Hi,
When c-typeck.cc:c_build_qualified_type builds an array type
from its element type, it does not copy the address space of
the element type to the array type itself. This is unlike
tree.cc:build_array_type_1, which explicitly does
TYPE_ADDR_SPACE (t) = TYPE_ADDR_SPACE (elt_type);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110237
--- Comment #7 from Hongtao.liu ---
> So it looks like a generic problem and better to be handled in
> expand_partial_{load, store}_optab_fn?
There're many other places with assumption MEM_SIZE is equal to MODE_SIZE even
!MEM_SIZE_KNOWN_P,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reducing ...
If mem_addr points to a memory region with less than whole vector size
bytes of accessible memory and k is a mask that would prevent reading
the inaccessible bytes from mem_addr, add UNSPEC_MASKLOAD to prevent
it to be transformed to vpblendd.
Bootstrapped and regtested on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Either r14-1981 or r14-1951
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
g++ -O3 -c ... is enough to repro
ude the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://bugs.gentoo.org/> for instructions.
```
```
gcc (Gentoo 14.0.0 p, commit 6cb33e2f39e289ec4f25f845d8153053147c5c49) 14.0.0
20230620 (experimental) f5d0cec170d6d5496edf4038499d288c07d79b18
Copyright (C) 2023 Free Software Founda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 83733, which changed state.
Bug 83733 Summary: -Wformat-overflow false positive for %d on bounded integer
when inlining
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83733
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83733
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 94021, which changed state.
Bug 94021 Summary: -Wformat-truncation false positive due to excessive integer
range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94021
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94021
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On 6/20/23 14:49, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches wrote:
The SVE handling of stack clash protection copied the stack
pointer to X11 before the probe and set up X11 as the CFA
for unwind purposes:
/* This is done to provide unwinding information for the stack
adjustments we're
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 80776, which changed state.
Bug 80776 Summary: -Wformat-overflow false positive for %d on integer bounded
by __builtin_unreachable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80776
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79161
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is fixed for GCC 10 by r10-1052-gc29c92c789d9 (and the related
patch after that which disable it for the C front-end but enables it for
C++11+)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55906
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16996
Bug 16996 depends on bug 11180, which changed state.
Bug 11180 Summary: [avr-gcc] Optimization decrease performance of struct
assignment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11180
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11180
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36127
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
So what seems to be happening is PRE is pull out the following from the loop:
pretmp_250 = MEM[(float *)_2 + 4294933760B + ivtmp.159_57 * 1];
_22 = (void *) ivtmp.140_79;
pretmp_253 = MEM[(float *)_22
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 3:37 PM Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 11:35 AM Andreas Schwab
> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 20 2023, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > > This libgo patches changes the runtime pacakge to use a C function to
> call mmap.
> > >
> > > The final
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110331
Bug ID: 110331
Summary: ppc64 vec_extract with constant index is suboptimal on
P8
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110018
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 110018, which changed state.
Bug 110018 Summary: Missing vectorizable_conversion(unsigned char -> double)
for BB vectorizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110018
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110018
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6f19cf7526168f840fd22f6af3f0cb67efb90dc8
commit r14-2007-g6f19cf7526168f840fd22f6af3f0cb67efb90dc8
Author: liuhongt
Date: Wed May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #85 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #83)
> Created attachment 55367 [details]
> Collapsed libcall and additional loop move invariants patch v3
Thanks for staying on it! I've looked through the latest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
Adding this debug code :
__builtin_fprintf (stderr, "DEBUG:>> %d - %d - %d\n",
get_lra_reg_info_size () ,
max_reg_num (), ORIGINAL_REGNO (operand_reg[nop]));
shows for the failing case:
DEBUG:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82894
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||csaba_22 at yahoo dot co.uk
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110330
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110330
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||82894
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f5d0cec170d6d5496edf4038499d288c07d79b18
commit r14-2005-gf5d0cec170d6d5496edf4038499d288c07d79b18
Author: Tamar Christina
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110330
Bug ID: 110330
Summary: GCC does not diagnose ambiguous function introduced
from base class
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
You should remove all "unspec" related of "n" ncopysign including
riscv-vector-builtins-bases.cc
vector.md/ vector-iterators.md
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Robin Dapp
Date: 2023-06-20 20:47
To: gcc-patches; palmer; Kito Cheng; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; jeffreyalaw
CC: rdapp.gcc
Subject: [PATCH]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100650
Damian Rouson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||damian at archaeologic dot
codes
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Lewis Hyatt :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f3be7cbebce8ec9e0c5d9340b2772581454b862
commit r14-2004-g4f3be7cbebce8ec9e0c5d9340b2772581454b862
Author: Lewis Hyatt
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110284
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
Hi Paul,
On 6/20/23 12:54, Paul Richard Thomas via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi Harald,
Fixing the original testcase in this PR turned out to be slightly more
involved than I expected. However, it resulted in an open door to fix
some other PRs and the attached much larger patch.
