https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104237
--- Comment #9 from Chengnian Sun ---
Hi,
Could you explain why the flag `-fcompare-debug` does not detect this bug? Is
it because the bug is triggered with -flto and -fcompare-debug does not work
with -flto?
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104219
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104213
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||unlvsur at live dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104190
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104265
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104266
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is another example:
class X { protected: ~X(); friend struct Y; };
struct Y { X x = {}; };
int main() {
Y b {};
}
But unlike the previous example, this one is rejected by clang in C++14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104266
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
Use correct names for __ibm128 if long double is IEEE 128-bit.
If you are on a PowerPC system where the default long double is IEEE
128-bit, GCC will use the wrong names for some of the conversion functions
for the __ibm128 type.
What is happening is when the defult long double is IEEE 128-bit,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104268
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104277
Bug ID: 104277
Summary: [meta-bug] gstatement-frontiers causes fcompare-debug
issues
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
Weird things are going to happen if you define your std::initializer_list
as a union. In this case, we crash in output_constructor_regular_field.
Let's not allow such a definition in the first place.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
PR c++/102434
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100930
Carl Love changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carll at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
On Linux/x86_64,
c2b610e7c6c89fd422c5c31f01023bcddf3cf4a5 is the first bad commit
commit c2b610e7c6c89fd422c5c31f01023bcddf3cf4a5
Author: Zhao Wei Liew
Date: Fri Jan 28 13:36:39 2022 -0500
match.pd: Simplify 1 / X for integer X [PR95424]
caused
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/divide-7.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80641
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is interesting:
_48 = _149 + 18446744073709551612; // _149 - 4
_63 = _55 + _48;
_18 = _63 - _55;
_19 = _18 /[ex] 4;
_20 = (long unsigned int) _19;
if (_55 != _63)
_18 should be the same as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28134
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Darrell.Wright at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Fail to eliminate deadstore |memset is not elimited when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #3 from Darrell Wright ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> >clang is unable to remove the memset in code like
>
> I think you mean GCC there :).
:) both are true. This optimization would remove the need for things
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>clang is unable to remove the memset in code like
I think you mean GCC there :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Full testcase:
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#define SZ 4096
std::vector foo() {
auto result = std::vector(SZ);
int *ptr = result.data();
for (std::size_t n = 0; n < SZ; ++n) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:21AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> When introducing the new built-in support, I tried to match as many
> existing error messages as possible. One common form was "argument X must
> be a Y-bit unsigned literal". Another was "argument X must be a literal
> between X'
param_early_inliner_max_iterations specifies the maximum number
of nested indirect inlining iterations performed by early inliner.
Normally, the default value is 1.
For AutoFDO this parameter was also used as the number of iteration for
its indirect call promotion loop and the default value was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98026
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #4)
> > void f4(signed int i,unsigned int j) {
> > if (i > 100) return;
> > if (j > i) return;
> >
> > if (j > 100) link_error();
>
> if i is -2 (0xfffe)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Bug ID: 104276
Summary: Fail to eliminate deadstore from vector constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98026
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod ---
> void f4(signed int i,unsigned int j) {
> if (i > 100) return;
> if (j > i) return;
>
> if (j > 100) link_error();
if i is -2 (0xfffe) and j is 0xff (-1)
then link error cant be
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 03:19:48PM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On 1/28/22 1:11 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:19AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> >> + and the generic code will issue the appropriate error message. Skip
> >> + this test for functions where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103872
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|riscv64-unknown-elf |riscv64-unknown-elf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103872
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104273
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104270
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104255
--- Comment #4 from qingzhe huang ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #2)
>
> error: use of parameter outside function body before ‘)’ token
>
> due to 'e' being used outside of an unevaluated context within the signature
> of the
Snapshot gcc-10-20220128 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20220128/
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=104253
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52306|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101135
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 52311
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52311=edit
Patch that regtests ok.
The patch suggested by the reporter is rather close to this one.
We need to
On 1/12/2022 2:02 AM, Yoshinori Sato wrote:
sh-linux not supported any SH1 and SH2a little-endian.
Add exceptios it.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/sh/t-linux (MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS): Add m1, mb/m1 and m2a.
Thanks. Technically this is probably too late to make gcc-12 as we're
in stage4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103514
Navid Rahimi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On 1/5/2022 1:12 PM, Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 103514 [1] to the
match.pd. [1] includes proof of correctness for the patch too.
PR tree-optimization/103514
* match.pd (a & b) ^ (a == b) -> !(a | b):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103514
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cb3ac1985a5332fa811a62844adb33ca140bd4ba
commit r12-6928-gcb3ac1985a5332fa811a62844adb33ca140bd4ba
Author: Navid Rahimi
Date: Fri
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 at 18:17, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/24/2022 4:11 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> > On 1/21/22 17:54, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >> Yes, OK (but please CC the libstdc++ list, not just me).
