This avoids a -Wunreachable-code diagnostic with EXECUTE_IF_*
in case the first iteration will exit the loop. For the case
in thread_jump using bitmap_empty_p looks preferable so this
adds REG_SET_EMPTY_P to make that available for register sets.
Bootstrapped and tested on
This refactors the IL "walk" in a way to avoid the loop which will
never iterate.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, will push later
unless there are comments explaining the function is wrong in other
ways.
Richard.
2021-11-25 Richard Biener
* cfgexpand.c
One case used fatal_insn which does not return which isn't
intended as can be seen by the following erro = 1. The following
change refactors this to inline the relevant parts of fatal_insn
instead and continue validating the RTL IL.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, will push.
The only use of get_alias_symbol is gated by a gcc_unreachable (),
so the following patch gets rid of it.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, OK?
Thanks,
Richard.
2021-11-24 Richard Biener
* cgraphunit.c (symbol_table::output_weakrefs): Remove
unreachable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103426
Bug ID: 103426
Summary: Acceptance of invalid template specialization in a
namespace not enclosing the specialized template
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 12:57 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 11:55 AM Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > Andrew's patch for this PR103254 papered over some underlying
> > performance issues in the path solver that I'd like to address.
> >
> > We are currently
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
---
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 12:30 PM Roger Sayle wrote:
>
>
> This is a simple one line fix to the regression PR middle-end/103406,
> where x - x is being folded to 0.0 even when x is +Inf or -Inf.
> In GCC 11 and previously, we'd check whether the type honored NaNs
> (which implicitly covered the
Hello Jan,
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Jan Hubicka
Komu: Zdenek Sojka
Datum: 25. 11. 2021 12:54:00
Předmět: Re: distinguishing gcc compilation valgrind false positives
>
> I can confirm that zero-initializing node_is_self_scc prevents the
> uninitialised use warnings in
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 11:55 AM Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Andrew's patch for this PR103254 papered over some underlying
> performance issues in the path solver that I'd like to address.
>
> We are currently solving the SSA's defined in the current block in
> bitmap order, which
>
> I can confirm that zero-initializing node_is_self_scc prevents the
> uninitialised use warnings in incorporate_penalties (ipa-cp.c:3282)
Great, I will commit the patch. But I also wonder if there are any
remaining unitialized warnings in ipa code?
Honza
>
> Thanks,
> Zdenek
>
>
Hello Jan,
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Jan Hubicka via Gcc
Komu: Martin Jambor
Datum: 25. 11. 2021 11:13:33
Předmět: Re: distinguishing gcc compilation valgrind false positives
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/ipa-prop.h b/gcc/ipa-prop.h
> > index 42842d9466a..1d0c115465c 100644
>
This is a simple one line fix to the regression PR middle-end/103406,
where x - x is being folded to 0.0 even when x is +Inf or -Inf.
In GCC 11 and previously, we'd check whether the type honored NaNs
(which implicitly covered the case where the type honors infinities),
but my patch to test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103052
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a1358f7ea475e9d46c1535656bdfb2a7904
commit r11-9310-g6a1358f7ea475e9d46c1535656bdfb2a7904
Author: Jan Hubicka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103052
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:298a4694f89ecb512be8ecba0512558996961fae
commit r10-10294-g298a4694f89ecb512be8ecba0512558996961fae
Author: Jan Hubicka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103395
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, the %n[_SDT_S##no] in there need to stay (dunno about the
_SDT_ASM_SUBSTR(_SDT_ARGTMPL(_SDT_A##no)) stuff), but that could be achieved
by giving the macro from, to, arg, args:vararg arguments and use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103425
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I hope it was not caused by my patch. As it could in theory cause cost
differences
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103416
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #4)
> Created attachment 51872 [details]
> RFC Patch to avoid the pointless evaluation, see comment 4
The default was supposed to be 'false' - to be overridden where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103416
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 51872
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51872=edit
RFC Patch to avoid the pointless evaluation, see comment 4
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #3)
> * Why is
Pushed as obvious.
Martin
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/invoke.texi: Use @option for -Wuninitialized.
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index d0ac59768b9..3bddfbaae6a 100644
---
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2021-11-23 Martin Jambor
>
> PR ipa/103227
> * ipa-prop.h (ipa_get_param): New overload. Move bits of the existing
> one to the new one.