This time, I did
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus ---
Correction with regards to reg_info_size:
I claimed that reg_info_size = 3659 > 3483 – but that's not quite true.
That's the result when doing 'p reg_info_size' in lra-constraints.cc.
When going 'up' in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110305
--- Comment #9 from Michael Morrell ---
And what about when -frounding-math is used? The transformation will still
occur in simplify_binary_operation_1 if -frounding-math -fno-signed-zeros
-fno-signaling-nans is used. Note that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110307
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #6)
> Note the REG_EH_REGION. This is relevant because can_nonlocal_goto checks
> it, so for insn 25 we knew it wouldn't return to the setjmp receiver.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110329
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110132
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4eb01f987606e82ba4b7696f6cf79266d9e242ad
commit r13-7462-g4eb01f987606e82ba4b7696f6cf79266d9e242ad
Author: Alex Coplan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110100
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9df688cbf908adc43e92bd012dafa88680ea11dc
commit r13-7461-g9df688cbf908adc43e92bd012dafa88680ea11dc
Author: Alex Coplan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110100
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff00fa1914e42d6b9c45cb36a5c99f94c4133cba
commit r13-7460-gff00fa1914e42d6b9c45cb36a5c99f94c4133cba
Author: Alex Coplan
On Jun 20 2023, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> OK, but I think that it does have something to do with big-endian.
> The bug was that on some 32-bit systems it was passing a 64-bit value
> to a function that expected a 32-bit value. The problem didn't show
> up on 32-bit x86 because it is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110329
Bug ID: 110329
Summary: [14 regression] build fails building documentation
after r14-1949-g957ae904065917
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110314
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #19 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #18)
> Would you mind if I clarified a few points regarding your query? I'm
> referring to implementing "sub borrow" with sub_overflow, as demonstrated in
> the code snippet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110313
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus ---
Some more debugging: We have:
(gdb) p debug_rtx(curr_id->insn)
(insn 106 3450 3080 4 (parallel [
(set (reg/f:DI 1433)
(plus:DI (reg/f:DI 16 s16 [3483])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #18 from cqwrteur ---
Would you mind if I clarified a few points regarding your query? I'm referring
to implementing "sub borrow" with sub_overflow, as demonstrated in the code
snippet at https://godbolt.org/z/ev3TfeTvd , correct?
Several gcc.target/aarch64/sve/pcs tests started failing after
6a2e8dcbbd4, because the tests weren't robust against whether
an indirect argument register or the stack pointer was used as
the base for stores.
The patch allows either base register when there is only one
indirect argument. It
The SVE handling of stack clash protection copied the stack
pointer to X11 before the probe and set up X11 as the CFA
for unwind purposes:
/* This is done to provide unwinding information for the stack
adjustments we're about to do, however to prevent the optimizers
from
Richard Biener writes:
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2023, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> Jeff Law writes:
>> > On 6/16/23 06:34, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> >> IVOPTs has strip_offset which suffers from the same issues regarding
>> >> integer overflow that split_constant_offset did but the
Hi!
On 2023-06-19T12:37:52+0100, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> This patch adds just enough TImode vector support to use them for moving
> data about.
