[Bug tree-optimization/107618] Incorrect diagnostics when using -Og, builtin_expect(), and function attribute "warning" or "error"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107618 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Version|unknown

Re: [PATCH v2] match.pd: rewrite select to branchless expression

On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 07:58, Michael Collison wrote: > > This patches transforms ((x & 0x1) == 0) ? y : z y -into > (-(typeof(y))(x & 0x1) & z) y, where op is a '^' or a '|'. It also > transforms (cond (and (x , 0x1) != 0), (z op y), y ) into (-(and (x , > 0x1)) & z ) op y. > > Matching this

[PATCH] c++: Implement CWG 2654 - Un-deprecation of compound volatile assignments

Hi! Again, because stage1 close is near, posting the following patch to implement CWG 2654. Ok for trunk if it passes bootstrap/regtest and is voted into C++23 and C++20 as a DR? 2022-11-11 Jakub Jelinek * typeck.cc (cp_build_modify_expr): Implement CWG 2654 - Un-deprecation

[Bug tree-optimization/107617] SCC-VN with len_store and big endian

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107617 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[PATCH] c++: Implement C++23 P2589R1 - - static operator[]

Hi! As stage1 is very close, here is a patch that implements the static operator[] paper. One thing that doesn't work properly is the same problem as I've filed yesterday for static operator() - PR107624 - that side-effects of the postfix-expression on which the call or subscript operator are

[Bug tree-optimization/107608] [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107608 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/107569] [13 Regression] Failure to optimize std::isfinite since r13-3596

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107569 --- Comment #35 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #34) > (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #33) > > what you're looking for is frange::maybe_isinf. > > Again, that works on frange, which I don't have here.

[Bug target/107627] [13 Regression] int128_t shift generates extra xor/or.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107627 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[13] Regression int128_t|[13 Regression] int128_t

[Bug target/107627] [13] Regression int128_t shift generates extra xor/or.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107627 --- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu --- Looks like caused by r13-1379-ge8a46e5cdab500

[Bug rtl-optimization/107628] New: ICE: SIGSEGV in commutative_operand_precedence (rtlanal.cc:3770) with -fsignaling-nans

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107628 Bug ID: 107628 Summary: ICE: SIGSEGV in commutative_operand_precedence (rtlanal.cc:3770) with -fsignaling-nans Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[committed] libstdc++: Fix tests with non-const operator==

Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- These tests fail in strict -std=c++20 mode but their equality ops don't need to be non-const, it looks like an accident. This fixes two FAILs with -std=c++20: FAIL: 20_util/tuple/swap.cc (test for excess errors) FAIL: 26_numerics/valarray/87641.cc

[committed] libstdc++: Add missing definition for in C++14 mode

Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- We support in C++14 as an extension, but that means that constexpr static data members are not implicitly inline. Add an out-of-class definition for C++14 mode. This fixes a FAIL when -std=gnu++14 is used: FAIL: 20_util/from_chars/1.cc (test for

[committed] libstdc++: Fix test that uses C++17 variable template in C++14

Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- This test fails if run with -std=gnu++14 because it should be using is_convertible instead of is_convertible_v. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * testsuite/experimental/propagate_const/observers/107525.cc: Use type trait instead of C++17

[committed] libstdc++: Avoid redundant checks in std::use_facet [PR103755]

As discussed in the PR, this makes it three times faster to construct iostreams objects. Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk. -- >8 -- We do not need to do bounds checks or a runtime dynamic_cast when using std::has_facet and std::use_facet to access the default facets that are guaranteed to

Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] LoongArch: Add ftint{,rm,rp}.{w,l}.{s,d} instructions

Lulu: So I think the code is correct: + ( +|| flag_fp_int_builtin_inexact +|| !flag_trapping_math)" is 1 for lrint, 0 for lceil and lfloor. As N3054 says: The lrint and llrint functions provide floating-to-integer conversion as prescribed by IEC 60559. They round according

[Bug libstdc++/103755] {has,use}_facet() and iostream constructor performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b3ac43a3c05744d62a963d656bed782fc867ad79 commit r13-3888-gb3ac43a3c05744d62a963d656bed782fc867ad79 Author: Jonathan Wakely