> * ipa-param-manipulation.h (ipa_param_adjustments): New member
> function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103395
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Apparently the change on the systemtap side was:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=systemtap.git;a=commit;f=includes/sys/sdt.h;h=eaa15b047688175a94e3ae796529785a3a0af208
which indeed adds a lot of newlines to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80330
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 10:17:52AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > Ah I see, sorry I didn't see that rule before, you're right that if this
> > > is ordered
> > > after it then they can be dropped.
> >
> > So the patch is OK, possibly with
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> > On 11/24/21 11:15, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 04:21:31PM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > > wrote:
> > >> This resurrects -Wunreachable-code and implements a warning for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103254
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d1c1919ef8a18eea9d5c1741f8c9adaabf5571f2
commit r12-5515-gd1c1919ef8a18eea9d5c1741f8c9adaabf5571f2
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103254
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8acbd7bef6edbf537e3037174907029b530212f6
commit r12-5514-g8acbd7bef6edbf537e3037174907029b530212f6
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
In a follow-up patch I will be pruning the set of exported ranges
within blocks to avoid unnecessary work. In order to do this, all the
interesting SSA names must be in the internal import bitmap ahead of
time. I had already abstracted them out into compute_imports, but I
missed the boolean
Andrew's patch for this PR103254 papered over some underlying
performance issues in the path solver that I'd like to address.
We are currently solving the SSA's defined in the current block in
bitmap order, which amounts to random order for all purposes. This is
causing unnecessary recursion in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103425
Bug ID: 103425
Summary: 48% tramp3d regression between g:df1a0d526e2e4c75 and
g:9e026da720091704 with -Ofast -march=native at Zen
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103416
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
Okay, the
map(to:D.4217 [len: 4][implicit]) map(tofrom:n [len: 4][implicit])
issue is not new – only the '[implicit]' + the misaligned address one (fixed by
the patch from comment 1).
* * *
Thus
On 24/11/2021 11:00, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2021, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
On 22/11/2021 12:39, Richard Biener wrote:
+ if (first_loop_vinfo->suggested_unroll_factor > 1)
+{
+ if (LOOP_VINFO_EPIL_USING_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (first_loop_vinfo))
+ {
+ if
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 9:00 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 5:36 PM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > On 11/23/21 16:20, Martin Liška wrote:
> > > Sure, so for e.g. case 1 ... 5 we would need to create a new
> > > unswitch_predicate
> > > with 1 <= index && index <= 5 tree
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 9:00 AM liuhongt via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> TYPE_PRECISION (type) < TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (@2)) supposed to check
> integer type but not pointer type, so use second parameter instead.
>
> i.e. first parameter is VPTR, second parameter is I4.
>
> 582DEF_SYNC_BUILTIN
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:06 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> The predicate analysis subset of the tree-ssa-uninit pass isn't
> necessarily specific to the detection of uninitialized reads.
> Suitably parameterized, the same core logic could be used in
> other warning passes to improve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103395
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||scox at redhat dot com,
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/ipa-prop.h b/gcc/ipa-prop.h
> > index 42842d9466a..1d0c115465c 100644
> > --- a/gcc/ipa-prop.h
> > +++ b/gcc/ipa-prop.h
> > @@ -623,8 +623,8 @@ ipa_node_params::ipa_node_params ()
> > : descriptors (NULL), lattices (NULL), ipcp_orig_node (NULL),
> >known_csts (vNULL),
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 24 2021, Jan Hubicka via Gcc wrote:
>> ==5404== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
>> ==5404== at 0x25DAAD7: incorporate_penalties (ipa-cp.c:3282)
>> ==5404== by 0x25DAAD7: good_cloning_opportunity_p(cgraph_node*, sreal,
>> sreal, profile_count, int)
Just a quick ping to check this hasn't been forgotten.
> -Original Message-
> From: Joel Hutton
> Sent: 12 November 2021 11:42
> To: Richard Biener
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Sandiford
>
> Subject: RE: [vect-patterns] Refactor widen_plus/widen_minus as
> internal_fns
>
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103416
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Chung-Lin Tang from comment #1)
> Can you see if adding this patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-November/583279.html
> fixes this problem? If so, then it should be another
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103395
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103414
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[PDT] ICE in|[10/11/12 Regression] [PDT]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103415
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103414
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103413
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103424
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103412
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] ICE: |[10/11/12 Regression] ICE:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 10:17:52AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Ah I see, sorry I didn't see that rule before, you're right that if this is
> > ordered
> > after it then they can be dropped.