Andrew tells me this need not be worried about, but -- for my future self
searching email archives for FAILs/ICEs -- I'd like to at least document
here
Le 20/06/2023 à 18:30, Tobias Burnus a écrit :
On 20.06.23 18:19, Paul Richard Thomas via Fortran wrote:
Is there a better way to detect a type(c_ptr) formal argument?
u.derived->intmod_sym_id == ISOCBINDING_PTR ?
&& u.derived->from_intmod == INTMOD_ISO_C_BINDING ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110314
--- Comment #2 from Franck Behaghel
---
>This is new in 14, was OK when forking 13.
>https://ada.godbolt.org/z/TvbPxYfnP
>Currently bisecting.
Marc,
Released version may have checks disabled :
If the file gcc/DEV-PHASE contains experimental,
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 2:32 AM naveenh--- via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> From: Naveen H S
>
> This patch adds support scalar_storage_order attribute to C++ front-end.
> It treats the opposite order fields similar as the packed fields are
> treated such that they will not bind to references.
> For
Tamar Christina writes:
> Hi All,
>
> define_cond_exec does not support the special @@ syntax
> and so can't support {@. As such just remove support
> for it.
>
> Bootstrapped and no issues.
>
> Ok for master?
>
> Thanks,
> Tamar
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR bootstrap/110324
> *
Hi Marc,
On 20/06/2023 15:47, Marc Poulhiès wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >> The package Interfaces.CHERI provides intrinsic bindings and
> >> helper functions to allow software to query, create, and
> >> manipulate CHERI capabilities.
> >
> > I'm curious what the motivation for these intrinsic wrappers is,
Hi!
The patch looks great now, thanks you!
But the commit message needs some work:
First off, the subject, which is a short (50 character max!) summary of
what the patch is about.
Fix power10 fusion and -fstack-protector, PR target/105325
There is absolutely nothing to do with stack protector,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102989
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #55364|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe later, I'm currently busy with _BitInt support.
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 21:16:40 +0200, Damien Guibouret wrote:
> I think the comparison should be ">" instead of ">=" as 0x10 seems a
> valid value (Unicode says value above 0x10 is invalid).
> Other tests around same value in this file are using ">".
Ah, good catch. I'll make a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #16 from cqwrteur ---
ok
Would you mind looking at the following link, https://godbolt.org/z/z7K79YMWr,
and sharing your thoughts? I would greatly appreciate your feedback. Thank you
very much.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 16:50:27 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 1/25/23 13:06, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> > - header-unit information fields
> >
> > Header units (including the standard library headers) are 100%
> > unsupported right now because the `-E` mechanism wants to import their
> > BMIs. A
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 16:50:27 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 1/25/23 13:06, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> > - header-unit information fields
> >
> > Header units (including the standard library headers) are 100%
> > unsupported right now because the `-E` mechanism wants to import their
> > BMIs. A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #13)
> See this:
> https://godbolt.org/z/eozPahn9G
>
>
> addcarry pattern it recognizes but not subcarry.
And see this:
> On Jun 16, 2023, at 5:35 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>>> So for
>>>
>>> struct foo { int c; int buf[(struct { int d; }){ .d = .c }]; };
>>>
>>> one knows during parsing that the .d is a designator
>>> and that .c is not.
>>
>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #14 from cqwrteur ---
https://godbolt.org/z/4ej4dnr4b
I find a bug here:
f0 = __builtin_subcl(f0,v,0,);
f1 = __builtin_subcl(f1,zero,carry,);
The compiler generates:
setb %cl//redundant
movzbl %cl, %ecx//redundant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91804
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 11:35 AM Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
> On Jun 20 2023, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > This libgo patches changes the runtime pacakge to use a C function to call
> > mmap.
> >
> > The final argument to mmap, of type off_t, varies. In
> > https://go.dev/cl/445375
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110304
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
See this:
https://godbolt.org/z/eozPahn9G
addcarry pattern it recognizes but not subcarry.
You can see it does not recognize the following:
template
inline constexpr T sub_carry(T x,T y,T carryin,T&
Le 19/06/2023 à 23:34, Jason Merrill a écrit :
On 6/6/23 16:50, Ben Boeckel wrote:
Unicode does not support such values because they are unrepresentable in
UTF-16.