[PATCH v2] Add condition coverage profiling

From: Jørgen Kvalsvik This patch adds support in gcc+gcov for modified condition/decision coverage (MC/DC) with the -fprofile-conditions flag. MC/DC is a type of test/code coverage and it is particularly important in the avation and automotive industries for safety-critical applications. MC/DC

[Bug target/106220] x86-64 optimizer forgets about shrd peephole optimization pattern when faced with more than one in close proximity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106220 --- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu --- Try to add combine splitter (define_insn_and_split "*x86_64_shrd_lshiftrtti" [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "nonimmediate_operand") (subreg:DI (lshiftrt:TI (match_operand:TI 1 "nonimmediate_operand")

[Bug c++/107622] Missing optimization of switch-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107622 --- Comment #4 from Wilhelm M --- In the following class the static data member is accessible via explicit template instantiation from the outside. So the compiler cannot reason that the value is in [0,2]. But this does not hold for the

[Bug c++/107622] Missing optimization of switch-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107622 --- Comment #3 from Wilhelm M --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > In the following example the default-case > > Yes it can. You can pass a 0xf to that function and still have well defined > behavior. Oh yes, thank you for the

[Bug c/85487] Support '#pragma region' and '#pragma endregion' to allow code folding with Visual Studio

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85487 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c/85487] Support '#pragma region' and '#pragma endregion' to allow code folding with Visual Studio

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85487 --- Comment #16 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d3fe767c16e7c528e4fc71c8a68ac14b4573d880 commit r13-3887-gd3fe767c16e7c528e4fc71c8a68ac14b4573d880 Author: Jonathan Wakely

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022, at 10:08 PM, Sam James wrote: >> On 10 Nov 2022, at 21:10, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> While everyone else is discussing big ideas, it would be helpful for me >> personally if autoconf just made a release with the latest bugfixes. > > Before I dive into the rest of this

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

> On 10 Nov 2022, at 21:10, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 12:16 -0500, Zack Weinberg wrote: >> >> Nobody has a whole lot of time to work on Autoconf at present, but I >> would like to ask, anyway, what Autoconf could potentially do to make >> this transition easier. > >

[PATCH] configure: Implement --enable-host-bind-now

This is a rebased version of the patch I posted in February: . Fortunately it is much simpler than the patch implementing --enable-host-pie. I've converted the install.texi part into configuration.rst, otherwise there are no

[PATCH] configure: Implement --enable-host-pie

This is a rebased version of the patch I posted in March: which Alex sort of approved here: but it was too late to commit the patch in GCC 12. There are no changes

[PATCH] i386: Add AMX-TILE dependency for AMX related ISAs

Hi all, For all AMX related ISAs, we have a potential dependency on AMX-TILE or we even won't have the basic support on AMX. This patch added those dependency. Ok for trunk? BRs, Haochen gcc/ChangeLog: * common/config/i386/i386-common.cc (OPTION_MASK_ISA2_AMX_INT8_SET): Add

[PATCH v2] match.pd: rewrite select to branchless expression

This patches transforms ((x & 0x1) == 0) ? y : z y -into (-(typeof(y))(x & 0x1) & z) y, where op is a '^' or a '|'. It also transforms (cond (and (x , 0x1) != 0), (z op y), y ) into (-(and (x , 0x1)) & z ) op y. Matching this patterns allows GCC to generate branchless code for one of the

Re: [PATCH] range-op: Implement floating point multiplication fold_range [PR107569]

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 08:20:06PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > So, maybe for now a selftest will be better than a testcase, or > alternatively a plugin test which acts like a selftest. For a testsuite/g*.dg/plugin/ range-op-plugin.c test, would be nice to write a short plugin

[Bug target/107627] New: [13] Regression int128_t shift generates extra xor/or.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107627 Bug ID: 107627 Summary: [13] Regression int128_t shift generates extra xor/or. Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

RE: [PATCH V2] Enable small loop unrolling for O2

Thanks for the notification! I’m not aware of the compile farm before. Will see what’s the impact of my patch then. Regards, Hongyu, Wang From: David Edelsohn Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2022 1:22 AM To: Wang, Hongyu Cc: GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] Enable small loop unrolling for O2

Re: [PATCH] i386: Add ISA check for newly introduced prefetch builtins.

