[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-22 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-22 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c24011b2ba0f268e74b72519fc8119c2c99d92b commit r14-5752-g8c24011b2ba0f268e74b72519fc8119c2c99d92b Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-21 Thread sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 --- Comment #9 from Sam James --- ack, np.

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-21 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- That one seems to be too large IMHO.

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-21 Thread sjames at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 --- Comment #7 from Sam James --- We can add the test case at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112526#c14 too if it's fine.

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-21 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | CC|

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Works for me with r14-5566-g841008d3966c0f .

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-14 Thread zsojka at seznam dot cz via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 --- Comment #4 from Zdenek Sojka --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > I cannot reproduce it with r14-5450-g4db820928065ec or > r14-5427-gd22b87864e5d47 . Thank you for the investigation! Either the flags have changed, or I did

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-14 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I cannot reproduce it with r14-5450-g4db820928065ec or r14-5427-gd22b87864e5d47 .

[Bug target/112518] [14 Regression] wrong code with __builtin_mul_overflow_p() and int128_t on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

2023-11-13 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112518 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[14 Regression] wrong code |[14 Regression] wrong code