUILTIN): Ditto.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104084
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104084
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:847a8301add0a316767878342c1367948835c181
commit r12-6808-g847a8301add0a316767878342c1367948835c181
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20040
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:847a8301add0a316767878342c1367948835c181
commit r12-6808-g847a8301add0a316767878342c1367948835c181
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
While looking at another bug I wanted the compiler to tell me what the two
unequal values were.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* semantics.cc (find_failing_clause): Return expr if not
decomposable.
(finish_static_assert): Show constant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104169
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 11:47 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 11:23 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > soe...@soeren-tempel.net writes:
> > > From: Sören Tempel
> > >
> > > The -fsplit-stack option requires the pthread_t TCB definition in the
> > > libc to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104170
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104170
Bug ID: 104170
Summary: [12 Regression] Failed to bootstrap by r12-6807
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104169
Bug ID: 104169
Summary: GDB unable to set $xmm2-7 register but able to set
$xmm0-1 on non-AVX machines
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ping patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/588292.html
| Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 13:04:19 -0500
| From: Michael Meissner
| Subject: [PATCH] Use system default for long double if not specified on
PowerPC.
| Message-ID:
I believe this patch will be very important when
Ping patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-January/587924.html
| Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 16:05:53 -0500
| From: Michael Meissner
| Subject: [PATCH] PR 103763, Fix fold-vec-splat-floatdouble on power10.
| Message-ID:
--
Michael Meissner, IBM
PO Box 98, Ayer, Massachusetts, USA,
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 4:20 AM soeren--- via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> From: Sören Tempel
>
> The -fsplit-stack option requires the pthread_t TCB definition in the
> libc to provide certain struct fields at specific hardcoded offsets. As
> far as I know, only glibc provides these fields at the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52246|0 |1
is obsolete|
Mark XXSPLTIW/XXSPLTIDP as prefixed -- PR 104136
If you compile module_advect_em.F90 with -Ofast -mcpu=power10, one module
is large enough that we can't use a single conditional jump to span the
function. Instead, GCC has to reverse the condition, and do a conditional
jump around an
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 11:23 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> soe...@soeren-tempel.net writes:
> > From: Sören Tempel
> >
> > The -fsplit-stack option requires the pthread_t TCB definition in the
> > libc to provide certain struct fields at specific hardcoded offsets. As
> > far
1 - 100 of 303 matches
Mail list logo