On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 3:15 PM Haochen Jiang via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Hi all, > > As Hongtao said, the fail on pentiumpro is caused by missing ISA check > since we are using emit_insn () through new builtins and it won't check > if the TARGET matches. Previously, the builtin in middle-end will

[PATCH 0/2] Support HWASAN with Intel LAM

2 years ago, ARM folks support HWASAN[1] in GCC[2], and introduced several target hooks(Many thanks to their work) so other backends can do similar things if they have similar feature. Intel LAM(linear Address Masking)[3 Charpter 14] supports similar feature with the upper bits of pointers can

[PATCH 1/2] Implement hwasan target_hook.

gcc/ChangeLog: * config/i386/i386-opts.h (enum lam_type): New enum. * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_memtag_can_tag_addresses): New. (ix86_memtag_set_tag): Ditto. (ix86_memtag_extract_tag): Ditto. (ix86_memtag_add_tag): Ditto. (ix86_memtag_tag_size):

[PATCH 2/2] Enable hwasan for x86-64.

libsanitizer * configure.tgt: Enable hwasan for x86-64. --- libsanitizer/configure.tgt | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/libsanitizer/configure.tgt b/libsanitizer/configure.tgt index 87d8a2c3820..72385a4a39d 100644 --- a/libsanitizer/configure.tgt +++

Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] LoongArch: Add ftint{,rm,rp}.{w,l}.{s,d} instructions

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches wrote: > Joseph: can you confirm that -ftrapping-math allows floor and ceil to > raise inexact exception? The man page currently says: > > The default is -ffp-int-builtin-inexact, allowing the exception to be > raised, unless C2X or a later C

Different outputs in Gimple pass dump generated by two different architectures

Hello GCC, While looking at the failure for gcc.dg/uninit-pred-9_b.c, I observed that x86-64 and risc-v has a different output for the gimple pass since r12-4790-g4b3a325f07acebf4 . What would be causing the difference? Is this

Re: [PATCH] c-family: Support #pragma region/endregion [PR85487]

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote: > Something similar has been proposed before, but didn't get approval. > Jeff wanted a more general framework for ignoring pragmas. It might make > sense to do that, and reuse it for the Darwin-specific 'mark' pragmas. > But as I said in

[Bug c++/105195] spurious warning label defined but not used with if constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105195 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- MSVC warns too: (12): warning C4102: 'label': unreferenced label (17): note: see reference to function template instantiation 'void f(void)' being compiled clang does not though. I think GCC should not

[Bug target/105480] Vectorized `isnan` appears to trigger FPE on ppc64le

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105480 --- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- __builtin_isnan must not raise "invalid" for signaling NaN arguments. __builtin_isunordered (i.e. UNORDERED / UNORDERED_EXPR; standard macro isunordered) must raise "invalid" for

[Bug driver/107448] [11/12/13 Regression] GCC no longer diagnoses missing input file with -MG since r11-6855-g4804de453e7f5f90

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107448 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid Summary|GCC

Re: -Wint-conversion, -Wincompatible-pointer-types, -Wpointer-sign: Are they hiding constraint C violations?

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > I assumed that there was a rule similar to the the rule for #error for > any kind of diagnostic, which would mean that GCC errors are diagnostic > messages in the sense of the standard, but GCC warnings are not. The rule (for C) is that any

Re: [PATCH] Various pages: SYNOPSIS: Use VLA syntax in function parameters

Hi Joseph, On 11/11/22 00:19, Joseph Myers wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote: One problem with WG14 papers is that people put in too much, because the overhead is so high and the standard is not updated very often. It would be better to build such feature more

demangler: Templated lambda demangling

Templated lambdas have a template-head, which is part of their signature. GCC ABI 18 mangles that into the lambda name. This adds support to the demangler. We have to introduce artificial template parameter names, as we need to refer to them from later components of the lambda signature. We

[Bug target/107590] __atomic_test_and_set broken on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107590 --- Comment #15 from Sergey Fedorov --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13) > Oh yes there could be a bug here when the byte (lbarx/stbcx.) and half-word > (lharx/sthcx.) instruction support was added (which was for Power8; >

[Bug c++/80637] constraint on a member function does causes ambigious and not allowing forming a pointer to the function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80637 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > Reduced testcase from the dup bug: Oh MSVC still rejects this reduced testcase for the same reason as GCC. (19): error C3535: cannot deduce type for 'auto' from