>
> So the patch is OK, possibly with re-ordering the matches.
I've committed the patch as is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103424
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Try using TFLAGS instead of CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103417
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:94912212d3d1be0b1c490e9b5f45165ef5f30d8a
commit r12-5513-g94912212d3d1be0b1c490e9b5f45165ef5f30d8a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103409
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103424
Bug ID: 103424
Summary: Ignoring -mfpu=sp_full/-mfpu=-sp_lite/-msingle-float
Product: gcc
Version: 8.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 09:21:37AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> OK if you can add a testcase that exercises this "feature".
Sure, that is easy.
Here is what I've committed. f2 tests the x | x = x handling in it,
f3 tests x | y = unknown instead of punting, f4 tests x ^ x = 0
and f5 tests x ^
Changes from original patch:
1. Merged test_redef_* test files into one
2. Encapsulated contents of arm-mve-builtins.h in namespace arm_mve (missed
in initial patch).
3. Added extern declarations for scalar_types and acle_vector types to
arm-mve-builtins.h (missed in initial patch).
4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103376
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:531dae29a67e915a145d908bd2f46d22bc369c11
commit r12-5512-g531dae29a67e915a145d908bd2f46d22bc369c11
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-25
Blocks|
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021, Tamar Christina wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jakub Jelinek
> > Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 8:39 AM
> > To: Tamar Christina
> > Cc: Richard Biener ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] match.pd: Fix up the recent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103405
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93259
--- Comment #4 from m.cencora at gmail dot com ---
This might be related to CWG2487 "Type dependence of function-style cast to
incomplete array type"
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 8:19 AM
> To: Richard Biener
> Cc: Tamar Christina ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [PATCH] match.pd: Fix up the recent bitmask_inv_cst_vector_p
> simplification [PR103417]
>
> Hi!
>
> The following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103409
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
I filled in PR103423. Interesting observation is that both regressions are cca
18% but happens at different time-ranges. This one is spec2017 WRF while the
other is spec2006 WRF and neither reproduce on
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 8:39 AM
> To: Tamar Christina
> Cc: Richard Biener ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] match.pd: Fix up the recent bitmask_inv_cst_vector_p
> simplification [PR103417]
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021, Michael Matz wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Wed, 24 Nov 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > > >> +/* Unreachable code in if (0) block. */
> > > >> +void baz(int *p)
> > > >> +{
> > > >> + if (0)
> > > >> + {
> > > >> +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103423
Bug ID: 103423
Summary: 19% cpu2006 wrf compile time regression with -flto
between g:0b7a11874d4eb428 and g:704e8a825c78b9a8
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 08:23:50AM +, Tamar Christina wrote:
> > But, IMNSHO while it isn't incorrect to handle le and gt there, it is
> > unnecessary. Because (x & cst) <= 0U and (x & cst) > 0U should never
> > appear,
> > again in
> > /* Non-equality compare simplifications from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103409
--- Comment #2 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> The two main changes during that time period was jump threading and modref.
> modref seems might be more likely with wrf being fortran code and even using
> nested functions and such.
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021, Tamar Christina wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jakub Jelinek
> > Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 8:19 AM
> > To: Richard Biener
> > Cc: Tamar Christina ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: [PATCH] match.pd: Fix up the recent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103405
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
Fixed by g:16e85390507ea92331c9052393b591202007f5ab (forgot to add PR marker)
Hi Jakub,
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2021 8:19 AM
> To: Richard Biener
> Cc: Tamar Christina ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [PATCH] match.pd: Fix up the recent bitmask_inv_cst_vector_p
> simplification [PR103417]
>
> Hi!
>
> The
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 09:45:16AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > Thinking more about it, perhaps we could do more for BIT_XOR_EXPR.
> > > We could allow masked1 == masked2 case for it, but would need to
> > > do something different than the
> > >
On Wed, 24 Nov 2021, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > >> +/* Unreachable code in if (0) block. */
> > >> +void baz(int *p)
> > >> +{
> > >> + if (0)
> > >> + {
> > >> +return; /* { dg-bogus "not reachable" } */
> > >
> > >Hmm?
Hi!
The following testcase is miscompiled since the r12-5489-g0888d6bbe97e10
changes.
The simplification triggers on
(x & 4294967040U) >= 0U
and turns it into:
x <= 255U
which is incorrect, it should fold to 1 because unsigned >= 0U is always
true and normally the
/* Non-equality compare
201 - 272 of 272 matches
Mail list logo