Pushed.
libcpp/
* charset.cc: Reject encodings of codepoints above 0x10.
UTF-16 does not support such codepoints
On Jun 20 2023, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> This libgo patches changes the runtime pacakge to use a C function to call
> mmap.
>
> The final argument to mmap, of type off_t, varies. In
> https://go.dev/cl/445375
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/604158.html)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110328
Bug ID: 110328
Summary: Module related optimization is too aggressive
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79173
--- Comment #25 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f8f68c4ca622a24c2e8cf2b5f2f9fdcd47a7b369
commit r14-2001-gf8f68c4ca622a24c2e8cf2b5f2f9fdcd47a7b369
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
> Am 20.06.2023 um 18:46 schrieb Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
> :
>
> Hi!
>
> In the following testcase we fail to pattern recognize the least significant
> .UADDC call. The reason is that arg3 in that case is
> _3 = .ADD_OVERFLOW (...);
> _2 = __imag__ _3;
> _1 = _2 != 0;
> arg3 =
Also change some internal variables and some function arguments to bool.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* calls.h (setjmp_call_p): Change return type from int to bool.
* calls.cc (struct arg_data): Change "pass_on_stack" to bool.
(store_one_arg): Change return type from int to bool
and adjust
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #5 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #4)
> Jürgen,
>
> I'm afraid we need a reproducer. Or can you bisect the regression further?
In principle, I could. But I just undid this commit of yours which is just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110297
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110284
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
gcc-consolidation.h is included by
m2/m2.flex:#include "gm2-gcc/gcc-consolidation.h"
m2/gm2-lang.cc:#include "gm2-gcc/gcc-consolidation.h"
m2/m2pp.cc:#include "gm2-gcc/gcc-consolidation.h"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
Patch by Tamar (thanks!):
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-June/622387.html
Does this testsuite patch look OK?
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-May/620275.html
Thanks
David
On Mon, 2023-06-12 at 19:11 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> Please can someone review this testsuite patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-May/620275.html
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression][bootstrap, |[14
|nvptx]
Hi All,
define_cond_exec does not support the special @@ syntax
and so can't support {@. As such just remove support
for it.
Bootstrapped and no issues.
Ok for master?
Thanks,
Tamar
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR bootstrap/110324
* gensupport.cc (convert_syntax): Explicitly check for RTX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
(gdb) p ((enum rtx_code) (x)->code)
$3 = DEFINE_COND_EXEC
(gdb) p (int)((enum rtx_code) (x)->code)
$4 = 172
and hence:
(gdb) p rtx_format[172]
$6 = 0x4bcda0 "EssV"
where we take the index 2 => 's'.
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110325
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #7)
> Ugh, I just realised I was using --personality=arm which is almost certainly
> it (used bash history without checking). Sorry for the noise. I'll reopen if
> it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110327
Bug ID: 110327
Summary: [12/13/14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination
when using __builtin_unreachable since
r12-4790-g4b3a325f07a
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110318
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110284
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110324
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
BTW, regarding: type 'T', have 's'
/* Indexed by rtx code, gives a sequence of operand-types for
rtx's of that code. The sequence is a C string in which
each character describes one operand. */
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #84 from Alexander Klepikov
---
I've forgot to say that first I ran all tests with SH specific loop
optimization enabled when condition 'optimize && flag_move_loop_invariants' is
true. And only then I ran all tests with final (at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110318
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||7.1.0, 9.1.0
--- Comment #5 from
This libgo patches changes the runtime pacakge to use a C function to call mmap.
The final argument to mmap, of type off_t, varies. In
https://go.dev/cl/445375
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/604158.html)
we changed it to always use the C off_t type, but that broke 32-bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110297
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Ian Lance Taylor
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4ac89ab35884906900cde8172d2db74e1d913fec
commit r13-7459-g4ac89ab35884906900cde8172d2db74e1d913fec
Author: Ian Lance
1 - 100 of 339 matches
Mail list logo