[Bug c++/80637] constraint on a member function does causes ambigious and not allowing forming a pointer to the function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80637 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-11-10 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/107605] constraint on a member function does causes ambigious and not allowing forming a pointer to the function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107605 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c++/80637] [concepts] incorrect ambiguous overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80637 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jlame646 at gmail dot com --- Comment

Re: [PATCH] Various pages: SYNOPSIS: Use VLA syntax in function parameters

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote: > One problem with WG14 papers is that people put in too much, > because the overhead is so high and the standard is not updated > very often. It would be better to build such feature more > incrementally, which could be done more easily with a

[Bug c++/107605] constraint on a member function does causes ambigious and not allowing forming a pointer to the function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107605 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|101603 | Summary|GCC rejects valid

[PATCH] d: Update __FreeBSD_version values [PR107469]

Hello, I would like to submit the patch below. Gerald Pfeifer already volunteered to commit it once approved. Thanks, Lorenzo Salvadore --- Update __FreeBSD_version values for the latest FreeBSD supported versions. In particular, add __FreeBSD_version for FreeBSD 14, which is necessary to

Re: -Wint-conversion, -Wincompatible-pointer-types, -Wpointer-sign: Are they hiding constraint C violations?

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 19:17, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > > * Marek Polacek: > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 07:25:21PM +0100, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > >> GCC accepts various conversions between pointers and ints and different > >> types of pointers by default, issuing a warning. > >> >

[Bug middle-end/107626] STRICT_ALIGNMENT and TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS usage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107626 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/107590] __atomic_test_and_set broken on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107590 --- Comment #14 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13) > Oh yes there could be a bug here when the byte (lbarx/stbcx.) and half-word > (lharx/sthcx.) instruction support was added (which was for Power8; >

[Bug analyzer/107625] RFE: analyzer support for dlopen etc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107625 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- dlmopen should be supported too (it is described in the same man page as dlopen). Note here is the POSIX 2018 page for dlopen: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/dlopen.html

[Bug middle-end/107626] New: STRICT_ALIGNMENT and TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS usage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107626 Bug ID: 107626 Summary: STRICT_ALIGNMENT and TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS usage Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: documentation,

[Bug analyzer/107625] New: RFE: analyzer support for dlopen etc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107625 Bug ID: 107625 Summary: RFE: analyzer support for dlopen etc Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: analyzer

gcc-10-20221110 is now available

Snapshot gcc-10-20221110 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20221110/ 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

[Bug middle-end/107601] Change SLOW_BYTE_ACCESS into WIDEN_MODE_ACCESS_BITFIELD target hook

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107601 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Related is probably STRICT_ALIGNMENT vs TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS That one comes up every once in a while though less often though STRICT_ALIGNMENT and

[Bug target/107609] ice in extract_insn, at recog.cc:2791

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107609 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-11-10 Keywords|

Re: [PATCH] Various pages: SYNOPSIS: Use VLA syntax in function parameters

Hi Alex, At 2022-11-10T11:59:02+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > You know what Moltke said about plans and contact with the enemy. > > For one thing, I think the Linux kernel will move too fast to permit > > such a leisurely cadence. > > Heh, at this point, I burnt my ships, by using enhanced

[Bug target/107590] __atomic_test_and_set broken on PowerPC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107590 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski --- Oh yes there could be a bug here when the byte (lbarx/stbcx.) and half-word (lharx/sthcx.) instruction support was added (which was for Power8; r0-123873-g4b02c96265fb52). But that was 9 years ago. Is

[Bug fortran/107444] ICE on character, value, optional dummy argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107444 --- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-November/058476.html

[PATCH] Fortran: fix treatment of character, value, optional dummy arguments [PR107444]

Dear Fortranners, the attached patch is a follow-up to the fix for PR107441, as it finally fixes the treatment of character dummy arguments that have the value,optional attribute, and allows for checking of the presence of such arguments. This entails a small ABI clarification, as the previous

[Bug c++/107624] [c++23] Wrong code with static operator ()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107624 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- This is interesting because clang also does not produce a call for the foo either for "foo (0) (0);".