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> > Sorry for that. Anyway, I would like to install the extended version
> >
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022, Richard Biener wrote:
> > that's not what it does. It treats it like
> >
> > float tem = f;
> > return x + { tem, tem, tem, tem };
> >
> > avoiding, like for x + (1.0f + f) creating
> >
> > return x + { 1.0+f, 1.0+f, 1.0+f ...}
> >
> > it's more CSE than volatile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|hppa*-*-hpux* |
Build|hppa*-*-hpux*
On 1/28/22 2:32 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:20AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> It was recently pointed out that we get anomalous behavior when using
>> __attribute__((target)) to select a CPU. As an example, when building for
>> -mcpu=power8 but using
On 1/28/22 1:11 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:19AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> This patch continues the refactoring started with r12-6014.
> ab3f5b71dc6e
>
>> + and the generic code will issue the appropriate error message. Skip
>> + this test for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104228
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
--- Comment #14 from Luke Dalessandro ---
Thanks for the information Iain.
Is there something short-term where gcc could provide an "unimplemented"
failure or warning diagnostic for requests for coroutine frames with extended
alignment?
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #8 from Michael Meissner ---
Yes, you are right. I didn't remember which functions were generated by the
compiler, but I just did all of the conversion functions.
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 05:12:41PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 1/28/22 16:26, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 04:08:18PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> > > On 1/28/22 15:59, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 02:53:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> > > > > On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104275
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |ipa
CC|
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:17:00PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 1/27/22 20:02, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > @@ -11159,8 +11159,16 @@ create_array_type_for_decl (tree name, tree type,
> > tree size, location_t loc)
> > /* Figure out the index type for the array. */
> > if (size)
> > -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104177
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104275
Bug ID: 104275
Summary: Os does not apply return value optimization while O2
and O3 does
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92752
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression] Bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92752
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e971990cbda091b4caf5e1a5bded5121068934e4
commit r12-6926-ge971990cbda091b4caf5e1a5bded5121068934e4
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:20AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> It was recently pointed out that we get anomalous behavior when using
> __attribute__((target)) to select a CPU. As an example, when building for
> -mcpu=power8 but using __attribute__((target("mcpu=power10")), it is legal
> to call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Conversion from __ibm128 to float/double etc. are done differently, and for si
<-> if named tf we want to use di instead.
So, shouldn't we just add
+ set_conv_libfunc (sfix_optab, DImode, mode,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101891
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-28
> On 25 Jan 2022, at 15:27, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
> This patch broke bootstrap on AIX. It may have broken Darwin.
As you anticipated, it did : fixed as below (tested on powerpc-darwin9,
pushed to master).
thanks
Iain
[pushed] Darwin, PPC: Fix bootstrap after GLIBC version changes.
A
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:19AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> This patch continues the refactoring started with r12-6014.
ab3f5b71dc6e
> + and the generic code will issue the appropriate error message. Skip
> + this test for functions where we don't fully describe all the possible
> +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104274
Bug ID: 104274
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/pr97029.c (test for excess
errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104273
Bug ID: 104273
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/pr103526.c (test for bogus
messages, line 31)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104255
--- Comment #3 from qingzhe huang ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #2)
> The error message is obscure, but it seems what GCC has issue with here is
> the use of the function parameter seq2 in the trailing return type occurring
>
On 1/21/2022 9:52 AM, Andreas Krebbel via Gcc-patches wrote:
When propagating a multi-word register into an access with a smaller
mode the can_change_mode backend hook is already consulted for the
original register. This however is also required for the intermediate
copy in copy_regno which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70230
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19987
Bug 19987 depends on bug 95424, which changed state.
Bug 95424 Summary: Failure to optimize division with numerator of 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104272
Bug ID: 104272
Summary: finalizer gets called during allocate
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104253
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #4)
> Created attachment 52306 [details]
> Patch to use the correct names for __ibm128 converts if long double is IEEE
> 128-bit
>
> The problem was internally
On 1/19/2022 11:42 AM, Zhao Wei Liew via Gcc-patches wrote:
This patch implements an optimization for the following C++ code:
int f(int x) {
return 1 / x;
}
int f(unsigned int x) {
return 1 / x;
}
Before this patch, x86-64 gcc -std=c++20 -O3 produces the following assembly:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2b610e7c6c89fd422c5c31f01023bcddf3cf4a5
commit r12-6924-gc2b610e7c6c89fd422c5c31f01023bcddf3cf4a5
Author: Zhao Wei Liew
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102204
--- Comment #3 from Ye Luo ---
I tried today's main 3f0fcda37f58d4108feb67de08f181a32bcb6388.
This issue persists. Any chance this will be resolved in 12 release?
On 1/24/2022 4:11 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 1/21/22 17:54, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Yes, OK (but please CC the libstdc++ list, not just me).
Hello.
Sorry for that. Anyway, I would like to install the extended version
of the patch
that touches all libraries.
Ready to be installed?
