[Bug target/82440] [8 regression] ICE in aarch64_simd_valid_immediate

2017-10-05 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82440

--- Comment #2 from Sudakshina Das  ---
Sorry about this. I am currently testing a fix for this.

Sudakshina

[Bug target/82440] [8 regression] ICE in aarch64_simd_valid_immediate

2017-10-06 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82440

--- Comment #3 from Sudakshina Das  ---
Again my apologies for this.

Please refer to
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg00329.html

[Bug rtl-optimization/82454] New: Possible future performance regression in x86 for 64-bit constant expansions

2017-10-06 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82454

Bug ID: 82454
   Summary: Possible future performance regression in x86 for
64-bit constant expansions
   Product: gcc
   Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: rtl-optimization
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: sudi.das at arm dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Created attachment 42317
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42317&action=edit
test1

As per the discussions on 

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg00570.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg00039.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-09/msg01736.html

The patch to add a simplification of 1U << (31 - x) for PR 80131, may lead to a
performance regression for x86.

I am adding the tests that Jakub mentioned as a runtime performance regression
tests.

[Bug rtl-optimization/82454] Possible future performance regression in x86 for 64-bit constant expansions

2017-10-06 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82454

--- Comment #1 from Sudakshina Das  ---
Created attachment 42318
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42318&action=edit
test2

[Bug ipa/82903] [8 regression] gcc.dg/tree-prof/20050826-2.c fail

2017-11-09 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82903

--- Comment #3 from Sudakshina Das  ---
Confirmed on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and arm-none-linux-gnueabihf

[Bug bootstrap/82948] [8 Regression] prefix.c:202:15: error: 'char* strncpy(char*, const char*, size_t)' destination unchanged after copying no bytes [-Werror=stringop-truncation]

2017-11-13 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82948

Sudakshina Das  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||sudi.das at arm dot com

--- Comment #3 from Sudakshina Das  ---
I think this is breaking glibc build on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and
arm-none-linux-gnueabihf. 

../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c: In function '__if_nametoindex':
../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c:46:3: error: 'strncpy' specified bound 16
equals destination size [-Werror=stringop-truncation]
   strncpy (ifr.ifr_name, ifname, sizeof (ifr.ifr_name));

[Bug middle-end/83069] [8 Regression] internal compiler error: in from_gcov_type, at profile-count.h:676

2017-11-27 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83069

Sudakshina Das  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||sudi.das at arm dot com

--- Comment #9 from Sudakshina Das  ---
Confirmed on aarch64-none-linux-gnu

[Bug regression/83195] New: [8 regression] pr82929.c scan for "Merging successful" fail

2017-11-28 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83195

Bug ID: 83195
   Summary: [8 regression] pr82929.c scan for "Merging successful"
fail
   Product: gcc
   Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: regression
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: sudi.das at arm dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

The test case pr82929.c that got in recently with the store merging patches has
started to fail on native arm-none-linux-gnueabihf and cross bare metals of
arm-none-eabi

FAIL: gcc.dg/pr82929.c scan-tree-dump-times store-merging "Merging successful"
1 (found 0 times)

This has been there since at least r255140.

Thanks
Sudi

[Bug tree-optimization/83195] [8 regression] pr82929.c scan for "Merging successful" fail

2017-11-28 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83195

--- Comment #4 from Sudakshina Das  ---
I think this is the only test that fails on arm.

[Bug gcov-profile/83214] New: [8 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-8.C -std=gnu++11 gcov failed

2017-11-29 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83214

Bug ID: 83214
   Summary: [8 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-8.C
-std=gnu++11  gcov failed
   Product: gcc
   Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: gcov-profile
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: sudi.das at arm dot com
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

On arm-none-linux-gnueabihf:

FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-8.C  -std=gnu++11  gcov failed
FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-8.C  -std=gnu++14  gcov failed
FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-8.C  -std=gnu++98  gcov failed

Failing at least from r255140

[Bug gcov-profile/83214] [8 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-8.C -std=gnu++11 gcov failed

2017-11-29 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83214

--- Comment #1 from Sudakshina Das  ---
Sorry I am bit confused with this. Not failing anymore on my bootstrapped build
from trunk this morning!

[Bug tree-optimization/80249] New: Failed to build SPEC 2006 483.xalancbmk with -fdump-tree-fre

2017-03-29 Thread sudi.das at arm dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80249

Bug ID: 80249
   Summary: Failed to build SPEC 2006 483.xalancbmk with
-fdump-tree-fre
   Product: gcc
   Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: tree-optimization
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: sudi.das at arm dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Created attachment 41071
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41071&action=edit
Reduced testcase

An ICE occurs while building 483.xalancbmk in SPEC2006 with the flag
-fdump-tree-fre (while compiling TokenFactory.cpp)

The attached test case has been reduced from it. It fails with both x86-64 and
AArch64 with the following command :

g++ -O3 -fdump-tree-fre reduced.cpp

reduced.cpp: In member function 'xercesc_2_5::Token*
xercesc_2_5::TokenFactory::getGraphemePattern()':
reduced.cpp:91:8: internal compiler error: in
dump_possible_polymorphic_call_targets, at ipa-devirt.c:3370
 Token* TokenFactory::getGraphemePattern() {
^~~~
0xb6eb3e dump_possible_polymorphic_call_targets(_IO_FILE*, tree_node*, long,
ipa_polymorphic_call_context const&)
/src/gcc/gcc/ipa-devirt.c:3370
0xf45739 eliminate_dom_walker::before_dom_children(basic_block_def*)
/src/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c:4607
0x138620e dom_walker::walk(basic_block_def*)
/src/gcc/gcc/domwalk.c:265
0xf466f7 eliminate
/src/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c:4763
0xf469b3 execute
/src/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c:5197