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

* Rich Felker: > I've been writing/complaining about autoconf doing this wrong for > decades, with the best writeup around 9 years ago at > https://ewontfix.com/13/. Part of the reason is that this has bitten > musl libc users over and over again due to configure finding symbols > that were

[Bug c++/107624] New: Wrong code with static operator ()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107624 Bug ID: 107624 Summary: Wrong code with static operator () Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[PATCH] RISC-V: Optimize masking with two clear bits not a SMALL_OPERAND

Add a split for cases where we can use two bclri (or one bclri and an andi) to clear two bits. gcc/ChangeLog: * config/riscv/bitmanip.md (*bclri_nottwobits): New pattern. (*bclridisi_nottwobits): New pattern, handling the sign-bit. * config/riscv/predicates.md

[PATCH] RISC-V: Use binvi to cover more immediates than with xori alone

Sequences of the form "a ^ C" with C being the positive half of a signed immediate's range with one extra bit set in addtion are mapped to xori and one binvi to avoid using a temporary (and a multi-insn sequence to load C into that temporary). gcc/ChangeLog: * config/riscv/bitmanip.md

[PATCH] RISC-V: Use bseti to cover more immediates than with ori alone

Sequences of the form "a | C" with C being the positive half of a signed immediate's range with one extra bit set in addtion are mapped to ori and one binvi to avoid using a temporary (and a multi-insn sequence to load C into that temporary). gcc/ChangeLog: * config/riscv/bitmanip.md

[PATCH v2] RISC-V: costs: support shift-and-add in strength-reduction

The strength-reduction implementation in expmed.cc will assess the profitability of using shift-and-add using a RTL expression that wraps a MULT (with a power-of-2) in a PLUS. Unless the RISC-V rtx_costs function recognizes this as expressing a sh[123]add instruction, we will return an inflated

[Bug c++/107622] Missing optimization of switch-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107622 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- There is one part which GCC could optimize better that is the store. There might be another bug about that too. Note as I mentioned __builtin_unreachable is needed if truely the value coming inside g is

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: costs: support shift-and-add in strength-reduction

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 21:47, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 07:09:35 PST (-0800), philipp.toms...@vrull.eu wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 02:46, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 11:54:34 PST (-0800), philipp.toms...@vrull.eu wrote: > >> > The

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

On 2022-11-10 10:19, Aaron Ballman wrote: In terms of the Clang side of things, I don't think we've formed any sort of official stance on how to handle that yet. It's UB (you can declare the C standard library interface without UB but calling any function with a mismatched signature is UB) The

[Bug other/107621] spinx generated documents has too much white space on the top

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107621 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- How does this fancy stuff work on a text based browser like links or lynx? Do we really need this fancy stuff for a manual? Seriously this is getting out of hand.

[Bug other/107621] spinx generated documents has too much white space on the top

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107621 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: costs: support shift-and-add in strength-reduction

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 07:09:35 PST (-0800), philipp.toms...@vrull.eu wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 02:46, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 11:54:34 PST (-0800), philipp.toms...@vrull.eu wrote: > The strength-reduction implementation in expmed.c will assess the > profitability of using

[Bug analyzer/106147] RFE: -fanalyzer could complain about some cases of infinite loops and infinite recursion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106147 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/107623] Using a parameter pack twice results in ambiguous overloaded function.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107623 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- On the trunk (with --enable-checking=yes) we get an ICE: : In function 'int main()': :10:11: internal compiler error: in comptypes, at cp/typeck.cc:1684 10 | test(f, 1); | ^~

[Bug ipa/102067] SEGFAULT in varpool_node::get_constructor during lto1 when optimising or not using debug symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102067 Sam Mish changed: What|Removed |Added CC||samuelpmish at gmail dot com --- Comment

Re: [PATCH 2/2] c++: remove i_c_e_p parm from tsubst_copy_and_build

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Patrick Palka wrote: > AFAICT the only purpose of tsubst_copy_and_build's > integral_constant_expression_p boolean parameter is to diagnose certain > constructs that aren't allowed to appear in a C++98 integral constant > expression context, specifically casts to a

[Bug c++/107622] Missing optimization of switch-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107622 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- > In the following example the default-case Yes it can. You can pass a 0xf to that function and still have well defined behavior.