It
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |testsuite
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |c++
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
On 1/28/22 12:54, Patrick Palka wrote:
Here we're emitting a -Wignored-qualifiers warning for an
intermediate compiler-generated cast of 0 to 'method-type* const'
as part of value initialization of a const pmf. This patch
suppresses the warning by stripping cv-quals from this pointer
type
On 1/24/2022 7:46 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
We were passing down the original type to recursive invocations
of multiple_of_p for say (int)(unsigned * unsigned).
Bootstrap and regtest pending on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
2022-01-24 Richard Biener
* fold-const.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104263
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression]
On 1/24/2022 7:45 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
There are a few cases where we know we're dealing with (poly-)integer
constants, so remove the use of multiple_of_p in those cases to make
the PR100499 fix less impactful.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
OK?
> Am 28.01.2022 um 18:36 schrieb Jeff Law :
>
>
>
>> On 1/28/2022 9:31 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> As mentioned in the PRthe following testcase fails, because the last
>> stmt of a bb with -g is a debug stmt and get_status_for_store_merging
>> uses
Mark Power10 fusion option undocumented and remove sub-options.
Bootstrapped and regression tested on powerpc64le(Power10).
Ok for master?
-Pat
2022-01-28 Pat Haugen
gcc/
* config/rs6000/rs6000.opt (mpower10-fusion): Mark Undocumented.
(mpower10-fusion-ld-cmpi,
Hi,
PR 100775 ( ICE: in df_exit_block_bitmap_verify, at df-scan.c:4164 with -mthumb
-fzero-call-used-regs=used)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100775
Although the ICE only happens on arm, but this is a bug in the middle end. So,
I think this bug has higher priority,
Need to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104263
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a591c71b41e18e4ff86852a974592af4962aef57
commit r12-6923-ga591c71b41e18e4ff86852a974592af4962aef57
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99175
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa*-*-hpux*
On 1/24/2022 6:31 PM, liuhongt via Gcc-patches wrote:
For i386, it enables optimization like:
vmovd %xmm0, %edx
- vmovd %xmm0, %eax
+ movl%edx, %eax
Bootstrapped and regtested on CLX for both
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,} and
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32\
Here we're emitting a -Wignored-qualifiers warning for an
intermediate compiler-generated cast of 0 to 'method-type* const'
as part of value initialization of a const pmf. This patch
suppresses the warning by stripping cv-quals from this pointer
type before performing the cast.
Bootstrapped and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104269
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new built-in
function infrastructure. In particular, I forgot to mark all of the "nosoft"
built-ins, and one of those should also have been marked "no32bit".
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu with no regressions.
Is this
As the subject states. Fixing this is accomplished by moving the built-ins
to the correct stanzas, [altivec] and [vsx].
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu with no regressions.
Is this okay for trunk?
Thanks,
Bill
2022-01-27 Bill Schmidt
gcc/
*
The -m[no-]fold-gimple flag was really intended primarily for internal
testing while implementing GIMPLE folding for rs6000 vector built-in
functions. It ended up leaking into other places, causing problems such
as PR103686 identifies. Let's remove it.
There are a number of tests in the
These built-ins were misimplemented as always having big-endian semantics.
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu with no regressions.
Is this okay for trunk?
Thanks,
Bill
2022-01-18 Bill Schmidt
gcc/
PR target/95082
* config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.cc
When introducing the new built-in support, I tried to match as many
existing error messages as possible. One common form was "argument X must
be a Y-bit unsigned literal". Another was "argument X must be a literal
between X' and Y', inclusive". During reviews, Segher requested that I
It was recently pointed out that we get anomalous behavior when using
__attribute__((target)) to select a CPU. As an example, when building for
-mcpu=power8 but using __attribute__((target("mcpu=power10")), it is legal
to call __builtin_vec_mod, but not vec_mod, even though these are
equivalent.
On 1/26/2022 8:29 AM, Nick Clifton via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi Guys,
I would like to propose the patch below to fix a couple of sources
of infinite recursion in libiberty's rust demangling code. This patch
is based upon the one submitted for PR 99935, but extended to cope
with the
This patch continues the refactoring started with r12-6014. I had previously
noted that the resolve_vec* routines can be further simplified by processing
the argument list earlier, so that all routines can use the arrays of arguments
and types. I found that this was useful for some of the
Hi!
This is a resubmission of some patches and a new submission of others.
Patches 1, 3, and 4 finish up the pending clean-up work for the new built-in
infrastructure support. Patches 2 and 5-8 fix a variety of bugs not specific
to the new infrastructure. I'm submitting these as a group
On 1/26/2022 6:42 PM, Allan McRae via Gcc-patches wrote:
Configuring with --enable-default-ssp triggers various testsuite
failures. These contain asm statements that are not compatible with
-fstack-protector. Adding -fno-stack-protector to dg-options to
work around this issue.
Tested on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70230
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:90c31ff339015ddd89ac519656fbd23a36ee6271
commit r12-6922-g90c31ff339015ddd89ac519656fbd23a36ee6271
Author: Allan McRae
Date: Fri Jan
1 - 100 of 206 matches
Mail list logo