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

On 2022-11-10 09:16, Zack Weinberg wrote: Changes to handle C23 built-in ‘bool’ better are under development but the design has not yet been finalized. [I'm cc'ing this to bug-gnulib too.] To my mind this is the biggest outstanding issue in Autoconf as far as C23 goes, as the upgrade path

[Bug c++/107623] New: Using a parameter pack twice results in ambiguous overloaded function.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107623 Bug ID: 107623 Summary: Using a parameter pack twice results in ambiguous overloaded function. Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/107622] New: Missing optimization of switch-statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107622 Bug ID: 107622 Summary: Missing optimization of switch-statement Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[PATCH 2/2] c++: remove i_c_e_p parm from tsubst_copy_and_build

AFAICT the only purpose of tsubst_copy_and_build's integral_constant_expression_p boolean parameter is to diagnose certain constructs that aren't allowed to appear in a C++98 integral constant expression context, specifically casts to a non-integral type (diagnosed from the *_CAST_EXPR case of

[PATCH 1/2] c++: remove function_p parm from tsubst_copy_and_build

The function_p parameter of tsubst_copy_and_build (added in r69316) is inspected only in its IDENTIFIER_NODE case, where it controls whether we diagnose unqualified name lookup failure for the given identifier. But I think ever since r173965, we never substitute an IDENTIFIER_NODE with

Re: [PATCH][GCC] arm: Add support for Cortex-X1C CPU.

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:24 AM Srinath Parvathaneni via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Hi, > > This patch adds the -mcpu support for the Arm Cortex-X1C CPU. > > Regression tested on arm-none-eabi and bootstrapped on > arm-none-linux-gnueabihf. > > Ok for GCC master? Ok Ramana > > Regards, > Srinath.

Re: [Patch Arm] Fix PR 92999

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 6:03 PM Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > > > On 10/11/2022 17:21, Richard Earnshaw via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > > > > On 08/11/2022 18:20, Ramana Radhakrishnan via Gcc-patches wrote: > >> PR92999 is a case where the VFP calling convention does not allocate > >> enough FP

[Bug tree-optimization/107569] [13 Regression] Failure to optimize std::isfinite since r13-3596

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107569 --- Comment #34 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #33) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #31) > > Created attachment 53873 [details] > > gcc13-pr107569-div.patch > > > > This is what I meant by complete

Re: old install to a different folder

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Martin Liška wrote: > We noticed we'll need the old /install to be available for redirect. > > Gerald, can you please put it somewhere under /install-prev, or > something similar? I'm afraid I am confused now. Based on your original request I had removed the original

Re: [PATCH] range-op: Implement floating point multiplication fold_range [PR107569]

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 03:50:47PM +0100, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > @@ -1908,6 +1910,123 @@ class foperator_minus : public range_ope > > } > > } fop_minus; > > +/* Wrapper around frange_arithmetics, that computes the result > > + if inexact rounded to both directions. Also, if one of the

Re: -Wint-conversion, -Wincompatible-pointer-types, -Wpointer-sign: Are they hiding constraint C violations?

* Marek Polacek: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 07:25:21PM +0100, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: >> GCC accepts various conversions between pointers and ints and different >> types of pointers by default, issuing a warning. >> >> I've been reading the (hopefully) relevant partso f the C99 standard, >>

[Bug tree-optimization/107569] [13 Regression] Failure to optimize std::isfinite since r13-3596

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107569 --- Comment #33 from Aldy Hernandez --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #31) > Created attachment 53873 [details] > gcc13-pr107569-div.patch > > This is what I meant by complete nightmare - division. We can take this to gcc-patches

[Bug fortran/107595] ICE in ix86_push_argument, at config/i386/i386.cc:4335

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107595 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|13.0|--- Summary|[13 Regression]

[Bug fortran/107595] [13 Regression] ICE in ix86_push_argument, at config/i386/i386.cc:4335

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107595 --- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4) > The initializer is > > {.a=4, .b=null ()} > > the frontend would need to lower such initializers to runtime initialization > (or not use static

[PATCHv2] Use toplevel configure for GMP and MPFR for gdb

From: Andrew Pinski This patch uses the toplevel configure parts for GMP/MPFR for gdb. The only thing is that gdb now requires MPFR for building. Before it was a recommended but not required library. Also this allows building of GMP and MPFR with the toplevel directory just like how it is done

[Bug middle-end/77432] warn about null check after pointer dereference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432 --- Comment #7 from David Malcolm --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #5) > I hadn't seen this, and I filed PR analyzer/99671 last year to track adding > a -fanalyzer warning for this. I now have a mostly-working implementation > of the

[Bug analyzer/99671] RFE: analyzer could complain about ptr derefs that occur before the ptr is checked

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99671 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

  1   2   3   >